Frances

From my point of view, denying someone extra responsibilities under the sole basis that you don't know them OOCly is kinda... against the spirit of the game, and very meta. Of course, you should use common sense - look at records, and don't promote snowflake characters like in the example above (nurse under 30 competent in everything? Pssh, sure, Odin probably messed up their records again or that person is trying to trick you. Fax CC and send an ahelp.) Otherwise, I'd just promote whoever has decent records, unless they're acting very suspiciously. Like, yes, they might be terrible, and once you know they are, don't give them anything. But you shouldn't assume they might be and deny them based solely on that, because that's super frustrating for any player to have to face. This also leads to situations where ICly under-qualified people are picked over superiors for one task because the people in charge have metaknowledge about that particular player. Records are supposed to mean something, and players should be responsible to know how many qualifications they can take on themselves. Yes, terrible doctors (that's just one example) might be a bit of a pain OOCly, but they can be removed fairly easily. Not to mention they can lead to hilarious situations, and general bring more life to the round's narrative, as long as they're not a persistent occurrence.

I can't speak for others, but I understand your frustrations, and my intent wasn't to dismiss your complaint on the simple ground that you lost a fight. The incident that happened, while justified in a SS13-universe, still remains incredibly silly. I haven't seen it a habit for staff to punish users solely for doing silly things, as long as these things are roleplayed properly and carry some comedic worth (so that's why for example you'll see chefs making impossible food items all the time, even though it's technically not super realistic.) There is no clear policy on what to do when these "silly" incidents end up creating roleplay that a player is dissatisfied with due to the silliness being immersion-breaking. Some people mind, some people don't. These incidents are usually dealt with on a case-by-case basis. Anyway, I wouldn't consider the complaint thrown out yet. Keep in mind the final decision belongs to the staff, and admins or mods have yet to post on this thread.

I believe Nanotoxin is implying his character came after the drawing, not the other way around. @Nanotoxin, out of curiosity, what did your grandmother draw for? This looks very much like the style of old DnD/Fantasy illustrations.

Wait, so you're twelve? This... both explains a lot and leaves me very confused.

Noooot to nitpick, but if you're applying to be a lore writer, you probably want to proofread your application and fix your capitalization and grammar. Also, unless examples of your own work are all something private you have a specific reason not to post publicly, you're probably best off including some writing excerpts with your application right away, not when someone asks for them.

As much as certain people would like for the server to be serious 24/7, you cannot deny that that a certain (non-minor) part of the server occasionally engages in a variety of non-serious acts, and that things far worse, both in terms of planning and RP usefulness, go completely unchecked and uncared for. I believe the reason why this is being brought up now is because someone was beaten into crit over somewhat silly circumstances, which wasn't enjoyable for them. And it's frankly a conundrum because you can argue why it was bad, and there are rules against terribly ridiculous acts, but they're generally not enforced if the roleplay provided is both of a certain quality and hilarity.

Whoever did this, this was not okay, was it? I mean, cargo was bombed, people got injured as collateral (which is great, and helps further the ops' plans), but... shooting security to death simply because they're there? From an IC perspective, I can almost understand it, but from an OOC one, isn't that poor, poor form?

EoR rules have an (unspoken? It should be added) amendment that pre-existing conflict is allowed to continue and finish organically at the end of the round. For example, somebody being chased by somebody else wouldn't be able to run into the shuttle and use it as a "safe zone" - they'd still get robusted. EoR rules also apply for disruptions after the shuttle has docked - people are pretty much free to roleplay as normal in escape before this. This does not really seem to be the issue here, anyway. I believe the highlighted problem is more that the players involved asked SierraKomodo to stop a behavior they found annoying for OOC, then decided to attack his character with minimal roleplay after he made a clear effort to accommodate their demands.

From having observed the general contingent of ERT players while being on staff, I can tell you that a good 50-70% of them are a mix of regulars who don't play heads, and semi-regular or non regulars who happen to feel like playing ERT. As it is probably the role you get to play the least in the game, I can basically guarantee you if it were whitelisted no one would ERT anymore. Has the stupidity in ERT really gotten that bad? Can you provide some examples, maybe? If people seem to think it really is an issue it might be worth trying to come up with another possible fix.

I believe this suggestion is being brought from an OOC perspective, to adapt and change the role of the ERT in an attempt to curb down on the damage caused by baddies. I nevertheless do not think the ERT should have a major change in purpose (going from being in command to basically being extra hands for the station to monopolize). Both in my time as an admin and as a player, I haven't seen enough ERT members being terrible to justify this, and the few that did misbehave or fuck up usually engaged in fuckups of a much simpler and easily explainable nature than anything that would involve the chain of command or giving out orders to anyone. Like, they'd run off alone in the station, or get lost in the armory, miss the ERT shuttle, and C4 Centcom. Moving them down in the chain of command wouldn't solve any of this.

I'm simply posting to note that it's been 20 days since I was informed some members of staff had issues that pushed them to oppose my candidacy, and I invited them to discuss these issues with me (a few I know nothing about, a few I believe understand and might be misunderstandings.) I'm not upset, or commenting this to be snide, but no one has posted (or PMed) me yet, and I highly doubt anyone will. I also understand that the application process for this trialround has been exceptionally weird, but I'm more calling out the fact that some people said that they had issues with me, rather than simply that I haven't been given a trial yet (lots of people haven't, it had to do with the weird system being used.) If anyone is interested, perhaps, it would be nice to know why people would think I'd make a good addition to staff or not? Not that many people seem to have shared their input yet.

People can go crazy under highly stressful circumstances - I don't believe someone losing their shit because terrorists are attacking their workplace really falls under the same rules that prevent people from losing their shit during a normal workday for basically no reason. Honestly, I feel like the biggest question here was, was it justified, and was it fun without being completely immersion-breaking? (Like, come on. A pissed off chaplain trying to melee nuke ops in a wheelchair is completely goofy, but there was thought, intent and effort put into it.) Nuke ops should have the equipment to deal with a few unruly crewmembers, as well. And this wasn't an instance of someone being terribly shitty, like running around while refusing to be a hostage or inciting everyone to revolve. It was just a pissed off, legless chaplain, with a grudge to hold. Edit: Maybe the other side of the medal here is that I don't believe characters should be overstepping their qualifications too much, especially regarding combat. But while some have done it out of malicious or powergaming intents (the sexy 20-year old nurse that power disarms an antag and immediately tables them), I'm not sure if there was such an abuse here. (Well, you were beaten into crit. By an old priest in a wheelchair. But as a player, I'm really not sure if I want to dismiss cases like that as "well, it's ss13 and it was funny" or actually take issue with them.)

Well, nuke ops firing on civilians unprovoked is pretty serious (it's outright ganking). Isn't this something we should try to get more info on before we process this complaint either way? It doesn't seem like anyone has been able to address precisely what happened to who, or posted a possible reason why it might've happened. A name was mentioned, Voltage's. Could it be possible to get him to drop into the thread, and maybe get the account of the other nuke ops and victims before we file this as ganking?

If nuke ops don't loot the armory, they risk fighting the station's sec force armed with lethals. If they don't disable cargo, they risk fighting the entire station armed with the guns cargo can order. Sure, operatives can try to play on a different scenario by acquiring some sort of leverage (bomb, hostages, etc.) and hoping they can dissuade the station from taking offensive action. But otherwise, as far as disabling the station's systems, this is a pretty standard opening strategy, and does not preclude the operatives from creating a myriad of interesting situations afterwards. The rest of what was named above, I'm not sure about. But I thought I'd state the reasons why so many operatives attack the armory and cargo - out of very valid OOC concerns, which don't really constitute powergaming to my knowledge.

technically you even proved me wrong lmao

It's because the entire thread is a joke, and having a "perfect" white, young and pretty character goes within attributes of the Aurora "common snowflake". But mark my words, people will still be complaining or questioning the grading system pages from now.

I would assume people are waiting on Skull as it technically seems to be "his" case (wrote the original unban conditions, and engaged Plahunter here). I understand that Skull is busy, but as he has come on the forums to ban someone else today (I'm not mad about that btw, simply stating), I'm not sure what exactly he's doing. Of course, it is possible he has simply forgotten about this.

I believe Nikolai is simply suggesting for a "reskin" of IPCs, with a different spriteset. Technically, they would have to be a new race, but they could be linked directly to IPCs both in lore and applications. It'd just give more cosmetic variety to IPC players. I also believe Nikolai states some pretty good uses for the suggestion, RP-wise.

So just to clarify, Sue is getting a tempban because she essentially wrote blood messages out of bad will with the intent to get antags caught, so that the round would end?

I did a portrait of Michael Tool, for, well, Tool! High-res here.

This was both beautiful and hilarious. And I had completely forgotten about it. I'm really glad to see it being digged up.

I don't really have an issue with it, if you're not afraid it might get a bit crowded. We'd probably want to open another CSI slot to make it fair, and at that point, you can end up with four investigative personnel, which is, like... a lot? I also get that there's a lot of cases to solve, and things can get pretty hectic on the station, but as a HoS it's hard enough to keep track of cases from 1-2 investigators along with all the other security stuff. Anyway, I haven't played detective/CSI in a while, so I'll leave others with more experience to speak about whether they think this would be a problem or not.

Make a fuss about it? I don't understand, what do you mean by that? I don't think the rework/polishing of an entire gamemode is a change that can be "swept under the rug". In my mind, an update would pretty much go: -Ninja is updated, maybe polished so it looks shiny and people realize once again that it exists, whatever we can do to help it gain traction -People play several rounds of ninja during a trial period -Feedback is provided, we decide whether to keep/add it in secret rotation, or leave it on vote only There's not really any room in this system for people to say "meh, I don't really care, add it in". There would be a period of discussion and debating, with feedback being provided by people who liked or disliked the mode.

This is amazing. I like it.