Arrow768

I do not think that the armor values of the suit need/should be increased from where they are right now. The captain should not get into a situation where these increased armor values are needed. After all, they have quite a few different people they can send into situations where a hostile encounter is likely. (i.e. HoS, XO, Bridge Crew, ...; depending on what needs doing) I also believe that having subpar armor and knowing that might encourage a captain to actually surrender and cooperate with the antags instead of high-tailing it out of a situation and tanking/ignoring the shots that connect.

The reason is that we have had people receive CCIA actions on their characters, then delete those characters and re-create them with the same name. We have also had some people that regularly renamed one of their slots and who would then end up with ccia actions / security incidents from the previous names on that character) In addition, quite a few things are based on the character id now adays. Preventing the same name from being re-used discourages behaviour that breaks that char-id-link.

As you can see the majority of the votes are in favour of it. So we keep the changes as they are. On a more serious note, there is a reason why we dont poll like that. If we want to poll this topic we will do it using our existing polling system.

I also want to point out that the pirates got that ship flying by themselves. I didnt spawn/modify it in any way to get it working, so they can take off from the pirate base (And looking at the map, there is everything on the base to get it flying)

We polled if people liked the round. Out of 23 people who voted 22 liked it. So I´d say the round was a success, even if it wasnt what people voted for. In addition, the vampire ahelped that they had to leave so it would have just been extended+

If you wish to provide feedback do it in the already existing topics in the suggestion forum. Creating yet another feedback topic is not helpful. Therefore I am binning this topic.

Closed and archived as requested by the OP.

This application has been un-archived as it was accepted within 30 minutes. This timeframe did not permit the required time for community feedback.

It seems that at this time it is not possible to have a civil discussion about this topic. As such the topic will be locked for the time being until people have cooled down and can express their opinion without accusations of spite PRs, …. I also want to point out that the decision to merge this was a unanimous decision by the maintainers. In addition the admin team will go through this topic and hand out strikes where needed.

You have proposed a solution to a problem I don’t see at the moment. Why is it an issue that you can’t play a specific corp in a specific department. The corps are currently set up to allow every species to play every department.

There are no items with the name "autodrill" or "chiseled rock". There is a "autodrill" variable that is set on a few types of drills/pickaxe, but from what I could see that only effects the way you can mine things (run into it, instead of having to click it).

Boron, Helium and Hydrogen have been added.

Should be available next round under the name "package wrapper" The "old" one has been renamed to "gift wrapping paper"

seconding the vote for dismissal. given the attitudes displayed by some people in this thread its being locked and binned prematurely.

From @Triogenix announcement in the Lore Discord:

Trial completed. Moved to the archive.

Trial completed. Moved to the archive.

Trial completed. Moved to the archive.

This will be implemented in a upcoming PR.

This is being discussed by the headmins/devs, lore masters, maintainers and ccia lead.

Voting for dismissal for the reasons stated above. You only risk loosing your AI / Command whitelist if you get banned. The species whitelists are generally unrelated to bans.

Seconding the vote for dismissal.

I think the way it’s currently set up is fine. The two main goals of project threads is to report progress and/or to gather feedback. With that said I am voting for dismissal unless there is something I missed?

I think it would be preferable to either give them their own small shuttle or provide a closer integration with mining.

Moving this to the general section of the forums as there currently is no policy that is being suggested for implementation. (And the policy suggestions forum is the wrong place for idea gathering)