Skull132

UH, they wouldn't. You'd have to apply one per door. They're more meant for blocking off rooms, which have optimally 2 entrances, rather than hallways.

Final idea before I go back to doing new map or actual important code that Scopes wants me to do. For anyone who's played Alien Isolation, these things should be familiar enough: They're security bracers for doors. Or hydraulic door locks. Or whatever the fuck. Basically: they stop the door from opening until they're either removed with proper identification, or dismantled. Now, here's my idea for having them ingame: A bulky, w_class 4 item that you can apply to an airlock and lock. Once on a door and locked, the airlock cannot be opened until the device is removed, or dismantled. These devices would come in three flavours: security, engineering, and ERT, and are controlled by IDs with that specific access. So a security officer can remove a security bracer, an atmos tech can remove an engineering bracer, and command staff members can remove both. Let's say, at the start of round, we give engineering 3, security 2 (in the armoury), and have new ones be ordered from cargo. How are these useful? Quite simply put, tape is shit. And tape doesn't stop half as many people. So having these around, for doors that you really don't want anyone to get through, might give the specific departments a little more control over the situations they are required to manage. So, let's say there's a plasma fire on the other side of a door. Or an open construction area. Just slap one of these on, and only people with specific access can roam through. Disassembly: You would require a standard toolbelt, nothing special. So a welder, screwdriver, crowbar, etcetera. The only thing is, it would take a bit of time. Like a minute or two, to properly go through the motions and have the lock broken. At which point, it'd fall off, and you can go through! You could also emag it, which completely breaks the lock just has it drop off immediately. So if you gotta go fast, there's that. A curious note: Cake suggested making these run off of energy cells. Batteries, basically. I'd say a starting charge of like, 30-45 minutes is enough. This way, they "wouldn't be too OP". Thoughts, comments, recommendations?

Done, and awaiting merge. They now show the date, year, and the shuttle ETA/ETD timer, just like your status display does. They also now do it if you just shift-click them, so no need to right click and be all funky with the verb.

Code is up on my branch, Jack, if you want to add DIY versions. They also jam PDAs, now.

Lemme rejig some of my code real quick to make the range into a variable, so you can just make the improvised version into a child of the original, with a lower range variable (probably like 2, or 3?).

http://puu.sh/l9yTM/90b060b331.png Done, also integrated with the scary as shit telecomms code. Basically: it only works on radios which have "Subspace_transmission" set to 1. This means that borg radios, AI radios, bounce radios and intercomms are not affected by the device. I jus tneed to add it to the uplink, and done. But, that's tomorrow v.v

If we actually bothered to read the pull-request, then we'd see that both tables are constructable. I also outlined the research levels required for the boards, the only things I didn't outline are the components (Though, these are all very basic for RnD to manufacture). As for disassembly, it works just like every other machine: screw-driver, crowbar, done. Ain't no rocket science about it.

Too easily accessible. It's meant to be an upgrade, and a superior alternative, not a replacement. It would also make the need for an IV drip smaller, were it in the OR. Though, if it's not getting used enough, I may slide it into the OR. Dno, haven't really thought about this.

They have the organ printer right next to them! The biologist is a slow-burn, long-term project for replacing genetics and kreeping on that turf. There's a thread, somewhere about it. It's supposed to focus on organ rejiggery, including transplantation, creationg, modification, etcetera.

*Looks at thread* The fucking PDA sprites. Again. ._.

Let me just. Throw a single word out there that, in my mind, defines roleplay. Choice. See, roleplay is a long term process. It's actually a project! A collaborative one at that. And the most key instrument in this process, for any participant, is choice. Or rather, are the choices that they make, for their characters. And from those choices come consequences. Now, you could say that non-RP servers have this aspect too, and they most certainly do, but in RP servers I see these things as having a more long term effect. Namely, how you present your character can create lasting relationships for months, if not years of RP. And I personally love to try and play with a system as complex as this one. Also, because of this, to me, roleplay extends to areas far greater than just text and emotes. Whether you choose to equip a gun or not is a choice, one that I will base my own decision to attack you off of: you do not need to emote, you do not need to say anything, the circumstances already set the scene, as does prior interaction, and your choice to arm yourself this very instance, your choice to make yourself a visible threat, is a clear message to me. This is regardless of whether or not you say anything, or tell me that "You didn't want to attack me, but just scare me". You chose, I reacted, end of. If you are ignorant of the options that you are presented with, then I don't really mind, nor is it my issue to solve. This is basically my view on the matter, and has always been. And I sometimes truly believe that more folks understood the meaning of their actions, instead of just yelling, "I HAVEN'T SAID ANYTHING YET!" as they proceed to arm themselves infront of me v.v

https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora/pull/757 There, it is done. Comes with an instructional guide as well, so read up.

I think this may have been suggested before, but if it was, then it's so far in the depths of whatever that I really can't be arsed to find it. Anyways, concept is super simple: for like, 2-3 telecrystals, you can buy a pocketable item that jams all radios and headsets within, say a 7 tile radius. This means both incoming and outgoing messages. You can flick the device on and off, and if it's EMP-d, it'll create horrible disturbance to any headset in range (basically go nuts). Why do I think this is useful? I think it would create more interesting scenarios for antags to play around with. Want to disable someone without outright killing them, for fear they may stutter out the words, "N-n-u-u-k-e-e o-op-ops" over general comms? Have this device on your person, and active! It may also be used to create deadzones of radio chatter, without the antagonist even being present! Of course, antag headsets would be affected as well, so it's a double-edged sword. Thoughts, my fair ladies and gents?

Actually, giving a few antagonist roles, such as nuke ops and the MalfAI and even normal traitors, a way to scramble Aurora/CC comms may just give them more opportunity to have fun with a situation. How about a specific jamming device, that disables all faxes and emergency messages (though not the emergency shuttle)? Make it work, in practice, similarly to the powersink: you have to find a place and set it up, and then just leave it online? It's big enough that people can find it and disable it, as they need to.

I actually did some testing, IPCs lose their limbs to brute damage at exactly the same rate as humans do. The only difference is the fact that humans lose some of the brute_dam on the limb, due to regeneration. With this in mind, I may actually be inclined to add the brute modifier back into the mix. However, what's interesting is the fact that no one's mentioned how damaging energy weapons are to IPCs. We've discussed EMP, yes, but not lasers, which seem to be about twice as deadly for some reason. I need to figure out why. And I'm also probably thinking of reducing EMP damage in the next round, and making EMP more livable, if only to have them in critical condition after an ion bolt strikes. So that they would be disabled, but still alive. The thing that irks me, though, still, is the lack of pain. This makes balancing them a more difficult gambit than it should be ._.

Regarding example no. 1: I'm going to side with FFrances and agree with her points. You had to have assumed that they're going to gun it for the fax, and you cannot blame them for doing it, as it is literally the most sensible thing to do. Instead, either find ways to disable the fax machines, or give the staff a head's up with, "Hey, I want to do this stuff, could you play along with the faxes?" They'll alert the DOs, and voila, you have yourself a playground. This also applies to pretty much anyone forever who wants to impersonate Central Command (cough-cough-nuke-ops-cough). Regarding example no. 2: I would argue that the roleplay all before your conversion was your mechanical encounter with the players in question. Roleplay is not just words and fluff, it can also be action. You have an action-packed encounter with your assailants, and they managed to corner you. And then they gave you a very simple choice: "Join or die." I'd argue that this is valid. Now, please do tell me, what do you think they should have done? Or what you would have done, in their stead? And regarding Sue: The general stance on this should be fairly simple: if you have IC evidence to back up the charges issued, then you keep the charges and act accordingly even if you know the person is an antag OOCly. If you don't have the evidence to back up the charges, then it's going to turn into a case of metagaming. Hopefully all staff enforce this standard, and if they do not, then please submit a staff complaint, and I'll square the issue.

I have a counter-proposal to that, Canon. Give science the ability to upgrade the IV-drip to enable such a function.

Durn it. Generating blood should still be harder than this, though ;-;

Uh. Can genetics be used to modify the blood-type of a test subject? If so, why not simply rely on the geneticist? Read as: I am not a fan of handing out machines to fix all the things forever just bcuz. Blood is meant to be a resource, and getting it is meant to be difficult. Making it machine generated seems... Lazy.

Okay, so, this is on my "To-do" list. A bit of an introduction is that there was apparently an SOP document in the works for staff. I quickly destroyed it with all firepower I could muster, because I'll be damned if I start hosting indoc sessions for SS13 -- I'd go back to ArmA if I wanted to do that. (The proper answer is: an SOP document is too clunky and requires too much investment for a game like SS13, in my opinion. Plus, everything the creators wanted to accomplish can be accomplished through alternate, less retarded ways.) One of those alternate ways is to update the "On Staff" area of the rules. And one of the things I want to include in there are standard expectations of staff members. I also want to create a child list from this one, and put it up as the expectations of Trial Moderators, that way we have a clear set of criteria to sift through, for the most part. (I'll still be doing my part to ensure that a free radical gets through here and there.) Thus, I want all of you folks to write a reply to this post, and write down what you expect of our server moderators and admins and me. Do try to include a short elaboration, or a "Why I think this should be," just so that the intent could also be seen. Please do try to keep it reasonable, though! I also want members of staff to partake in this, because I think they should be allowed to play a part in determining these expectations, just like anyone else who is a member of our community. Here are the main expectations I apply to myself, as an admin of our community: Be courteous - While I do absoloutely detest false happiness, I do wish for all of our staff members to be courteous and polite whenever they're acting within their official capacity. It's an easy enough request, I imagine, and will go a long way with fostering an open relationship with the community. Be familiar with the rules, know the "Why's" - Rules are important. Though, rules are not important to the letter, not in my book. Each rule has a specific purpose, and that purpose, which usually comes out whenever you ask the question, "Why does this rule exist?" is important. That answer should determine enforcement in most cases (though that answer should also remain uniform from staff member to staff member, which is more challenging at this time). There are obvious exceptions, usually in the "blanket enforcement" category. One example is the "No ERP" rule. Remain open minded - Getting bogged down in an argument is absoloutely the worst. Getting bogged down in an argument and locking yourself down to a single viewpoint is even worse. Staff should have the capacity to pull themselves back, assess the situation, seek council if required, and then re-engage with a clearer mind and higher perspective. This is one of the key steps to solving a good deal of issues, even in real life. Be active within the community - You cannot properly moderate something you are not involved with. It'll end in a lack of information causing erroneous decisions to be made, which in turn causes mistakes and creates distrust. Being active, one way or another, within the community ensures that you know what's going on, and how to respond to situations; instead of trying to approach a new situation with an old, blunt instrument. Know how to be wrong - Probably saved the best for last. There is no shame in making a mistake. There is nothing wrong with making a mistake. But you need to know how to make a mistake. Or, more precisely, how to act after one is being made. One step, two steps, three steps back; reassess, evaluate, think; acquire knowledge and experience, mend as needed. This is my personal practice, yours may very well be different, but what absoloutely should not happen is a member of staff turning tail and hiding after something went kaput. That is not how problems are solved. These are my core expectations. I look forward to seeing yours! Also, I wonder if we should have a thread, later on down the line, about expectations of fellow community members. I think that might also be interesting. Anyways, things!

Nano, mind replying to my reply, as you seemed to have skipped over it?

Initial assessment. The "pushing warden over because they claimed to have pasta on them" is a silly thing to do, and if it becomes a constant, then it'll start detracting from the roleplay environment we're trying to set here, don't you think? As for your character. if what you portrayed in your conversation is true, then I'd say you can keep him. Just, please don't make a habit out of shoving people over and craving for their pasta. (Or unless it's in a playful fashion, I guess? Though that would seem contradictory to your character? Idno.) Unless you're an antag, at which point, crave away! The reason for this single note is that everything's good in good measure, and if you have a character frothing at the mouth, standing over another man because he claimed to have pasta on him, then, I don't know, it doesn't seem too well roleplayed that they'd keep him around. Does this sound reasonable? Now for a bit of clarification, on the "Staff are always right" bit. And this is actually on my list of shit to clarify for now and forever, so we can start here. The rule in question is this one: The intent and purpose of the rule is very simple: admins and mods ingame can have a lot of shit going on at one time, depending on the situation, and the more things they have to respond to, the less reasonable it is to expect them to hold long discussions about complex topics. Those are the times where this rule is levied, so that a single argument wouldn't hinder the staff's capacity to deal with potentially more important issues. Of course, it is also expected that the staff member politely apologize at that point, and quickly explain the circumstances and in what format the discussion can be continued. (Such as in a staff complaint, which is what we're effectively doing now.) Awaiting further input from staff and folks alike.

Quick question, when did this take place? Gooot it, nevermind.

And any head of security who doesn't prepare for these possibilities is gonna have a bad time. Yup! And that's their choice!

Here's my question: why is this preferred to the present system? The bounce radios can already be given a custom freq, and any HoS can include a line of, "Use this frequency when comms are down," in their standard briefing. In my mind, the tools to solve this problem already exist. Making it easier would add so very little. In fact! Making it easier would remove depth.