Fluffy

How people use or engage with the lore and atmosphere is a broad topic that would escape the boundary of borging itself, and is also in broad strokes subjective Should people act more on the dystopian part? If you ask me yes, they should, but then we should give them more reasons to do it, both in mechanic, lore and policies As I am sure you would also see, this is a broader discussion than borging itself, that we can have (I would too enjoy more leeway to characters to act like faulty human beings, with desires needs and impulses, than what I see currently being afforded), but is separate from the narrow focus of this specific proposal I am all for fun and engaging things, can you elaborate on some of those ways? Possibly in another thread, if appropriate I do agree with you here, antagonists should be given more power to have equal odds against the ship, but the presence (or lack) of borging wouldn't really accomplish this, I fear; when you are caught repeatedly to the level of being borged, you are usually essentially out of tools to prop yourself (as an antagonist) up What would best accomplish this, I believe, is better tools, policies and player culture Because that should not happen, marooning and borging should be mostly reserved for threats that go beyond being i3XX infractions, and should likewise in my view be roleplayed on the other side as well, borging someone 5 minutes after being cuffed doesn't accomplish any of that I believe there should be 2 chief questions we should ask ourself, as players, when deciding what to do: Does this progress the narrative of the round? Is this the most fun option for the majority of the players in this round? Ideally, every player would choose to do something that answer yes to both questions; please note that "fun" is intended as a broader concept than hilarity (though it can also include it), and is somewhat of a moving target too

Cyborgification should be used for cases that warrants it, eg. mutiny (this is also canonical), and for threats that escape containment It should also happen when it's either approaching round end, or there are multiple threats and the ones captured aren't controllable with the available resources It fullfill a corporate interest, because it's cheaper than a positronic brain and you don't have to pay the employee anymore, and it also fits to remind us the corporate dystopia (that sadly gets often forgot), it's a nice element that serves both a purpose in lore and mechanically, the only thing it needs is to be used responsibly, but that goes for everything On that note, I believe it would be beneficial to add an option of public execution by firing squad as an alternative that the Captain/Command can take, it would help remind the dystopia part and could be used one way or the other to further the RP and conflict (it would be far easier to distrupt an execution in the central ring, eg. by blocking the firing line, than a cyborgification inside the machinist workshop for example)

As far as I'm aware (I don't play as a vampire), veil walk has a cooldown and requires blood to be used, is that correct? Any vampire player can chime in and clarify how it works?

Next round it will not have it, as of now it's un-testmerged Come and play!

I have requested to un-testmerge it, and I will look into if it is worth to leave it only at higher speeds, or just drop the idea of using smooth atom gliding movement

Based on the feedbacks I got so far: - The zombies can now attack mechs, around 12/13 hits explode the mech - Standard zombies are now easier to kill, special zombies are a bit tougher than before, except the tank that got another ~40% of health more. Good luck~

I am aware it feels different than before, however I suspect it might have to do with us not being used to it, like when you get a new monitor for your PC, that's why I have asked in the OP to: That is done to iron out any first-impact sensation that might be due to it just being different than what we're used to; after that, we can see if it can be salvaged (as a side note, it's possible to set it not to apply below a certain movement speed, eg. walking), if it has to be scrapped, if it makes sense to keep it and increase the movement speed, or whatever else might come out of the conversation after this small test So, please, give it a couple of days to get a feeling on this different approach

This is the feedback thread for the currently testmerged atom gliding PR (https://github.com/Aurorastation/Aurora.3/pull/17215) The PR substitute our mini-jumps with a smooth(er) transition between turfs/tiles The effective movement speed (how much time a mob takes to move from turf A to B) is unaltered Please, give it a couple of days to get a feeling on this different approach to movement and leave your feedback

This is an excellent point I have not thought about I retract my suggestion from the scope of this proposal

That is correct, however two rebuttals are present in what you said yourself: "for the betterment of staff morale" and "long-range vessel" Sure, a company can go full 1984 concrete buildings space optimization on the ship, but the depressed and likely mentally unstable employees it would generate makes them bad performing workers, that's, I think, a good justification of why we get a Psychologist/Psychiatrist on duty, a Bar and some other amenities besides what is strictly needed for the ship to function, and it goes for pets too, but that was not my point, see below To be clear, I have no interest in keeping PunPun (or any other animal for that matter), what I was saying is that I believe it would be an improvement on both fronts if they were animals that gather positive attention and they were also useful animals, the two aren't mutually exclusive (a mercy dog/capibara/whatever in Medbay would be both) You would give a reason to pull the animals out of their cages/offices (because if nothing else you have a mechanical incentive to have it at hand) and they would also generate positive attention from the rest of the crew Both the animal having a mechanical utility or not would work for replacing PunPun, and I think it having a mechanical utility could add other things of value on top of acknowledging the existence of an animal in a department/corridor and spamclicking "pet" x50 (or the occasional comparison between Crusher and a Tajara) Therefore my question was: What would make it preferable for them not to have a mechanical utility on top of it? What makes it better, game wise, for them to just be roaming mobs that don't do anything, over them be roaming mobs that can also do something?

Yea I was not talking about the pirates in the event, I was talking in general, eg. if you fought pirates while aboard an Hegemony ship, in a Solarian ship or whatever

We could establish an IPC / Viax / Borgs based residential security/medical/engineering/whatever NPC group that takes care of all that happens below decks People who work above deck (aka any player-played character, excluding appropriate staff) cannot work or do anything of note below deck, the above group takes care of it I believe this could solve the believably points mentioned (how can there be no security, no holes made while the upper decks were half exploded etc.), allow the appropriate staff to create some under-deck offscreen narration if they want, solve other pain points during rounds (where did the antag that we brigged go if they enter the residentials?), and solve what OP's indicate Do note, however, that nothing prevents character from having similar things in the background as long as they are believable, people can have characters that fought boarders/pirates/whatnot off-screen as long as they are believably done and don't conflict with lore, through headcanon, the proposals you (OP) and I suggest would only prevent them from having done that on the horizon's residential quarters, and would be limited to things that happens to the horizon only .2c

Sure, but this isn't the residential area, this is the work area of a ship that belongs to a dystopian megacorp conglomerate, IMHO it makes more sense that they would give us animals that have a purpose (like Columbo) if they can, rather than some animals "because they are funny and because they keep you company", also considering that they can do that while also being work-useful My question however was more meant on the lines of OOC consideration, aka, why do you think from a game perspective it's better for them to be pets? Why is it preferable over them being useful tools too? That's what I wanted to inquire

Ok, other people above have pointed out that the pets often don't see any use, rarely add anything of value, or the likes What I was saying would address those points, it would see use and add value in having it, etc. Why do you think pets should remain pets? Why do you think it preferable than them having some utility too?

I would give crusher to the Bar, and give a mercy dog to medbay, basically a Columbo whose AI can be told to roam and seek injured people, with a suit sensor to know the location and a radio where it would bark when it finds someone injured This also makes the pet useful, instead of staying in the CMO's office or the reception glass cube, as well as justify the existence and presence of such animal

I like high intensity events, we are competing to get the most precious resource known to men, in a space with a lot of conflicting ideologies, government and entities, which have a weak grasp on the expansive territory that is present in the galaxy Though I'm not the biggest fan of canon deaths (though it has some pros too), I am absolutely a fan of high intensity events, having high stakes is good; no, it doesn't mean everything should be high intensity, but a good portion (around half), in my view, should

I am sure we can, and will, have our wealth of disagreements on different points. But, you seem deeply interested in the server success, and to arrive to sound conclusions. You seem to me to care, at least in principle, about following a sound method to reach a conclusion, and don't shy away from having it scrutinized, falling for cop-outs or fallacies comparatively uncommonly. This, in my view, makes you the best candidate for this position, among the current applicants.

I would be interested in this, if LVS isn't

I will just re-outline the part regarding the vacuum, then: I have seen Tokash trying to escape the area more than once, the shutters were closed and it being a vacuum means they cannot be opened without a crowbar, I have myself made at least two attempts to open them using the combitool crowbar, that were unsuccessful. Being inside the area, and having the attempts to escape it interrupted one way or another, by slippings with cleaner grenades or the raiders opening the airlock trying to perform an incursion on your back and shooting you, makes the escape between more dangerous and impossible, hence your highest chance of survival is given by stopping the threat that keeps coming shoot you in the back first, and escape when it's not happening anymore after; while characters generally try to avoid pain for obvious reasons, a period of time exposed to low pressure/vacuum is still preferable, safer and less painful than being shot in the back by an assault rifle. Attempts to charge in and get a fire line on someone multiple times, in a dangerous atmosphere, that prevents them from safely and successfully leaving the area can only end with either them dying or a countercharge to stop what is preventing the leaving, which is the reason why 3 people felt had no other option but to charge in (as well as helping their colleagues) and incapacitate the threat, in my opinion.

As I was present in the round, I can provide direct witness from memory. I will keep it short and pertinent as much as I can. The raiders were, over multiple encounters, invited to leave the ship, the contested fight happened after the third time they came back instead of leaving; they were given ample opportunities in previous encounters to leave. The raiders (two of) mentioned to have stolen secret technology blueprints (or something on that line), right before leaving the second time; The first encounter they held Tokash at gunpoint in maintenance, with me on the side, and tried to subdue and take him as an hostage. It is less clear the second time they left, but it was generally believed for them to have took a Doctor as hostage before the standoff, and while leaving one of them said something on the lines of "we're sorry for what will happen, we will be back to get our friend, we won't leave him behind". When they rolled in the third time, inside the Brig from the north maintenance airlock and then afterwards by detonating a wall south of communal, the fight was in my opinion inevitable: You have armed people destroying the ship, that are laying siege and bombing your department, that promised to use whatever it takes to get the prisoner, that tried to take crew hostage (including command staff), and are now aiming assault rifles at you and other officers. We were then flanked from the communal-to-brig doors by another raider, which prompted the firefight. Despite some attempts at retreating that I have seen Tokash do, while trying to leave the decompressing area, we were being slipped by the cleaner grenades and flanked, with one of the raiders appearing and opening the shutters, to which of course we shot at, but it was in my mind pretty clear that we would not have been left to simply leave even if we wanted to. The shutters were being opened and the raiders lining up to shoot inside the brig, and they had suits, so the best bet for survival would have been to down them to avoid being flanked again and evacuate the area when we're sure we're not getting shot. If we could not pull back, our best bet was to push forward and overrun them. I have personally witnessed at least two attempts of Tokash to pull back, in which he was slipped with a cleaner grenade or shot, so I do not believe the representation of the situation a la him deathgasp bayonet charging them blindless is accurate. In regards to masks, I believe I have seen him using the emergency oxygen tank, and I am sure I have used it myself as soon as I had a moment to wear it, I have even lit an oxygen candle. You can use oxygen tanks with the full face gas mask. If 3 hours of round with multiple encounters, two abduction attempts, stealing secret information from the SCC, two chances given to leave, laying siege to an entire department, a promise of coming back with force to get what they want, a shootout with part of them and finally bombing the ship and trying to acquire a prisoner while denying your ability to retreat aren't considered enough justification for a full force engagement, or interesting, I would be surprised.

I prefer XO being 2IC over this proposal, for the reasons outlined in the relative thread that we're still pending the results on. To address the points brought: Just like the captain can be removed with sufficient reason via a vote, so does the second in line of succession or elected acting captain This would apply to the captain too, the captain does not need the rest of command to "be comfortable with the character in question", so I am not sure why it would matter here The regulations requires a majority of command to vote for this to happen, being 2IC does not grant you this ability outside established procedures, your vote has no additional weight in respect to any other command member on the matter unless stated otherwise The reason for a 2IC is to fill the gap in case the 1IC is incapacitated and there's something to handle, there is no need for it to be filled if there's nothing to handle, just like there would not be to elect an acting captain; if there's something to handle and the captain is incapacitated, the 2IC takes that position, if the 2IC is incapacitated too, someone else should likewise take that position A line of succession can be established, or the third acting captain could be voted, for the very rare occurrences where both the 1IC and 2IC are incapacitated It is important to note that IRL civilian ships have a structure with a chain of succession, as I have discussed in the other thread Ultimately, it is a tool to quickly respond to emergency situations and threats, makes sense to be there, and the asserted issues that it would have that I have seen presented are either just equivalent to what a captain would be under, or easily solvable via regulations and policies I therefore cannot support the whole of this proposal (though I tentatively agree on some department line reorganizations), I am however open to change my opinion on the matter if an issue can be presented that is exclusive of the XO being 2IC, not solvable via regulations and policies, and not a whitelist issue

For the reasons specified by Read and Flpfs, I am also against this change. For the roleplay PoV, the effect is wider than the character(s) itself that fight and possibly dies to the event. Hivebots and the likes are threat that anyone can fight: Open or break into one of the two armories, engineering, ops, bridge or CIC to take up/order either a gun/weapon or an emitter, and you can fight the threat.

I like high intensity rounds, it is no secret that I find preferable to either entertain conversations and mess with characters or high intensity, high adrenaline and high destruction rounds, plus we have a lot of cool things that we basically never use, which is a travesty. This could help on both of those fronts, therefore, it has my support.

Not according to what is being proposed: Unless you mean "in a canon event", but no distinction is indicated, and what is being proposed mainly affects normal, non-canon-event rounds anyways, which is the vast majority of all the rounds too. If you are allowed to kill people with enough escalation as you indicate, then what is the purpose of those two additions? Why would the accidental execution even matter? Using the example above, the DPRA character would have enough reason to execute the PSIS merc, but by how I understand the proposed points, they would not allow that. A sun sisters HoS could decide to have the cultists in a Raskara gimmick executed due to his ingrained core beliefs, the proposed points would not allow that. A Dominian XO could order the execution of the Fishandur Freedom Force gimmick revs due to his loyalty towards Dominia, the proposed points would not allow that. The proposed points would remove a deal of freedom and uncertainty that is fun and interesting to explore, the possibility that people would go "screw this" if given enough reason to, which would be negated via OOC means. They also do not seem to have in consideration the state of the round, or the method, too: John Trasen wordlessy walking between downed Varuca mercs at 00.50 tapping each of them is a glorified extended turn, uninteresting, unfun action that diminishes the overall enjoyment of the round for the next hour and half. Chad Sol that, after an hour of hunting and three firefights, walk over to the downed Varuca merc at 1.55, emotes to lift the handgun out of the holster, says "Just like grandpa", let the merc talk and then plant a bullet between his mosquito-like eyes before collapsing on the floor is a fun, soulful, memorable and HRP moment, that enhances the overall enjoyment of the round. it's something to talk about afterwards, gives other people hooks to attach to in many different directions (brig/defend/indifference/scream at/hate/taunt [...]) which sets in motion its own chain of RP moments. It's a net positive. The chief difference between the two? One is a meaningless execution, without much reason besides antag = kill, the other is a meaningful, roleplayed execution. If we want to target executions, I believe our target should be the meaningless or premature ones. The meaningful, interesting, roleplayed, character-driven ones should not only be allowed, but encouraged.

I have thought about the proposed formatting, and while I see some merits to it, I do not believe it would be beneficial as a whole. Some wording-specific points and opinions in the spoiler: But, I want to address the elephant in the room mainly: This contrast to the HRP setting, other rules, and is in general antithetic to the character-driven environment that we keep saying we want to offer. Character can, and should, be able to disregard IC regulations if the situation is in broad strokes sufficient for a non-insane/psychotic character to choose so. We also allow criminal characters, per our rules. Hanging over the player a threat of OOC retaliation, akin to the damocles sword, to constrain believable characters from doing what makes sense for them to do is shooting both our own HRP foot, and part of the fun, for no clear reason other than avoiding someone from being salty to have been tapped. Eg, If your ex-pirate, DPRA character finds itself being taunted by someone from a merc group of PRA, PSIS agents, that starts trying to kill him, and somehow he manages to down the PSIS agent, then by all that is holy he has all the IC reason to, and should be able to, execute the enemy cat with a full magazine unloaded in his skull, and be confident that he won't get OOC punished for that. If the event is canon, assuming someone sees and report him, or evidences are collected that frame him, then he will suffer the IC consequences of the IC choices that the character took due to the IC events, if not, new round new salt. And that, in my view, is the nail in this policy's coffin, and the main reason why I don't support it.