Fenodyree

Azarii often filled in the command role when command was absent, a well deserved promotion! +1

There are some serious problems with our armour system. I'll start with the TL:DR. Armour is too weak when it is low, too strong when it is high, doesn't respect armour piercing properly, has no random variation and is completely unintuitive. How much the armour reduces damage is calculated by adding together damage and armour piercing, then comparing it to the armour value. If the damage + AP value is equal to the armour, the damage is reduced by 50%. If the damage + AP is greater than the armour, the damage is reduced by less. If the damage + AP is 20 points more than the armour, the armour has no effect at all. If the damage + AP is less than the armour, the damage is reduced by more. The damage is never reduced to zero, but if the damage is half the armour, damage is reduced by 85%. This is needlessly complex and introduces some serious problems. No one without actively code diving can possibly intuit how their armour is working. Which should be better at killing someone in heavy armour? An armour piercing rifle round, or a regular rifle round? The answer is usually the regular round. Because damage is equal to armour piercing in the calculation damage is flat better. Example, a shotgun slug 60 damage, 0 AP, hits 60 points of armour. The damage and AP equal the armour, 50% reduction. 60 / 2 = 30. Target takes 30 damage. Compared to an a65 rifle round. (DNAC rifle) 30 damage, 30 AP, hits 60 points of armour. The damage and AP equal the armour, 50% reduction. 30 / 2 = 15. Target takes 15 damage. An armour piercing rifle round is half as good as a shotgun slug. Famously, not very good at penetrating armour. Then there's the problem where armour is rapidly either useless or too strong. That same a56 round, hitting a hazard hardsuit. The armour does not reduce the damage at all. This is even worse for antagonists. There is no reason to ever wear any armour but combat armour, or a merc hardsuit. Midlasers (laser rifle, carbine), 30 damage, 20 AP. Vs chameleon armour, 30 laser armour. Armour does nothing. 5.56 Polymer (security carbines) 25 damage, 34 AP. Vs chameleon armour, 40 bullet armour. Armour does nothing. Then lefts flip the table around. Strong armour is far too good against weak attacks. 10mm and 9mm SMG, (merc smgs, security smgs) 20 damage, 15 AP, vs Combat Armour. Armour reduces the damage to 3.3. This would be acceptable if there was some random variation, simulating weak spots in armour, strong strike faces of your plates. But armour is a monolith that covers every milimeter of a limb. Therefore, if you're against combat armour with an SMG, your only option is to aim for the hands or feet. If your opponent is in a hardsuit, go for the disarm. It's better than your gun. So those are the problems. What should we do about it? Reduce the amount that being over/under the armour value matters. It should be near to a flat % reduction, except at extreme values. Armour should never do nothing. Reduce the amount that damage matters in the armour penetration calculation. Perhaps 50% of the damage is added to AP for it's effective value. Introduce some randomness into the calculation. This simulates weak/strong spots in armour. High coverage armour like hardsuits can have less variation. These three points are all relatively easy to implement into our current armour component system. Just some variable changes and an additional bounded random check. This system makes it understandable to players, high armour value is better, always. 50 armour is close enough to 50% reduction that people understand it. I understand that a more comprehensive armour rework is underway for NBT2. With armour having health and the possibility to be degraded by repeat hits. But that's a long way off. The current system is unintuitive enough that it seems like a bug when it's working as intended. Here's the spreadsheet used in these calculations. Armor_Table(4).xlsx

I can do that, make an extra pin that toggles the behavior between this and the old way.

I have a suggestion for equipment persistence between rounds. A once in, once out system. Meaning something created in round can be put into storage, then taken out and used exactly once. If returned to storage it does not persist. It could also time out if not used. There should also be some limit on the amount that can be stored this way and if exceeded random items do not persist. Maybe per-item limits as well, like one stack of gold only. Extended canon+ only, so antag items don't get stored. Different items need to go in different storage depending on their strength. For example, an impact driver in tech storage, any engineer can go get it, it's not a very big deal they're easy to make. Then an energy shield from science, rarer, needs materials and illegal tech, this goes in the operations vault to persist. This way you can prepare for a future round, but it's also very clear that the powerful things aren't to be taken out and used on a whim. There's an already existing and very strong prohibition on using things from the vault, which we can take advantage of. In a canon round, where the crew knows that something dangerous is coming, we can stockpile useful things in the vault, or secure storage. Might mitigate the one hour and thirty minute prep time for dangerous away missions a bit.

Its great, but it needs a couple of things to be genuinely useful: All crew need to get read access to it. It's worthless if you can't at least check who's in what team and locations. Keep command IDs needed to actually edit the thing. A section of command bulletins, where stuff about the event / lore terminals we find can be shared. Maybe this can be exception to the command ID needed. Example for that second point, on the test round, the Station we docked at had prevented the Intrepid from undocking somehow, and wouldn't let us undock until we lifted the quarantine. No one outside command knew this, coulda been in the little app that everyone on an expedition should read. Then we found HOW to lift the quarantine, but it barely spread outside of medical / science, because the radio chatlogs got eaten. Maybe this could be the exception, and crew can put information down on the bulletins bit. Or you click the info terminal on an away mission with your PDA and it, copies the contents of the terminal into the app.

I would have perferred to get into this in character, your position isn't entirely wrong. Firstly, I am out of character exactly aware how Temo died. He died because he was injured previously (fighting combat borgs, where ions would have helped). Then went to fight again, still injured, because he's brave and things looked dicey. He then took compounding injuries to his lungs. Medical didn't notice how serious it was until too late. You, the player, are not responsible for that. This is out of character knowledge, which I tipped the IA report to actually look into. One of my witnesses, knows in character that this is exactly what happened and told me in character they would speak up for you if I called them. I added them anyway. Would dropping an ion grenade outside the pod have made a meaningful difference? No, it probably wouldn't. If we timed it perfectly we'd get a second of stun to exploit. Except the person inside the pod doesn't know that. They don't know how many grenades we have. Ions start going off, they come out into a set up crossfire. Really however, this isn't the point. In character, Tyler's friend died. Everyone around him (all of security, and several outside the department) agreed we should have used ions. Several characters talked him through the IA process. This was written in character, with entirely in character knowledge. As far as he knows, Forbearance is at fault. Nothing that was written in character is factually incorrect, it's just using emotionally charged language. it was my understanding that IA reports are not out of character punishments. I am sorry you see it as one, but you did not make any effort (or even wait) to respond to me in character. Am I meant to ignore the canon death of a friend? I have no desire to continue the IA now, regardless, as it's clear you're not going to enjoy it. I do rather resent a player complaint, which seems to assume malice where there was none.

Hello. In character is in character. Also, this is the effect on IPCs. Not combat borgs, which they remain extremely effective against. Which we killed 8 of. And knew we would have to fight. Two separate people, who I won't name unless admins want me to, said they would post an IA report if I didn't I went to significant effort to write it IC, get it stamped signed and read in character.

Seperate pictures for readability

Reporting Personnel: Tyler Briner Job Title of Reporting Personnel: Security Officer Game ID: 2 rounds after was cFB-aleO Personnel Involved: Temo Impukane, Security Officer - Victim [DECEASED] Forbearance, Head of Security - Offender Tyler Briner, Security Officer - Witness Saulo Forselli, Security Officer - Witness Leah Staymates, Investigator - Witness Z.I. Akatsiya, Scientist - Witness Secondary Witnesses: Larissa Massen, Security Officer - Involved in first contact with Eyes Agent, Injured. Shepherd, Investivator - Involved in first contact with Eyes Agent. Mi-an Zhong, Security Cadet - Involved in combat with hostile robots. Badly injured. Hippolyte Carnaro, Bridge Crew - Involved in final firefight at pods. Witnessed Impukane's death. Injured. Nassa Telixith, Paramedic - Took Impukane to medical. Time of Incident: Approx 19:40 Ship Time, 2468-05-21 Real Time: ~09:00 GMT 21/05/2026 Location of Incident: SCC Horizon, Starboard Maintenance Nacelle, Hangar Port: Escape Pods. Nature of Incident: [ ] - Workplace Hazard [X] - Accident/Injury [ ] - Destruction of Property [ ] - Neglect of Duty [ ] - Harassment [ ] - Assault [ ] - Misconduct [ ] - Other _____ (Place an x in the box that applies. If other, replace line and specify.) Overview of the Incident: An Outer Eyes agent was left behind after the encounter with the Ashen Prince as a stowaway. They hid inside a wall cavity in Starboard Maintenance, with remote-control multiple combat robots. They attempted to take control of Telecommunications with these robots, but were prevented and the first wave of robots was destroyed. At this point Z. I. Akatsiya offered to produce ion weapons, similar to the ones used in the previous boarding action. Forbearance refused the offer. Operations also delivered a box of ion grenades, Leah and I took one each and were ordered to return them, despite our protests. When the Agent was located, their capture failed as they were a shell, and LTLs had no effect. Following this realization, I requested Ions again, I was refused again. More combat robots attacked cadet Zhong, but I don't know what happened there. Captain Juqtul Glipt-Xulshi reported on security radio that they were in the port-side hangar escape pods. Forbearance, Temo, and I breached the pod, Temo was shot and killed. I was injured in the prosthetic hand. The agent was captured, intact, with it's limbs damaged enough to stop it fighting back. Forbearance ordered it repaired. Every officer was injured. If we had deployed ion grenades at the pod door, prior to breaching, Temo would have survived. If we had had Ion weapons for the fight against 8-10 combat robots, Temo wouldn't have been injured prior to the breach. We had the tools. We weren't allowed to use them. Submitted Evidence: Would you like to be personally interviewed? [X] - Yes [ ] - No Did you report it to a Head of Staff or a superior? If so, who? If not, why? Juqtul Glipt-Xulshi, Captain Actions taken: No actions due to shift transfer. Forwarded to IA on subsequent shift. Additional Notes: (If none, leave blank)

Second suggestion! Show skills in exploitable information, let the antags know which cargo tech is trained in the dakka.

On the topic of more freedom to spend points: If we are going to have hard limits (familiar science for anyone not R&D background for example) Backgrounds should give less set skills, and a few extra points. Eg: Mechanical Engineering Degree gives you professional Mechanical Engineering, instead it gives you Trained and 4 points in occupational. Those 4 points can't be spent compltely unreasonably, because we've got those hard limits on max skills outside your background, but if you want to have a focus on another skill at the expense of your main one, it works.

This is thoughroughly mean spirited considering both are Scientist jobs, which you've just stated are job skills and the rules havent changed. Forgive me for playing with all the things in my department. Want me to make a new character for every different facet of the job? I wonder why there are so few science players. I've made every possible effort for this NOT to be confrontational before this, reached out privately and got asked to post it publicly. So thanks for that, moving on. I shouldn't have given a real example. That's been latched onto and your taking this as me being defensive. In fact all this has accomplished is derailing the main point and had you reiterate what I already knew. If this was an administrative complaint, it'd be a complaint! I'll quote me, admitting fault so we can ignore it. I am guilty of powergaming. You have tools, that aren't a bwoink. Your whole position, is that actions should make and require roleplay. I firmly agree with the first part and nearly completely with the second part. You do however have a resource that you should use, the players in the round. CCIA does not have to handle everything. There are security players, command players, who would love to have things to do. Is subtle messaging a security player to go check out a place OOC in IC? Yes. So is a bwoink, an OOC action that affects what's happening IC. If it's not severe enough for an admin note, and no one's ahelping don't bwoink. Mention it to someone in round. You have prevented prevented the undesired behavior, involved multiple people and leave better feelings all around. If someone's response to that is poor, bwoink away. You'll learn plenty about the situation just from watching thier response IC. That's the suggestion, which I already regret making.

Because they don't consider it important. Because not everyone follows the rules. Because they could and didn't think they'd get in trouble. Because it was the only way they knew. There are loads of IC reasons. Real people get in trouble all the time! I'm not arguing there shouldn't be consequence, just that the first consequences should be IC. If your character does get a huge arrest record then... they should get fired! In character! If they continue to play the character after that, then staff shoud step in. SCC doesn't want to keep someone known for repeatedly breaking into places around and has enforcement on ship to deal with it in the short term. Except, if staff step on it immediately (the first time, in this case), there will never be a repeat record Security won't get to have fun, the investigator won't get to keep a canon case file on a serial troublemaker. Your head of staff won't get to pull you into an IA meeting. Even someone who doesn't care if they lose their character will not do it. Which is a problem, if it's the norm and not the exception. The very first line, Playing to Win, is the bit that matters. If a players actions shut down an antag, that's bad. If its being done explicitly to avoid roleplay, that's bad. If it's being done when there's someone who's job is explicitly to do the thing you're breaking into do, that's bad. There's obviously a point it becomes not okay, but that point isn't the first time it happens. Not on a low pop round, where there isn't someone in the department. Not when everything done was well within skillset. Not when no one was actually upset by the action. Intent is important, the intent was to engage in a niche system, do something outside the norm and then get people involved in it. Lets spin out three examples. 1: Exactly what happened. I get stopped immediately, nothing at all happens, for anyone. 2: I do know the garden grows wood, I go and grow it, I go take the result to security and we shoot it for a bit, playing with the new system. This is fine. 3: I don't know, I break in, a mod sees this and subtle messages security that a patrol over there feels like a good idea. I get in trouble and make a fuss, now the investigator has to prove exactly what I did. Someone points out they can be grown in the garden, everyone laughs in LOOC, a fine gets paid, then we go shoot the gun which might explode. I get a little note in the records about the fine which persists between rounds. Which of these three examples would you prefer to be playing your security officer in? In case one, you've turned sub-optimal play into no play. In case two, this is the platonic ideal if no one ever makes a mistake. In case three, you've turned sub-optimal play into things to do, for multiple people and enforced the rule without the person involved even knowing. Wouldn't it be nice if the rules were enforced using IC systems? Aurora can do it, unlike most RP servers, as the examples people have given make clear. Most servers can't do that, it's a strength, clearly. Checking someone hard OOC the first time, should be reserved for when their actions have upset someone. Had there been a xenobotanist, who ahelped, I'd deserve bwoinks. I don't want to get bogged down in defending myself, if the line is drawn in the sand and I stepped over it, sorry. But the line shouldn't be drawn exactly at that spot. It should be a wiggly line, with security officers, IA and heads of staff guarding the other side of it, with admins standing a little further back with their very big sticks for when that's not enough. The first recourse shouldn't be an OOC one, when IC is more fun for EVERYONE, including the person breaking the rule.

Okay, I'll be specific about the case that crystalized this thought. I'm playing a weapons scientist, and OOCly, I've done all the modweapons stuff there is to do, no one else joined research this round, it's extended, R&D's done, there's no one for me to bounce off of. So I think, skills are in! Apparently they set the quality of things you make in the construction menu, I've got high mechanical engineering, improvised guns are a thing, I'll do that, then go over to security and ask to have some ammo and shoot it. Then come up with some science explenation for why this is advancing research. I look at the recipy and see that making an improvised gun needs wood. OOCly, I know that you can get wood from tower cap spores, and I assume that as that's a weird mushroom only xenobotany has them. And hey, another skill I took, I've got trained gardening, that's enough to grow some mushrooms. So I break into xenobotany, steal an axe and some towercap spores to grow. Am I doing xenobotany? I'd argue not, I haven't touched the gene machines, or the special spawns. I have just committed petty theft and trespass in character. If I'd been caught, I'd have been an indignant scientist upset at these officers interfering in what's clearly so minor it doesn't need their attention, and OOCly I'd have been enjoying it, even if I ended with a permenant record mark. Maybe the Captain would need to be called to put my in my place! What did happen, is I get a bwoink, warned not to do another departments job and told not to steal a hatchet and then I leave the round immediately feeling bad. I then find out post round that the public garden has tower cap spores and I could have just gone there. Now I feel bad for raising a fuss about it and that I the player, am the idiot. If the Captain had been called and told me that, I'd have been an idiot in character, it'd have been roleplay, and I'd have ENJOYED being dumb. No one else gets to have roleplay if administrators step in, it's the full stop, you broke the rules, end what you are doing. As long as what's being done isn't actively harming someone else's enjoyment (like a xenobotanist showing up and going wtf, all my plants are grown I have nothing to do), I really think it should be handled ICly.

I have not experienced that. Any actions even close to illegal, I got told not to, with every case the laws I broke being explicitly pointed out. So, I'm not precious about the character, if I was I'd play a more straight lace character, but I am finding that I feel compelled to be completely law abiding.