evandorf

I’ll echo what @Lent23 said. I found a comfortable character and worked them up through promotions and it’s 50:50 on whether I regret it or not. Command duties take up a lot of time but you also find RP during slow moments or extended. I have a couple dozen characters made but only really play one and nothing short of a canon death will likely stop that. I would encourage people to take risks with their characters, bring them on canon events, ect. Even “bad” outcomes are great for character growth. I also would say that you shouldn’t strive to make every interaction memorable. Sometimes you’re just going to be someone else’s NPC and that’s alright. It just makes the ship feel more lived in.

Remove the armblade’s ability to cut through reinforced walls and you solve a lot of the constant up and down of the less interesting ling players. They cannot be contained without constant oversight with it and I’d rather a round turn into extended or admins force another antag spawn after the speedsters are thrown in isolation.

I don't have any issues giving you another chance. Just don't disconnect when staff is trying to speak with you because it can look like griefing behavior.

I have had many engaging and entertaining experiences with Goolies’ guwan and I hate it. +1

Tell me you don’t like melee combat without telling me you don’t like melee combat. I’m joking but in all seriousness, if we boost projectile damage I would seriously consider adding or changing items to block them entirely. For example, making combat energy shields have a very high block chance for all projectiles and make them available on uplinks, or improving the personal shield item, giving vamps innate dmg resist as they grow in power, natural armor purchases for ling, ect.

Appealing Personnel: Warden Suvek Tokash Specific Incident: INCIDENT REPORT - 03/12/2465 Action taken as a result: Removed as Head of Security and Demoted from Command Status to be available for appeal within three months time. Action contested: Demotion and Removal From Command Positions Reasoning for contest: As I made clear during my interview with the HR Representative following the event, I do not contest the fact that my decisions have caused loss and pain to members of the crew and had a lasting impact upon the Horizon and the Conglomerate at large. This appeal is not meant to gainsay the decision of the original report, yet, as stated by the handling agent, the decisions in question were predicated on the necessity to provide for my team and further the success of the mission. The agent continues, saying that the punitive measures taken were due to the unfortunate outcome from the chain of events my actions put into motion and that, but for the damage to the Conglomerate's reputation within the DPRA, punishment may have been spared. In the subsequent months following the incident I have worked diligently in my new role as Warden to protect the Horizon and its crew. Removal from command and a shift in duties has given me time and isolation to reflect on my actions and the lessons learned from the tragedy, for if I do not strive to improve after failure then it would be better if I had not survived at all. First and foremost, the preeminent lesson to be taken from this is one of foresight. I must strive to see beyond the immediate and consider the long-term consequences of any action. During the expedition I allowed myself to be blinded by a singular need and it deprived me of a wider perspective. As a member of command I must be able to prioritize multiple issues while being keenly aware of the effects their ripples may cause. I give oath that I will have a greater care for the enormity of my actions and consider the unforeseen consequences; may my ancestors witness my vow. The second lesson is one of accuracy and veracity. My decisions during the expedition were predicated on mistaken assumptions which, in my haste, I did not verify. I do not consider myself rash and in enforcing regulations I make every attempt to ascertain the truth. A handful of minutes was all that need be spared to alter the course of events that day, yet the urgent call of those in the caves spurred me to act with less care than was due. As a member of command I must be able and willing to quell my own impetuousness and take time needed to make informed decisions. I give oath that I will verify to the best of my ability the conditions upon which my decisions are made. I will stifle rash action and give my decisions as a member of command the consideration deserved; may my ancestors witness my vow. The final lesson is one of trust. Every commander must be able to trust in those they command. A lack of trust results in a need to oversee every aspect of the operation and stretches your attention to its limit leading to issues seen in the first and second lesson. Trust does not imply your personnel are infallible, merely that you can expect they will do what is required and if they fail they will make every effort to correct their failures. As a member of command I must give this trust to the officers and crew I oversee, as those in the higher echelons of the Conglomerate give their trust to me. I give oath that I will lead my officers with the trust deserved of their position, allowing them to perform their duties with appropriate oversight. I will remain detached, observing and leading from a perspective that allows greater understanding of the whole; may my ancestors witness my vow. I will keep these lessons close and remember my failings as I continue forward. If I am reinstated and given the opportunity to regain my honor I will impart them to those I command as well.

I like the shortcut but agree that it can be a pain, especially when grabbing people on the ground. I’d rather have a preference to toggle maneuvers off then change the shortcut though. Or make it to where a control + click pull overrides the maneuver somehow. On the other hand, I feel like this is something that you can become acclimated to, like making sure you don’t have your gun in your current hand and accidentally shooting your coworkers or making sure you stop pulling patients so you don’t drag them off the operating table.

This is silly, and I would normally say it’s unrealistic but if you make it to where someone can get stuck and can’t get out without the help of engineering I’m all aboard.

I know this would be more involved than a simple remap but if people like it then it may be worth discussing how it could be implemented. What do people think of the xenobio lab being able to be jettisoned as a map entity? It would be disconnected from power and have no engines but thematically it could makes sense.

Would it be possible or wanted to add flavor text in character creation that shows up on medical scans? Things about your character that a scan would not mechanically show and may not be actionable aboard the ship but would be interesting or useful to transmit to medical personnel in a way that's more visible than them having to catch it in your medical files. For instance, I play a character missing an eye but I also know others that have defining physical traits like heavy scarring that you would think would show up on high-tech medical scanners. Maybe you use a cane because of an old wound that would show up as irregular on the scanner but not really something medical can fix. Maybe you had some disease like cancer that left telltale medical signs on your body. There's definitely a chance for people to make up ridiculous shit but it would be addressed the same way we currently deal with people creating heinous flavor text within the scope that already exists.

Robotics, did we just become best friends?

Yes, Garn or whoever eventually rules on this can pull the logs for the round. I believe the game ID was cmM-cIXz. To be fair, the largest deciding factor in re-applying the ban was your previous note/warning/ban history. While the round may not have been the most egregious violation of the antag rules we have an escalation of punishment that we follow. I'll say now that I'm not averse to lifting the ban after some time has passed but in the interim I would encourage you to continue playing sec, shaping the interaction from the other side and growing more comfortable with staying in a confrontation without controlling it.

Yes, to my understanding you were seen on the bridge which initially alerted command and sec to your presence. Then you were seen in deck three sec maintenance where an attempt was made to communicate with you. An officer moved into the doorway to prevent it from closing and you interpreted this as a hostile move and shut the door on them. At this point security considered you fully hostile and gave chase. Then when they caught up to you and Strong near the lobby there was an issue with the way security engaged Strong, which was handled in a separate ticket, and eventually you engaged security in combat with the esword. Through all this I didn't speak with anyone who could confirm that you had made an attempt to communicate or provide RP in any meaningful way. People seeing you does not count as meaningful RP, especially in the context of what is required before lethal escalation. At some point you should have realized that the plans you made didn't pan out, the round had become a silent chase, and something should have changed. I think you should also re-evaluate your stance that being caught equates to the end of your round. There is a lot of RP to be had after capture and even if that's not appealing, you can make preparations to have contingencies after arrest. The compressed matter implant is a great way to ensure you can break out if caught for instance, but more importantly this idea that the round is over when you are captured restricts you to a style of play that focuses only on your success. It doesn't let you trust the other players for fear that they will trample your gimmick and it makes you feel the need to immediately fall back on force and lethal threats when your plans break down. It doesn't allow you to branch out and try gimmicks that can be fun beyond you accomplishing your personal objectives which in the end defeats the point of being an antag which is to drive a story for the server at large.

The situation with Strong was ahelped in a separate ticket by a different mod but IIRC it was an issue where the intent was misunderstood. That behavior should not be assumed to be normal. Security will often react with equal force; if you talk they will talk, if you shoot they will shoot. I've played a lot of antag and a lot of security and there is a moment where you can feel the gears shifting from calm to chaos and vice versa. Both sides have to be willing to put trust in the other players and if there is a violation of that trust you should ahelp.

From a moderation standpoint, what you intended to do, meant to do, would have done but for the circumstances doesn't factor into the equation. What matters is what actually happened and things going wrong does not remove the requirement for RP before escalation. Things going wrong will make your life more difficult as antag because security is operating from a place of authority and it is their job to enforce regulations. I don't expect you to immediately comply with security and give up when caught but at the bare minimum get out a pithy comment, make a speech, give a monologue, do something. Most sec mains will let you talk and make a scene out of it.

The ban was applied after a ticket came in some time after the altercations with security and unfortunately you had already DC'ed at this point. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that sufficient time had passed between the fight and the time you disconnected but you also have a well documented history of logging if you are caught or about to be incapacitated as antag. I spoke with one of the officers and I spoke with Strong who gave me a description of the events. Security had been armed to deal with an intruder who tried to holdup the bridge and unfortunately for you and Strong they found you preparing in the maintenance tunnel near deck three security. I spoke with the Interim HoS at the time and they stated that nothing was said on your part and when they tried to speak with you you bolted and shocked the airlock, crushing one of them and then ran off the other direction. Security caught up with you later in the hall and downed you after you de-limbed one or more officers in the fight. At this point it sounded like security already knew of you, there had been escalation (and assumed RP), and I just needed to find where the RP took place but when I spoke with the XO who was present at the time you attempted to take the bridge I was told that no attempts at communication were made there either. I made more than a fair attempt to try and find someone that you interacted with but the response I got was always the same.

Please put the safe back in the vault. I'd love to crack it again.

I have to disagree with this. I think issues of race, whitelists, and abuse of position are secondary and could be worked around, however our current system of "all heads as equal" and creating an acting captain when needed is much more flexible than a strict chain of command.

How do hardsuits figure into your system?

I never assume notes are perfectly accurate. They are very subjective because it is rare that you can accurately gauge intent even if you are actively observing a situation. Notes are not meant to be objective proof but are mainly used to show trends in player behavior. For example, if I am trying to determine the best action to take because someone was killed with little to no RP the exact details of previous incidents matter very little compared to their frequency and how many different members of staff have had to speak to them regarding the issue. I believe making notes easily accessible, and therefore increasing the likelihood of having them be subject to complaint, is flawed because of their subjective nature and narrow focus. It’s better to leave complaints to warnings and bans as they usually occur after some amount of collective scrutiny and the pattern of the behavior proves the intent.

I don’t believe this is necessary. Garn explained the existing system above and, assuming staff are following proper escalation, if you have a warning you can assume that either the act was egregious enough for an immediate warning or sufficient notes exist to warrant it. Warnings are visible to players and if you think a staff member is not following proper escalation then that would be a staff complaint. The staff member attached to the complaint reviews the notes and history and gives a second opinion/makes a determination on if it was warranted. Many of the benefits you list are to provide players who have anxiety contacting staff with an alternative but if someone is incapable of engaging with staff to simply ask for their notes I don’t see them going through the complaints process multiple times to correct perceived errors or misunderstandings. More likely this will be used by less anxious players for frivolous and/or pedantic complaints to change the wording of notes at best. At worst I can see notes, which are often subjective, being used in bad faith as a tool to overturn decisions or admin-shop for more favorable outcomes.

I agree that adding a new dynamic will upset and frustrate those who are already comfortable in established routine but it’s a necessary evil for any large change until the new becomes the norm. I think, as far as pie-in-the-sky longterm goals go, we would be best served making medical treatment something that can be done from multiple areas with low transit time. Sending patient vitals/initial scan data over the network to the machinist for example. Having the machinist be able to respond and give feedback or print a compatible limb/organ. Being able to link your PDA to a roller bed monitor so that you are alerted to a patient’s state degrading, ect. QoL enhancements that make it to where deck 3 medical can be used for its intended purpose and supplementary roles like the mechanist can be more easily integrated into the process.

I might be in the minority but I don’t think the focus of medical should be efficiency, where everyone can be treated quickly and completely. I think extended treatment for niche cases should be part of the experience and when players give their characters synthetic organs they are opting-in to having a different experience than normal. My personal medical competency is somewhat low but my understanding is that unless the organ is destroyed or extremely damaged a good doctor can still mitigate and manage the side effects and a skilled doctor would be able to get close to a correct diagnosis using the context of the patient’s condition, patient medical files, and their own experience.

I’m not sure if artificial organ damage shows up on the full body scanners in medical but if it does I would argue it should be removed. The machinist should be consulted more by medical and making damaged synthetic organ scans their sole domain could add some cooperation.

I agree, I see a machinist as medical for synthetics and should not be opening surgical sites on organic tissue. It would be interesting if cybernetics/prosthetics had deeper mechanics that required diagnostics the machinist could provide but if it’s a replacement organ that requires an organic surgery site you should be a consultant and provide scanning services or replacements as necessary.