dessysalta

related to above post, couldnt resist posting here (admins sue me) ft. clark, diego, and woe art is by sketchalicious

buy-in was 300, there were 3 other players :]

In fairness, a lot of other weapons are OHKs at close range or barely give you any time to react. 357 and 50 cals do fucked up damage, eswords if done right, like any rifle if you manage to do that, super heavy pistols, the list goes on. PBs are intentionally very powerful. Not really a matter of balance IMO so much as it is roleplay quality. PBing someone and insta-killing them can have a lot of buildup and thought behind it. Shotgun PBs especially do i think like 80 damage on account of being the close-range, single-shot "fuck up this person" weapon.

Most of what I could say boils down to "I don't think I was wholly off-topic" and most of what you and the rest of staff could say is "I think you were." I'd rather eat the warning point that's doing nothing than invest multiple days arguing to meet the same end. Besides, if the host warns me himself, I'm probably doing something wrong. As for retracted complaints being permanently retracted, that's another can of worms and I might make a policy suggestion thread about that, but again, not worth it to argue here.

After some consideration (and speaking with a friend) I don't think investing my energy into this is going to be beneficial for any of us. I've gotten a chance to re-read all of what I said in the original complaint (thank you Wayback), and while I stand by what I said in both the above post by myself and the spoiler below (what I had previously used to respond to Roostercat, but now only something I'm keeping for posterity) I could have handled it differently. I'd like to retract this complaint for now, though I might revisit it depending on how I feel in the future. There are things I could have said differently in this post and in the original and things that are more worth discussing as policy (unrelated to off-topic peanutting that is).

BYOND Key: Dessysalta Staff BYOND Key: Arrow768 Game ID: N/A, forums Reason for complaint: I was given a forum warning for largely explaining the views of the mentioned topic in this staff complaint, the relevant topic being this one. This quote by greenjoe is why I contributed to the discussion. I stated every point that was dissected in the main thread, as well as giving my thoughts about it because they're relevant to the discussion. I wasn't trying to give a list of reasons why the 2ICXO change shouldn't go through. I was giving adequate context of multiple developers, CCIA, lore devs, not to mention countless players contesting the change, and I closed with something along the lines of (I can't get the quote exactly for reasons that are obvious): Among other things, I handled points such as "give us a concrete number of the amount of non-human XOs played" as they were disregarded in the topic that was the subject of the complaint for no good reason, and I compiled many quotes (even a screenshot) of others players that visibly contested the change or how staff handled it. All of these were prudent to give staff (head, etc.) a sense of scale to the point of "there was a large amount of negative feedback." The staff complaint by greenjoe was not, "I am only referring to Arrow," and even if it was, the entire discussion had in regards to the 2ICXO is what sparked the complaint. I consolidated the views of the playerbase without failure and pointed out frustrations that were caused by the implementation and dialogue regarding it. I would bring up the fact that five people reacted to what I said to show they agree with me, but I cannot do that because the post was deleted. Evidence/logs/etc: The warning's in the spoiler. Additional remarks: Locking the thread immediately after I contributed was fine, I agree that it was a lot to read and I personally don't see the reason why anyone else would need to say anything after the fact, but being given a warning and having all of what I wrote deleted is unreasonable. I was not peanutting nor was I shifting the complaint to be off-topic.

"hadii's grassse" says the adventurer liznerd now apparently. this round was fucking amazing

Nothing I can think of.

Creator of the Drek'za clan here. Love to see the inclusion of more Drek'za warriors, and I can attest to Casgam's ability to roleplay. From another Vedhra fan to another Drek'za muscle, I have no doubts they can play a Unathi correctly. +1

Echoing what Evan said, it's a new thing that's been placed everywhere. Give it a month and people will stop commenting on it.

Honestly, I think it should be all or nothing, yeah. It should either be acidic and damage things around it, or it should do nothing and be mostly edible to everyone else. I would definitely side with you on making them edible/removing the acid. Let people freak out ICly about whether or not to eat greimorians and/or how weird it is.

Also you could argue that while sec is the combat learner role, team antags are a chance to get used to specific mechanics like being a combat medic or engineer, blah blah blah, but that's not my place nor is it my main point.

I hear people talking about giving antagonists a break a lot. They don't need a break. In a mercenary team you have access to a really good amount of things for free, and then from there you can grab anything in the uplink, such as combat cyborgs, mechs, specialized equipment, and that doesn't even get into playing a species that's mechanically better or trading for something powerful via ahelp. As mentioned, they have the ultimate authority of "if you don't do what I say, I am within the rules to shoot you and kill you instantly." It completely disregards that if an antagonist or group of antagonists want someone dead, they should have to earn that, as someone whose total rounds are about 1/4 to 1/3 group antagonists. I don't ask this to be sarcastic, but it's a question that runs through my head a lot: do people forget what a coordinated and aggressive mercenary team is capable of? With the bare minimum coordination between 4 guys you can completely neuter any and all threats. Send two guys to the crew armory to rob and two more to the main armory and the ship is essentially screwed. Want to give the ship a break anyways for a laugh? Let security arm up but target their legs, make use of stun weaponry and net guns, put on flash-resistant goggles and buy the soundproof headset in the uplink for negligible TC cost, use the barricades you spawn with and buy more as you go, take hostages. How about the two sanasomnum injectors per uplink (this is just absurd) you get as a "get out of round removal free" card? It's not that hard to make the ship your bitch if that's your goal. Likewise, security understands that when there is a serious and present threat to the ship that is trying to do this they're well within their right to punish them. "Oorah, the Solarian clone corps is here!" Is only going to fly for the two minutes or so it takes security to get guns and tell them to stand down. Even if they are going for a narrative and security doesn't get to shoot them instantly, that doesn't make them subject to less scrutiny along the way. At any rate, ops/cargo can order practically any weapon that matters within sixty seconds if they're fast enough, and that includes PEAC shells or ion rifles to delete mechs and synths respectively. As a sec and command main, I want antagonists to roll us more often. I want to have the thrill of beating as many as 8 guys with guns and mechs knowing I'm completely outclassed but that my character will do everything in their power to defend what's good (or what's "good"). I give antagonists leeway and swap to lethals far later than I should from a reasonable perspective, but I know when to pick up the pace to meet the difficulty curve. This spoiler has a paragraph that I thought about including as the intro to what I was going to say, but I debated whether or not it belonged, so I'll put it here in case any of you think it's relevant or approaches the problem better. Now to work my way down the list of responses that I think I should give my two cents on. I half-agree; I think bullets in general should be far more lethal. I've always been surprised how you can get shot 3-5 times in the head with no armor and somehow get up, walk your ass to medical, and live. Outside of that, security's arms are pretty adequate in my opinion. - Side-arms (small threats or a last resort) - Carbines (medium threats, such as grems or rowdy assistants, the go-to non-lethal with lethal option) - Both rifle variants (all lethal all the time, for bigger threats that you absolutely must use lethal force against) - PEAC (utility weapon for mechs/IPCs) - Shotguns (weird gray area between being utility with flash/tracking rounds, and lethal with lethals. Nobody uses beanbags.) I agree that other departments like science should be involved, I just struggle to see how. Science can make some pretty scary things. Generally speaking, I think everyone should be more open to escape opportunities. As it stands, if you're at gunpoint, you're at gunpoint. If you try and run away, you're running in a straight line which is perfect for shooting. Sana needs to go or be restricted to one, I'm sorry. Play around having no/little medical or pay the price for it; that's the trade off of being allowed the most powerful weaponry for existing. This PR by Fluffy seems like an interesting new addition that I like. Past that, it would be nice to have some more speed-enhancing tools that aren't hyperzine/coffee, which are pretty incredibly all-or-nothing. A good example is leg actuators that make you do a leap. I like those. I like brutal and unforgiving mechanics in my SS13. BLACKSTONE was fun up until it turned into a giant murder-fest, since it's a downstream of an old Lifeweb-adjacent server that, while bolstering an extremely contentious community, had the best melee combat I've ever seen in the history of SS13 servers (I only played on BLACKSTONE, to be clear, I do not want to be associated with the server that was its upstream or Lifeweb in general on account of all that I see and hear about them). The only downside is they made it so getting hit once makes you stop for like a year (this is hyperbolic) so the person can hit you once and random-chance cut off your head in two slices (this is not). Brutality in combat mechanics are something I want to see done more, because it not only makes combat feel satisfying so long as you have smooth movement and sufficient mechanics to accompany it, but because death is meant to be a common occurrence in a firefight, death isn't supposed to be fun. You shouldn't be tanking 10 high-powered rifle rounds in real life, and it's not like the plates we see given to antags/sec are made of some mythical material that eats them. It's the same reason I want players to be more invested in combat events along with me, because knowing that death is a very real possibility means you should not be running in willy-nilly acting like an idiot. I know this particular section is a hot take, but that's just my thoughts. Less of a hot take is: it's only ever comically lethal because the presence of the ever-noncanon antagonist interactions means that deaths and injuries have no weight and thus people ignore pain far too often. This is why new canon missions are being introduced in June. At the end of the day, I'm more curious than anything how this change would be implemented and how well it would actually work. The issue with making reliance on departments more common is you're nerfing one department to make them more likely to rely on others, which might not even be staffed, leading to the demise of security and everyone else. Really, cooperation would be more common if there wasn't an enormous "don't do this or you'll get bwoinked/warned/banned in extreme circumstances" barrier between the departments. Instead of making the "strong" area less powerful, make the less powerful areas stronger. Yes, including their opposition, if you really have to. Otherwise you're going to force people to conform to a playstyle they don't want and only do what's best for the situation for the sake of it. A real life analogy would be when they were developing the original Team Fortress; they made it so the original Demoman could open up specific areas on maps for coordinated pushes and tactics, but because his kit was so unfun to use out of those vital passages for his team, people would just swap to him to get the job done and then go back to whatever they were playing prior to it. The same thing applies here. You're just gonna get more machinists/scientists who make shit for security to own antagonists because, worst case scenario, that's the only way security has a chance at whatever mystical antagonist team is cooking that day. Not everyone, and the rules will filter some of those people out, but definitely not all. Agreed. To close: Security is a role that is often staffed by players who have had time to learn what the antagonist types are and how combat works; it is the role that is designed to teach you about combat and involve you with every single antagonist gimmick under the sun. They have gear that is meant to catch inexperienced and experienced gunmen alike, so it only makes sense that tools that are meant to bypass certain things (mechs, etc) are strong. Yes, the crew backs security up in many instances, but not always, and even if it was only 1% of the time security isn't backed up by everyone else, we need to compensate for that. As it stands, I've played security for a year straight with no breaks. I have also played group antagonists for a year straight with no breaks. Neither is inherently over the other, it's all coordination and skill based, but as Peppermint said, this shouldn't matter so much. If we have a group of 6 miscreants going after the disk or executing civvies without a very good reason they shouldn't be here in the first place, that's not what this server is. We only play to win so much because at some point you run out of things to say on the 100th extended round. With eight(?) or so months between I think it was Cold Dawn and Silicon Nightmares, no wonder people start developing metas, because there's only so much narrative you can fit into news articles and talking about each other's days. I could go on, but I run the risk of repeating myself.

@hazelmouse

slapslapslapslapslap.mp4

Since this hasn't been used in a month and a half or so, I'm jumping back into it with Sadie and GEVURAH, traumatized IPC bartender and slightly less traumatized but murderous XO soon-to-be-something-else IPC. No tracks from me. I've recommended like five, get a job you freebooters.

Bumping this with a full list of my current characters. Names that are crossed out are either test characters or ones that I played/plan to play during the stupid non-canon events like the one we had earlier this month. Also, Nar'ol'Thek used to be Nar'lth'tp before I had to change his name since I fudged how unathite names are. Bonus points if you remember or recognize Sherrie from here or literally anywhere else.