WickedCybs

As far as I can tell, it explicitly always relates to foreigners. Nationalization through military service is still a thing in various military forces, but they wouldn't be called Foreign Legions due to it.

Lore Impact: Medium Species: General Short Description: Renames the Tau Ceti Foreign Legion to the Tau Ceti Legion How will this be reflected on-ship?: We're supposed to believe the TCFL is actually modernizing and becoming a credible military force, the singular one in the Republic. Meanwhile it hasn't really changed beyond minor lore bits about getting better gear. It's still referred to as a "Foreign Legion" too. If we're beginning to shift how the TCFL are perceived, a good start would be their name. It's just a matter of presentation, really. So stuff would be renamed, future lore articles would refer to it by its new name. Does this addition do anything not achieved by what already exists?: No. Do you understand that the project may change over time in ways you may not foresee once it is handed over to the Lore Team?: Yes. Long Description: After a long period of deliberation it was eventually decided that referring to the Nation's main military force as a "Foreign Legion" was detrimental to recruitment and its perception. The Legion is everyone who would call the Republic home. They are not separated, or foreign. They are Bieselites and deserve full recognition as such whether inside the Republic or abroad with allies. Idealism aside, military service is a hard sell to people and there's only so many foreign groups like the Skrell that the TCFL can simply press gang into service in exchange for them not being deported. Making it as appealing as possible and giving the right idea as to what it actually is will only make it more palatable. It's not really a Foreign Legion anymore, anyway.

Yes, other people have talked to you about your behavior and you've chosen to ignore them. I refer to the community, not staff talking to you personally about these issues and applying warnings. The doomsaying and general complaining is common enough. Fairly certain this has been noted on your staff applications as well. You just ignore it. Feel free to post any examples or a round ID as I have done. This illustrates what I'm trying to say. You double down on an intense reversal, say something vitriolic, strangely change course while somehow thinking this is the way to cover for yourself? I don't know how I'm supposed to interpret "No, we were never friends, how could you possibly think that? Disclaimer: Yes I called you a friend. I'm defending myself though, I have no choice." other than that this wasn't really a misunderstanding, you just easily and quickly turn on others. If it was even relevant to this complaint I'd provide further examples of you specifically seeking me out, having some friendly banter or whatever else. So yes. I am disheartened and I did expect better from you, unfortunately. Thank you for at least re-affirming to me you haven't ever been sincere in this thread and outside of it. Now, again. The reason I made the complaint in the first place is how you act in OOC channels. I don't really need to highlight anything else here as most of what you have posted is again just self victimization justifying your increasingly abhorrent behavior and it speaks for itself in the context of what this complaint is about. You have an issue with how you approach anything that troubles you and it needs to stop or be taken to where it's not going to be publicly seen and it frequently happens after you antag.

I meant deck one, yeah. I still get the third and first deck confused frequently. My bad.

This is a weak excuse and It's one you have used before. What you post will be read as is and if you honestly cared about clarifying anything you would have done so. I'll focus on the paragraphs that aren't dominated by this thought of yours. I also made it quite clear that's not the only thing I said. I posted the worst possible statement I could have made during that conversation to be transparent about this. It's not really a key statement, It's one of many made by you. I'm aware Tajara are a topic that comes up frequently for you to complain about. The bit I did assume was directed at me, was when you suicide bombed security and then lamented after the fact to dchat they would run through the fire to shoot you despite you teleporting into the fire to kill the warden and lingering in the area to kill as many people as you possibly could while they were trying to get wounded out. The action in-round was fine. Your comments were not. Which all precedes you becoming incredibly vitriolic about how not one person had self preservation and what a joke everything was. How else and am I supposed to read this? How else is anyone else supposed to interpret it? You have to moderate what you say because "I didn't mean it like that" isn't really a valid excuse. It hasn't been ahelped, because It's typically handled with the standard "ahelp instead of discussing the problem here" or you reversing course and mentioning not actually having a problem. It doesn't really matter if you and others are completely calm. Dogpiling and insulting people who will never see what you type is still a problem. No, not really. I've earnestly talked to you about stuff, other people have as well. The whole "state of security and antags" conversation has been done before. When it gets volatile though, "butting in with the mod tag" and telling people to drop it is the job, Kyres. The deadchat conversation stops as soon as you start complaining about things you ought to have ahelped. I don't expect anyone to challenge staff in that regard when we say as much but nobody gets banned over it unless they're incredibly hostile. I'm not going to post a highlight reel of quotes from random people affirming what I'm saying if that's what you mean. I know who to ask to post here if it becomes relevant to do so. It's not really a debate when I say "Just ahelp it and stop complaining" to people. In this case I do realize that I should not have talked to you outside of a ticket. I should have just PM'd you and applied a note, warning or ban. That would have been the reasonable thing to do from a staff-perspective and it could have been done earlier. Staff are still human however. I get irritated at deadchat for peanut gallerying. I got especially irritated at you in this case. You've been at least pretending to be my friend for a while now, which made it all the more disheartening to see how you acted. The "reconciliation" aspect of your arguing is always going to look bad after everything else you've said as you've made it entirely about you. You've been projecting some intense paranoia on your colleagues and the players. You've made it more than clear I've effectively made you act like this due to the complaint even existing what with the whole "Look at what you made me do" posting. I think It's more than clear I respected you before, and I've defended you in the past. Reading this quasi-apology though just makes me feel stupid for ever doing so, I would have felt better if you didn't go out of your way to put it into your post. So yeah. I'm not really keeping this fact hidden or anything. It does upset me to see how OOC channels are used and it feels like pulling teeth to get a ticket out of the regular complaining about sec/antags for the day. For those who just can't bring up their issues to staff, not talking about it publicly has always been an option.

Yes. It will happen eventually. At this point I think Gem is going to include it in a future deck three PR, so I've refrained from doing anything for now.

Kelly is fine, he makes an effort to do stuff, is proactive and talks to people rather than being a brig zombie. There's not really much else needed there as the real test is the trial anyway.

BYOND Key: WickedCybs Game ID: IcjL-dITU Player Byond Key/Character name: Kyres1 Staff involved: MattAtlas Reason for complaint: I've noticed Kyres just cannot be happy as an antagonist as they frequently complain in dead chat after being killed/detained/what have you. For the particular round I'm focusing on they led a plan where they would announce to the crew that they must make a total of five sacrifices everytime a sort of killing hour was announced and leave the body in a public space for inspections. If they did not, a deck would be stated on the radio and the ninjas would kill a target of their choosing within it. The crew congregated together and after the Ninjas made their first kill on someone far from them, the crew armoury was opened and most of the crew had weapons makeshift or otherwise to protect themselves. Eventually the ninjas were caught, one was killed and one escaped. The one who escaped was Kyres. They took a hostage later on and presented it to security and command. They said it wasn't really a "hostage situation" and that they would take a trade on someone else to kill if we wanted, otherwise the guy they were currently holding would die and they'd continue killing others as they made it clear earlier it wasn't stopping at five anymore. Everyone waited until the last possible moment, so as to not stop any possible rp here but they began counting down to kill the hostage and so the crew acted to shoot Kyres. A hostage doesn't provide full 360 degree protection, and we knew that. They were forced to drop the hostage, then teleported away. Security mainly gave chase. It did end with Kyres dying. So they began to complain about how the round went and about particular people. Here are some snippets. Kyres1 (Terror) moans, "today i will pursue the antagonist into a pluming fire to slug them" Kyres1 (?) (Terror) complains, "i could not honestly get a single person to engage in self preservation of an entire highpop manifest except a fucking baldie!" Kyres1 (Terror) blubbers, "thats honestly a joke" Kyres1 (Terror) moans, "as in, the fact that NOBODY would vote" (WickedCybs) says, "I don't see what you expected" (WickedCybs) says, "this was a crew arm gimmick" (JMP) DEAD Kyres1 (Terror) complains, "well, i can see 2 reasons" (JMP) DEAD Kyres1 (Terror) moans, "1. you want something to happen besides security ganging up and slugging the ninjas oocly" (JMP) DEAD Kyres1 (Terror) laments, "and 2. you want to pretend youre scared you might get decapitated like rey" (JMP) DEAD Kyres1 (Terror) complains, "however" DEAD Kyres1 (Terror) whines, "why would you be scared with an entire private military at your disposal" DEAD Kyres1 (Terror) laments, "and a crew armory" (JMP) DEAD Kyres1 (Terror) moans, "and slugs and ballistics and riot gear and tajara with bullpups and etc etc" There was a bit more, but I'm not going to scrape it all. It concluded with me being more hostile than called for. MODERATOR(WickedCybs) says, "honestly stop bitching about it in dchat if you have literally nothing else to say" And then Matt ended it. It's strange to me that Kyres would even begin tearing into essentially the entire crew that shift for not voting to kill their colleagues, for grouping together instead of hiding and dying and for trying to kill two people presenting themselves as insane killers who can't be talked down. I am frustrated, as it is a dice roll whether Kyres will begin complaining about people who can't even see the terrible things they say about others (often friends) or just accept it. I've challenged them on this before and they usually stop posting about it, an example of that can be seen on a changling round (cjG-adyg) where security was considering destroying their body before they even revived. Those involved were spoken to in the end, but it only happened because an unrelated ghost player mentioned the issue after I told Kyres to stop complaining about it in dchat. I don't have anything more in that regard because I don't really log every conversation I have with people. I do know others who have seen this behavior, and I will ask them to post if it'd be useful and not turn this into a "he said she said" situation. They do not ahelp their issues and should not be antagging at all if they can't handle what the possible conclusions to their gimmicks will be. Did you attempt to adminhelp the issue at the time? If so, what was the known action taken by administration/moderation?: No. I actively argued with them and was reminded to stop and formally make a ticket rather than continuing to cross a line. There are no real excuses on that, and I can comment on it if required. Approximate Date/Time: September 5, 7:30 MST

The notion that a GPS is on the level of suit sensors or encourages people to run off alone and die is a strange auroraism to me. They don't do anything other than give a coordinate position and are just a basic tool of the trade. There's far less room for any kind of "abuse" with it than a lot of other things. As for who gets them, most departments and jobs should not spawn with these or have them in their lockers. They should not be in the public tool storage. They're given out as of now, to anyone who can expect to go EVA or outside (Engineers, miners, medics, telescience). Since this is also what team members in an expedition are doing usually, enough GPS units for a sizeable expedition can just be put in a common research area. A PR to change the Research E.V.A room into an expedition E.V.A room was supposed to be in the works, and I'll probably start it myself if it doesn't go up soon.

I don't want all shuttles to be constrained to a 9x9 design. Other than still looking the same even with minor changes (they're all boxy), they have the same airlock positions, thrusters and it'd be difficult to fit stuff in. It's also just offputting to me from the perspective of a player and mapper and I don't want to lose the more imaginative designs, like the TCFL or OX shuttle. It's going to be the OX ship spam all over again, I think. If we standardize that hard and have effectively identical shuttles. Another thing is, we're not going to have so many third party ships wandering around and docking at the same time. We could easily still have airlocks in various areas that can accommodate different angles and still have the usual 1-3 ships that appear dock.

Now that we're getting into mapping entirely new ships and away sites, one stumbling block I've always found is that everything is either the same colour (steel/rwalls) or a custom wall type to get past that to an extent. It would be a lot easier though I think, if we could just have our core type of walls be colourable (maybe add a painter?) and it would help with mapping too and making it so things don't need the effort of custom sprites while still still looking different. This is easier said than done of course but as someone getting into mapping, it'd certainly be appreciated, at least.

Now that we have a solution for actually making it so away sites can take advantage of power requirements, I plan on looking into existing overmap ships and updating them. I would also like to change their shuttles so they can actually cycle into space properly like the Intrepid rather than having just a single airlock universally. I'm only interested in looking into what's more popular at first though, since this does take some effort and time. Other than the obvious ships tied to factions, xwhat might be some good ideas or concepts for future away sites and ships?

I'm aware, but It's not really relevant. The reality is still that they had no armour on and only one weapon capable of causing serious damage. Even a gauss carbine slug is still going to hurt them massively. So if just one person in ballistic armour who can just shrug off their mostly weak firepower (smgs and buckshot) fired off maybe two or three shots that hit, it would have been over for the marine being hit. The event runners definitely knew what they were giving out, since like you said, anything better would effectively eliminate any small chance they had of securing their objective altogether. The additional weapons also wasn't what really heavily contributed to their defeat but it did seal the deal by making people more willing to actually engage. The FSF CO and XO essentially critically wounded two or three of the SFA with just their pistols, and they mostly missed. This included the person with the AR, so it was a done deal after that. I personally still wouldn't want gauss carbines being the main weapon even at the start of any event, since even if it's a perfectly serviceable weapon it doesn't encourage action, by design.

I think it would be better to suggest an event might be of differing intensities depending on what happens rather than only marking it high due to the possibility of fighting. So, suggest it could range from medium-high intensity as an example. The event prior to it was completely fair and not really inevitable at all. Despite those "gauss carbines" the crew still ended up being able to defeat the marines after the fact. They are not worse weapons than 9mms either. The marines had no armour on and only one weapon worth a damn vs sec armour (the assault rifle). Security had not one, but two ballistic armour sets available which would have completely shut out the marines, but one wearer was in the bar and too far away which is fair. The other one just ran away during the armoury fight so the rest had to deal with the problem. The "loss" and killing of the FSF members ended up being completely the fault of the crew. Obviously, It's not about winning or losing in the end and nobody really did anything wrong with how it turned out though.

Some guidelines will certainly help with that, though I think as long as we don't let people do more stuff in general, wanting to drag around the "specialized" personnel is always going to be a constant issue as there is a tendency to overprepare without much reason. Another thing is that from what I've gathered during my conversations with people, some just find it unimaginable a "proper" expedition would leave without having a designated engineer person, a designated medic, a designated security member. Since this is their first real experience with the overmap. Other servers don't really have that problem.

This is probably more semantical than anything, but rather than phrasing it as "requirements" I would say it should just be labelled as expedition "suggestions" or "recommendations" so it appears more flexible and allowing of improvisation. To me, there should be no real hard restrictions. There shouldn't be an absolute requirement to take a medical member, or anyone really. Just advising good picks to round out an expedition, but acknowledging there's also zero problem with just a research team heading out themselves. They can always return for additional help if they want it. That's pretty much how the miners work, and we don't mandate they take anyone extra because the reality is, that's really not even needed. In general though, I think we should have it so basic knowledge in each area (engineering, medical and so on) can be considered acceptable for even an assistant going on an expedition to know. I don't think the expedition should need to have a medic in order to use the sleeper for an example, that should be considered easy to use and learn so an entire team can utilize it. If desired, there should also be an expectation expeditioners can know how to defend themselves if they want that. Playing someone without that knowledge could still be fine, for those who aren't into it.

Just an oversight these were not added yet I believe. The Aurora had one way exits in most departments once those were implemented, but it wasn't mapped into most of the Horizon. Only the bridge has one way exits, at its entrance at the moment.

Apparently this is how it is under the hood for the Aurora at least, so at least, your solution would be pretty nice at least as a background element. Other than sometimes IC confusion it would help me out of the game when I map stuff to see specifically what deck is what. So it seems like the most harmless adjustment.

That's why I posted the thread, I want to see if in general there's still problems with it or if people are used to it (except me).

As in. label deck one to be three, deck three to be one.

I keep mixing up whether deck one is the top deck or the hangar deck and whether deck three is the hangar deck or the top deck. In game of course, deck one is the hangar deck (lowest work deck) and deck three is the upper deck (with the bridge). Not sure if anyone else really has this problem though. I'm just used to the way Aurora labelled its levels (1 is the top, 5 is the bottom) and how stuff like the camera program manages it if you go into map view. I also always get slightly annoyed clicking on the map files and having to go from bottom to the top to edit the highest level.

Whenever I think of possible changes to the Horizon map, the main thought tends to be about maintenance. We've lost a significant amount of it, It's mostly small and narrow and it only leads to a few departments depending on the area. The overall map itself kind of makes it hard to add to maintenance as well or expand it, given how It's constrained by the "shell" of the Horizon and I would say the only "real" maintenance sections of note are on the second deck. We also have a ton of windows, leading to space and I kind of wonder if it really needs to be that significantly represented. Overall we could really benefit from more maint, just about everywhere. Challenges aside, I think It'd do the top and lower deck some good.

At the moment, losing power means the Horizon gets rather messed up across the board since any non critical shutter or blast door automatically closes down and then requires some extra effort expended to get them to how the state they used to be (open). However, we don't always have the roles capable of doing that available and so it leads to incredible delays and irritation. It also just looks bad to jump around and see the hangar becoming unusable for research until command is able to divert focus to them or random minor areas closed off. I think it would be best if we default to having every blast door and shutter acting as if they already have the critical variable toggled. I don't think stuff like having blast doors automatically raise upon power returning is a good solution either, they should just be rendered non-useable.

For clarity, I was Officer Szilvia Lestyan during that round. Apologies for any confusion if there was any.

I can't really get into that viewpoint, as I think It's coming from a position where you've had a bit of fun with merchants and want it to happen more often. The rarity is what makes it all the sweeter. I understand some may have interesting gimmicks or might not even be selling game changing stuff. However, we accept stuff like a merchant drastically impacting the round sometimes for now, because it just doesn't happen that often. If it were to change there is absolutely no way their stock would make it out intact, such as breacher suits and the other more interesting things people like to buy. Maybe that could be a plus, though. Either way it causes me to not only consider the constant effect on a round, but how it even makes any IC sense considering the Horizon is supposed to be out on its lonesome often. Meanwhile, there is a constant merchant presence docking to sell it stuff? That aside, it's not really the weapons I care about, but it is still a relevant aspect so I'll discuss it. They can't really be compared to the Horizon's armouries anyway, they're far more easily accessible and often outclassing anything or being a good alternative to what the ship can easily bring out. That the Horizon can bring a lot of guns to bear isn't really relevant. The only important ones are its rifles, the PEAC isn't even a contender because It's a terrible weapon (to anything not mechanical) that only looks scary. Meanwhile, the merchant can provide fully automatic weapons, xrays and a lot more. Good weapons aren't even that expensive and you can comfortably buy a few extremely powerful ones or a lot of on-par or better good ones without really caring too much. Being a massive game changer often, what with the firearms, hardsuits, tools and more. Credits are not even relevant, most merchants realize (understandably so) that credits are useless and It's far more interesting to sell at a massive loss. Then there's considering just how that's going to be used, especially as consistent merchants have a tendency to favor the crew. I do not want the role watered down and believe the current way is the best when it comes to facilitating roleplay, reducing issues and the headache of some tickets/investigations.