evandorf

That statement can not be made this way, as the probability for this gamemode to occur in the secret rotation depend on the probabilities set in the configuration file. These probabilities can be tweaked by the administration (specifically the headmins) Even the opposite can be true as this PR adds the ability to better better set the chance for a malfunctioning AI to occur (as the malfunctioning AI is no longer mixed into the traitor gamemode) I guess the thing that worries me most is if AI is removed from auto-traitor, then it seems like only AI mains would get to experience the AI antag role. As it stands currently, you could join as AI after roundstart and still have a chance to turn traitor-AI. Unlike wizard, for instance, where you don't have to tailor your occupation to be considered for the role, if you wanted to play as antag AI you would have to modify your occupation preferences in addition to fighting against RNG for both the AI slot and round type. In essence, I would have to consistently play as and get the AI slot over multiple rounds to have a chance at it. I understand also that certain antag roles are restricted and can't be given to certain jobs. HoS is heavily restricted on almost all on-station antags I believe. But as HoS I still have the ability to opt-in to raider, merc, and other off-station antags, the same as everyone else. As I understand it, if you join the game as AI, you won't be considered for non-AI antag roles. Your antag options under the new changes will be MALF or bust. If the reason these changes were implemented was simply because the traitor-AI is weak, then I would rather buff it slightly with simple QoL changes. For example, giving traitor AI access to the traitor comms channel. Working with other traitors during the round would increase the chances that you're not simply waiting for sec/engineering to break down your core doors. If you really intend to remove the traitor-Ai role then I would at least implement what I suggested in my previous post and keep the AI in the autotraitor rotation, but as malf.

I enjoy the occasional ai traitor round mainly because it lets me act in ways that my laws would otherwise prevent. I don't necessarily need all the malf powers to have fun nor do I feel cheated when I die as AI traitor. I feel like removing ai from traitor, auto traitor specifically, puts my odds of getting these chances much lower than before. On par with wizard and ninja. If the goal is to get rid of traitor ai and replace it with malf, would it be possible to add malf to the auto traitor rotation?

Apologies if I came off as argumentative. I was just making sure my entire thought process was known.

I had two rules I was taking into consideration making this decision. First: No ganking. While antags will sometimes kill, it is expected for you to provide interesting roleplay to your targets first [...] While the interpretation of "interesting roleplay" is definitely subjective, from my perspective the purpose of this rule is not simply to have a checklist that you must complete in order to kill. The purpose is for players to be considerate to others and not only to keep them engaged in the round but to ensure that both of you are aware of the intentions of the other player. The feeling that simply pulling weapons and opening fire on each other is sufficient RP clearly wasn't mutual. Second: Only resort to killing if it makes sense or drives a story. Randomly killing someone because you’re a traitor will get you removed right quick. This also means that murder for the sake of murder is punishable. However, in certain situations, murder can serve as a tool, if none other applicable. If you’re uncertain, ask for guidance via adminhelps. From my perspective, his actions during the confrontation with the Captain and his subsequent actions against the AI were driven by a need to win. The Captain's player was not part of the equation when he took lethal action against him. He only saw a threat and moved to eliminate it. Regardless of the aforementioned fact that the Captain was at a sizable disadvantage, steps were taken to ensure that Butter would come out the victor. When the AI joined, his thought was... Both incidents occurring, one after another, showed a pattern; a lack of concern for other players. Regardless of any emergent storytelling that can occur simply from the combat mechanics, the rules against ganking and killing without cause, sufficient RP, and escalation exist to encourage dialogue and cooperation between players. These rules should always be kept in mind when combat is a possibility out of consideration for others, both antags and crew alike. I feel like a rewording of the warning would be in order. I stuck primarily to a play by play of the facts, but I feel the intent of the warning was lost.

I mean..... I would love to have the bull-horned sprite on the unathi suit so I don't have to make excuses for stealing the Captain's.... Please.

A couple things. First, there are tracking implants available in security and they are intended as a punishment for medium to high level crimes. I know it may differ from player to player, but for the most part implantation is usually seen as a bad thing. Second, I think what you're suggesting can be accomplished with fewer changes. The suit sensors already rely on telecomms to work properly. I'm not certain if this is already a mechanic but adding the ability for the radio jammer to also jam suit sensors would effectively allow the kind of stealth you're talking about. For antagonstis without an uplink, there are other means available. Changelings have a silence sting, vampires have dominate, cult can use emp to disable comms. I don't know if emp also disables suit sensors but that would be worth a look as well.

Additional Information: Game ID: bWE-dGLP I've looked over the logs that Butterrobber provided and they match what I have except they lack the attack logs from the incident with the captain. Below are screenshots from my log showing the attack logs from the initial confrontation. I think it's important to note that during this exchange the Captain was equipped with standard gear and you had them essentially trapped in their office with the aid of an emagged borg. Even if the first shot you made was because of your aiming at them, they were then flashed and tased by the borg and you moved in with an energy sword without further RP. The first line of the screenshots is the first attack log. The last line is where butterrobber's logs start. I can post the full logs from the round if needed.

The reason I issued this warning, in a nutshell, is that other players are allowed to defend themselves against your attacks as an antagonist. You cannot retroactively use their defensive actions as escalation or reason for lack of RP in the first place.

I have my logs saved at my computer and will post them when I get home. To clarify, I was the AI in this round. I joined the game soon after the attack on the Captain at approximately the same time that the ahelp came in regarding the attack. If I was unresponsive it was due to either lack of camera access because much of the bridge had its cameras destroyed or because I was speaking with you or others about the incidents.

TBH, if the blob squares were stronger and less likely to be memed destroyed by the emitter, and if the blob did much less damage to walls I think it would be a more entertaining and persistent threat that just a giant green glob that flattens whole sections of the station. It would be more like a thick and resiliant slime, mostly contained by walls that slowly oozes down the passages.

That would be interesting. So, for example, if there was a cult present and you swiped for ERT, you might get an ERT or maybe it spawns a Merc team? One that command would have to pay or placate for help?

If they add a permanent shield room it needs to be placed on the main line and not the civilian surface subgrid.

Can you extrapolate on this? If ERT was whitelisted it would be of some deterant to calling the ERT early or without reason.

No, I agree. They would need to be whitelisted if given that power.

It might be useful to make the ERT a double edged sword for command. Have them come aboard and take care of any issues, but because they were called they will effectively suspend the Captain and/or the heads of staff under whose authority the problem lies. Similarly to how it's the CE's ass if the engine blows. The company, having to waste resources securing the station might consider the relevant heads as guilty of neglect. Arrests and transport back to Odin may also apply. This way you can have a force to stop overwhelming antag forces, but command may also lose their positions and freedom. This may require the ERT role to be whitelisted, but I think that would be fair if given more power.

Honestly, a QOL upgrade for me that would speed up engine setup without taking away any agency I have in how it's setup would be to simply replace the two nitrogen canisters in storage with phoron canisters. This would mean you have four nitrogen canisters already in the engine room and three phoron canisters in storage for your average phoron setup. No need to break into atmos.

I like some of these suggestions, but as an engine tech I wouldn't like having most of my job done for me.

Pretty straight forward. It's a medical device, has almost the exact sprite as a medical scanner health analyzer. It cheeses my onions trying to get my inventory in order when I play virology.

I've gone ahead and edited the original post so that it is more in keeping with the intent of the changes. Notably verbiage such as "low CHV" has been changed to "lowered or reduced CHV" and "high CHV" was edited to "baseline or augmented CHV". Originally, stating that normal crew would have "low CHV" would indicate some kind of hindrance or restriction, but normal crew CHV should be considered baseline and not detrimental until certain actions trigger a reduction.

Yes, that was the point of the suggestion. This is a temporary removal so we can rework it without continuing to bother us Sorry. I misread the post initially. I’ve edited my response.

The only issue I have with this is that there are good and interesting ways to play changeling as it currently is. It requires cooperation from the crew and ling but it can be done. Edit: I misread your initial post. Reworded my concern.

But surely there has to be oversight somewhere. Earlier you said that, if there were issues, complaints should be made and ahelps created. This puts the majority of the responsibility of oversight on the admins and moderators. Additional mechanics that are reasonable, balanced, and realistic in the world allow the game itself to account for more of the countless scenarios that could occur and automatically resolve some issues that might otherwise be ahelped or entered as a complaint on the forum. It also removes the subjective element of admin/moderator decisions. An element I think causes quite a bit of unrest when it comes to people not being satisfied with admin/moderator decisions. This applies not just to my suggestion but any added mechanic. But I've gone quite off topic again and I'd like to return to the details of my suggestion regarding technical viability and balancing. I respect your position and I understand where you're coming from and your concerns should be taken into consideration if this is implemented.

From my perspective, I think of it more like a DM in DnD. There's nothing wrong with player driven story and RP but sometimes the DM has to step in and give them external consequences to deal with. In this case the DM is a set of automated rules which we can alter the math behind to best fit the playerbase.

I feel like I've given you the wrong idea or explained it poorly. The mechanic would be similar to dropping your weapon because your prosthesis is damaged or you have a bone fracture, except in this case the cause would be mental not physical. It sucks when your prosthesis is damaged but do you really think people will spend their time and brainpower keeping track of that? They'd rather concentrate on the actual RP and not the minutia the server can handle in the background.

I feel like this has gotten slightly off topic. These mechanics were not suggested with the sole intent to eliminate validhunting nor do I think that we are unable to trust our playerbase. I suggested these mechanics to fill in RP details that I felt were missing regarding the consequences of combat due to various factors including but not limited to player intention, time constraints, and the pace of heavy combat, I feel that even the best of us can gloss over just how tiring combat can be and the effects it has upon the body and mind. [mention]Bauser[/mention], as I stated earlier the frequency at which you would encounter adverse effects while at a baseline CHV would be very low. I'd like to get futher feedback from you on the response post I made. If you feel like these mechanics are invasive to your RP in some way I feel like tweaking the numbers could find a good balance.