EvilBrage

If your belt window isn't open and you're not in a ready position to pull that taser out, then you really shouldn't be reacting with lightning speed anyways. I'd much prefer the spirte-update idea that's been floating around - and if you're dead-set on having a holster, get one with the custom loadout menu.

If you ask me, the reason for the mute really doesn't seem to be the IC in OOC - it was Khalid's critique of the "stop it" line. Then again, in the same position, I'd have hit the mute button right after Khalid said "ICly, i had them the whole time." It's my experience that Baka jumps the gun on occasion, but I'm really not seeing that here. That doesn't mean Baka couldn't have handled the situation better - the tone of your first PM to Khalid is bossy almost to the point of hostility, and exacerbated a situation that could have been avoided entirely had you simply (and repetitively) pointed to the rules. It is difficult to read emotion and intent behind text, and I could easily see how someone might construe what you said as an assertion that being an administrator makes you better than other players - that's where the escalation took place.

That's like saying your typical traitor wouldn't have the advanced scientific know-how to set up the singularity beacon, or the murderous intent to kill someone. Traitors are not typical, they can really be anything from a highly trained secret agent representing corporate interests, to someone who walked into work one day and decided he didn't like it that other people were living. It's a matter of choice, and the e-sword's blocking capability is just that - a choice. If it doesn't accurately represent your traitor, don't pick it - on the security side, don't expect your laser rifle to be the end of all traitors. It's more than a RP choice, it represents a mechanical oddity that's capable of making security actually stop to think about what it's doing. I've hardly seen the e-sword utilized as the ultimate traitor weapon, so it's probably fine as-is, but removing its ability to block would also warrant a decrease in the amount of telecrystals it costs, lest it go the way of the energy crossbow and never see use again.

The only thing that should change, though - I should be able to take that 60 seconds during which we vote to yell at the one guy who voted ninja. Like why.

An empty cell that may or may not be locked from the other side because of the way the cell controls work. The old permabrig actually had a few methods by which a prisoner could potentially catch his captors offguard and escape - a water tank and a bucket, the soap in the bathroom (which was a nice little spot away from the prying eyes of cameras, mind.) A communal brig seemed like a good idea, but it hasn't really accomplished any more interaction among prisoners since there really only tends to be one or two prisoners awake at a time - not to mention it's completely thrown off the possibility of escape, bar the random "trojan" event. If some of these aspects were returned (or maybe some new features, items, etc. added) then perhaps we'd see prisoners actually interact together - or conspire together in an escape attempt.

Pretty much this. If I wanted to simulate a realistic work environment for four hours, I would stop playing this game and go pick up a half-shift at work. Moreover, forcing a round type doesn't even remotely solve the "problem" of people calling the shuttle early - and I stuck quotes around it because it's not actually a problem. Three hours is more than enough for anything I could possibly think of, and if the players can pass the arbitrary 2/3 threshold before the three hour mark, then who are you to get miffed because they want to move on? If the players aren't engaged, they won't want to play - this isn't a failure of server mechanics, this is a failure of the chair RPer's mindset. When I try to make extended rounds fun, it typically doesn't go over very well - it usually results in an event with poor attendance (due to SSD's, chair RPers refusing to move, etc,) or being thrown in the brig while the officers go SSD (because I did something non-antaggy, but also illegal). Unless the gun is in your face (or you're part of security) I can't really see how most rounds are different from your extended chair RP - if you're the kind of person who's making all sorts of preparations you wouldn't normally because of your OOC knowledge there's an antagonist about, you're doing something wrong. If you insist on being a chair RP hermit, just shut yourself in your department and do it, but don't force the rest of us to suffer through it because you don't get the 3-4 hours of quality time with your clique that you'd like. I can't even conceive of a situation in which someone requires that span of uninterrupted time. If it didn't get voted in, that means a majority of people don't want to play that round type - so don't be a selfish git and try to force it on us, because all that'll do is disgruntle players, myself included.

Only if you can update the sprite to make it look like it's laying across your sprite like the spear/fire axe (sometimes) does. Then it'd be badass.

Because it's not there any more. Unless...

But it's accessible in-game, NT-approved (because it's standard in their arcade machines) and let's face it - it just saves me the time of winning the arcade over and over trying to get it. If this doesn't work, I'll get a custom item application, damnit - I'm going to have my tacticool. As for the armor suggestion, it always seemed strange to me that you could just as easily jam a metal rod into someone's foot while they're wearing sandals as opposed to, say, (supposedly) steel-toed work boots. Or into their chest as easily when they're wearing a firesuit as when they're wearing nothing at all. I'll choose to interpret the silence in regards to the drunken brawlers as a resounding "yes."

Step One: Add light armor to things that might be considered helpful against attacks. Maybe 10 melee armor to the firesuit, 5 armor to work boots, minor things like that (but nowhere near, say, armored vests.) Step Two: Give characters a physical amplifier of *1.2 while inebriated. Step Three: Add Tacticools to the custom spawn list. It's the little things.

It baffles me that someone with the capability of generating enough traffic for a DoS attack would choose to target an online game. I've noticed this happening with increasing frequency, and not to tell the hosts their business, but maybe it's time to fiddle with the firewall and see if we can't optimize it.

The bonus isn't just numerical. I'd be fine with unathi/tajaran claws if those didn't also mean they could break these cuffs and cause nasty amounts of bleeding.

I seem to recall Delta being reached within forty minutes of the round starting - feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. That said, I participated in the round in question, and Xander did fine - things just escalated a little too quickly for my tastes, but I still didn't see anything explicitly wrong with what happened. Oh, and before I forget - drones have no rights and I hate them to begin with.

I don't usually agree with Chaz, but Smiley/Bygone did say something about not playing even if their ban was lifted - which it shouldn't any time soon, because: That said, I've seen Baka jump the gun a few times, sure - but if I felt so strongly about it, I'd have brought up a complaint myself. If you don't feel like you're being treated fairly, I guarantee you'll find more sympathy by privately discussing the issue with the head administrators and/or developers as they're available, rather than tossing the case out into the public arena. From everything that you've thrown out there (which I will freely admit I haven't read all of,) it sounds like you might have a case, or at very least you think you have one. Problem is - you chose the wrong way to go about rectifying wrongs, perceived or otherwise. If you disregard multikeying rules so carelessly, how are we supposed to look favorably on your intent, here? There's a right and a wrong way to go about all of this, and I don't believe you've gone about the former.

Or to the Read ID command in the IC tab. That would solve all of the "is he too young" problems without having to go to command and get a brightly colored impossible-to-break wristband.

Please don't forget the soda can IED's.

Difference is in the armaments - blueshields typically have guns, while lawyers have pens and tricky legal wording.

It's not subjective; in order to retrieve someone's brain, you have to kill them - that, or you're killing them in the process of the extraction. People don't wait for their shift to be over to personally escort a murderer to the local police. Why shouldn't that transfer to police custody be immediate, like a real-life example would show you? Because that's not fun within the context of the game we play. We make concessions from reality to make things more fun for all involved - I still fail to see why the mere suggestion of a lawyer warrants the sort of half-baked outrage you showed us. I'm really happy for you, and I'ma let you finish, but half the rounds I witness have no command staff at all, even if security is packed to capacity. Do we simply let the matter lie and hope that security will erupt into civil war at the mere suggestion of injustice? If we have no command staff except the CMO, does that person become the arbiter of justice across the station regardless of the fact that they've rejected the role of "acting captain?"

Forced cyborgification is tantamount to execution (perhaps even slavery) - and those forms certainly do exist. On the contrary, I simply think you're too jaded to realize that things may be different on Aurora than they were for you on Baystation - and worst comes to worst, we have an empty job slot. So what?

First of all, your hyperbole is ridiculous and makes you look silly. Second, without any sort of legal sanction, NanoTrasen would not be authorized to do any sort of fining, brigging, or executing. If you want a logical reason for lawyers to exist, consider that there are usually years of appeals before someone can be sentenced to death in a civilized country - a single lawyer to ensure that no one is executed without irrefutable evidence (and let's get real - security can't police itself, what with detectives being hailed as heroes for executing fleeing suspects without anything remotely resembling due process) wouldn't be out of the question. The rest of your post is sheer speculation based upon an erroneous assumption that what you've said is true. And this is exactly why the security department needs more oversight than it's currently receiving - because people think this is somehow acceptable and fair to others. That said, is this the right sort of oversight? I'm personally more inclined to give the captain more leeway in regards to sentencing and whatnot. Maybe even grant Internal Affairs to authorize a release if their investigation concludes that not enough evidence exists to keep a crew member in the brig.

There are differences, some more subtle than others, with how these people act as well that leads me to doubt my confidence in my ability to accurately portray specific people - I never understood why, in a limitless universe, people choose to emulate cultures that we already know. One concept I've embraced on this note is that if it doesn't exist, you can't portray it incorrectly. For example, when you see Jaylor talk, read what he says aloud. It makes sense on a screen, but not so much when you actually say it (due to how I've apparently conditioned my brain t' short'n certain words down t' somethin' 'at seems t' be an accent.) There are some words I just don't know how to shorten, and it irks me to no end when Jaylor has to use a long word like "abbreviated" because I have no way to insert apostrophes to simulate his accent - but then again, I don't have to worry so much because it's my own creation, and I can figure it out as I go because I'm not bound to a real-life example. More on topic, though: It's great to create a character from nothing but your imagination - but at the same time, you need to keep them far enough away from yourself so as not to foster attachment. If you're a straight, white, blonde-haired man standing at 6'3'' like myself, I'd strongly advise against creating a straight, white, blonde-haired man standing at 6'3'' - the association will come naturally, I assure you. I also advise against copy-pasting a character into Aurora that you've created elsewhere - again, to avoid attachment. I frequently see these grandiose stories posted here, there, and wherever that outline someone's character to the smallest degree - where they went to school, who their high school crush was, all of this could likely fill a novella. Why? The more time you spend on creating a character, the more attached you will become. Seeing a wall-of-text style flavor text complete with an image link does give us a good idea of what a character looks like, but at the same time I can't help but feel that all this leads to a great deal of that attachment. Why is that bad, though? Well, you see... With that attachment comes entitlement - "you can't kill my character because they're mine and I decide what happens to them," and these players will do everything in their power to facilitate this mindset. Powergaming becomes acceptable because it favors their story rather than benefiting everyone's story, antagonists become simple villains to be defeated to show their character's glory and potential. They become the star. However, we're all essentially writing one large story, and a story can't have more than a few main characters at a time (let alone 30-40.) My best advice to avoid all of this? Play a side character. Literally. Build your character thinking, "okay, if I were making a game and included a side-quest for said game, where would this person fit in?" I guarantee you'll have far more fun that way. It's okay to take the limelight sometimes (being an antagonist means you need to, to a degree) but don't be the guy who has to tie every single thread of every story together with his own. So when Dexter prowls the station ready to make his next kill, try to be the James Doakes, the Vince Masuka, and the Angel Batista - unless of course the other players are very obviously making the story about your character, in which case you should consider this your moment to shine.

So your "suggestion" is to be like every other server and strip the HRP from our title? I'm beginning to wonder if this is the right server for you. You've categorized an entire group of players as "terrible" when I've seen some security players who actually (in my opinion) play along fairly well. Don't say "security" is terrible - point out the individual players and if there's a legitimate concern, that's something we can work with. You claim real life doesn't matter and that no one can speak out because they're not police officers (I'm a detention officer, so almost) like you'd rather just throw realism to the wind altogether. This very mindset is the problem we're having, and you're doing nothing but contributing to it by thinking about the game in terms of "winning" and "losing." Being an antagonist doesn't entitle you to free passes to carry out your plans, just like being security doesn't entitle you to be the OOC police of the server. Sometimes, you will lose, regardless of job or antagonist status. Sometimes, you will die, regardless of job or antagonist status. Can you honestly not see that?

You are part of the problem. This, as outlined above, is literally the problem. You're not offering any solutions, but rather encouraging the perpetuation of the problem, saying we "might as well get used to it." Did you post this to validate your own actions, or to actually weigh in and help us figure out how to make the server a more enjoyable experience for everyone? I'm seriously curious about what would possibly lead you to think this was constructive in any way.

Here's a unique concept: What if the antag has a reason for killing you? I know it's hard to fathom, but bear with me here. Sometimes, it takes a little kick for things to take off in a direction the antagonist can foster intrigue from, and sometimes that kick is you, and you end up dying. If you have such an attachment to your character that you can't bear the thought of taking a timeout for a few hours from that particular character, then the attachment in question is not only unhealthy, but also detrimental to the server as a whole. I've noticed a trend lately that particular players seem to consistently jump to the conclusion that all antagonists are terrible and it is their OOC duty to stop them. When called out on this behavior, the general administrative consensus seems to be that "they didn't do anything wrong in particular" even though the player may have a very long history of such complaints. Sure, perhaps the letter of the law was upheld, but now we have this trending issue and no one can explain why. FFrances even pointed out that these are veteran players partaking in this sort of activity - and when others see that this is acceptable behavior, they will begin to do it as well. There's nothing wrong with being robust, else antagonists would simply have a "kill" button, but you have to think about what your character would say or do realistically. No one in their right mind is going to defensively employ lethal force (intentionally) unless they're in some serious danger. Also consider this: when an antagonist tries to coerce an individual into a compromising situation and you fight them tooth and nail, what options are left? Kill you, or let you go - and I guarantee you option #2 is rare indeed. The best antagonist moments I have are with those who play along, and ultimately they're the victims who have the most fun as well. When you adopt an OOC mentality that you must stop the evil antags, you're only degrading the fun for yourself and others. And for what? So you can continue the amorous and indifferent-despite-all-the-gibs-around-them adventures of Gary Stu and Mary Sue?