Jump to content

Arrow768

Head Admins / Devs
  • Content Count

    1,426
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About Arrow768

  • Rank
    Head Developer

Linked Accounts

  • Byond CKey
    arrow768

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I’ll handle that complaint since it pertains to the rules of/in the suggestion forum. The warning categories are (together with the associated actions; such as warning points or temp-forum-bans) pre-determined. The mods select one of the existing warning categories when creating a warning. Therefore the warning category doesn’t always match the exact rule violated. Thats where the user note comes in to explain in detail what you were warned for. You were warned for this post: This post is nothing more than a fancy -1 and does not provide a reason why you dislike the
  2. Moving to policy suggestions, since that isn’t something solvable by code. Edit: "that" being the suggestion by the OP to require admin approval to take out tcoms.
  3. It is possible that something like that will be re-added at some point, but it is not planned for the immediate future.
  4. No, the borgs wont be covered by the AI whitelist. At this time we have not discussed if we want to extend un-nerfs (that we plan for the AI) to the borgs aswell or if we want to keep the capabilities of the borgs as is.
  5. Status and Future of the AI Over the last years the AI has been a topic that regularly comes up for discussion and various suggestions have been made to change, remove or nerf it. This is mostly due to the ease with which the AI can cause issues with various antagonists. Often all that is needed to prematurely end the round of a antagonist is that the AI spots them in an inopportune moment and announces their actions to the general population. This resulted in the creation of a player poll about 7 months ago to ask the player-base how they feel about a removal of the AI. 65% of
  6. Voting for dismissal. The current warehouse setup offers enough decent items to encourage looking through it. At the same time the warehouse does not contain enough valuable items for it to become the new go-to place for antags / screw with them in a major way. The guide to station procedure contains this: While there is the expectation that cargo at least checks for valuable items, there is no need to clean up the warehouse and ship out everything. Imho it would be better to change the directive so there is no longer the requirement that cargo ships out valuable items fr
  7. They have been added to cargo under hospitality
  8. The PR has been binned after a discussion with the maintainers
  9. Moved to the unban requests archive as a staff complaint has been opened regarding this.
  10. If you do not think that the ban is justified you need to make a staff complaint. This forum is to be used if you think your ban is justified and you want another chance. (As it sais in the forum description.)
  11. The ban has been lifted and you should be able to connect again.
  12. You will be unbanned under the condition that the next offense will result in another permanent ban that can not be appealed. Do you have any questions regarding that condition?
  13. I should also clear that up: Just because someone assumes temporary captainship does not mean that they are automatically entitled to know everything a "proper" captain is authorized know and would be briefed about that by NT. So it would be perfectly fine for the AI to not answer any questions that concern the self destruct. (Its also much easier to not tell a acting captain about the nuke than to "brief them and mind wipe them afterwards with drugs" as suggested above)
  14. That sums up pretty nicely why the escape shuttle exists and why only a very limited number of people is told about it. In case of a vessel/space station it might be an expectation. However we currently have a asteroid setting, which by its nature prevents a lot of the reasons why such a self-destruct might exist in the first place. (i.e. breaking up a ship/station in case it accidentally de-orbits, ...) That can also be handled quite easily by writing somewhere down: "Protect the disk/SAT at all costs and do not allow unauthorized personell access to it under any circums
×
×
  • Create New...