Nanako

definitely agreed. I'd consider this more of an oversight to be fixed report as an issue on github and we'll get around to it.

I couldn't tell what was different about it, the difference in color isn't that noticeable. IMO you should be a bit more outgoing

This is an interesting and fun use of antag powers

what new spacesuits, where?

Oops i accidentally edited your post, tried to repair it They should generate heat, much like computers do. Computers with no moving parts. There's a reason server rooms have such powerful cooling The reason IPCs don't generate heat right now is either: 1. Someone just forgot to do it or 2. The increase in heat wasn't significant enough to affect gameplay, or to be worth the extra processing power/coding effort In either case, i wouldn't take the current functional state as a representation of lore

I love it, these ideas are awesome and will fit science very well After a cursory reading, i have at least one concern: Small weapons are already more popular for various reasons, including flexibility, minimal storage usage and concealability. Large weapons are comparitively uncommon. It's also a constant in science, that smaller is better (but also harder to do/more advanced) And smaller items are more likely to have inadequate ventilation for cooling parts, or to use experimental small parts instead of older, larger, proven parts. That's some lore justification if you need it. But my concern really is that from a gameplay perspective, making large weapons dangerous will just make them less used- an occasional novelty, while people will rush for the handguns and miniature things they can stick in a pocket. So please, flip that around. Make small things more prone to failure, and large ones more reliable

By normal conditions, you mean not in combat? Computers generate heat from processing, more than anything else. Large scale movements, like manipulating robotic arms, aren't really expensive. Under 'normal conditions' an IPC has to process a probably intellectual job, and social interactions with organics. Which is really more complex than combat or crisis situations and would generate more heat imo

Welp, it looks like your prediction was off. Pro-synth factions have a massive lead in this poll

I'd say we're not really lacking in armour and weapon sprites, but more clothing is welcome. Also, significantly, we have hundreds of things that are missing held sprites. Making those is pretty similar to clothing

What? First we're in space, go away imperial system. Secondly, my PC runs at about that temperature under heavy load, and it has a cooling system too. That's not too bad

Its also the age of synth rights activists and corporate espionage. And people haven't changed, programmers are still prone to oversights. In gameplay terms, AIs are specifically not barred from lying, so that, if subverted and given new laws that work against the crew, they can lie to the crew about these laws or their existence, and masquerade as a normal, functioning AI The lore is quite clear that AI research is like 'fast moving waters' New things are being developed at a rapid pace, perfection, if such a thing does exist, has certainly not been reached For the same reason that they place an experimental, unstable, and prone-to-detonation supermatter engine on that station. Science! And I never said that they're bad. An AI can be 99% perfect but you still don't want to charge someone for a serious crime if you're not certain Also to consider, RP flexibility. If we made it a hard rule that the AI has to be trusted, then we'd get salty malf players complaining about how the crew retaliated and killed them, instead of trusting them and assuming the best when they tried to kill someone In any case, people mostly trust AIs for the most part, and there's nothing wrong with that. I'm just giving you reasons against cementing that trust in some hard administrative rule. It's a grey area that depends on your character and their beliefs, and that's what works best for roleplay imo.

Well, if the AI is experimental, and/or from another corporation, it may not necessarily be 100% trustworthy. It's bad to blindly trust any single source if you can help it it is veeeery complex. We haven't even written a computer that can understand human orders, let alone execute them with a degree of common sense. AI is very arcane tech No, an AI is less trustable than head of staff. Far, FAR less. The station AI is likely an unproven machine, maybe purchased from a hephaestus research program yesterday, or maybe cooked up in a lab last week. It's unlikely to be more than a couple of years old. Any head of staff is guaranteed to at least be 30, and spent at least 5 years of their life working for NT. Thats 5 years of a clean record - or at least clean enough to qualify for promotion above many other candidates. They've proven over a significant period of time that they're beneficial to the company, which is reflected in the elevated responsibility they're given Nobody except maybe the man who built it, would trust a new machine over a colleague they've known for years

A classic ERT tactic when they didn't want to risk defusing a nuke was to circumvent that by C4ing it. It was understandably patched iirc because it was somewhat awful, and that's why I'm mentioning it here so it doesn't end up an issue for any new iterations of defusable bombs. I'm not sure that's a bad thing. Destroying a nuke before it explodes is a legitimate tactic to prevent explosion. they require things to be just right to start the chain reaction

Because even a computer in such a high position of power, needs training and specialised programming to understand the nuances. Little things like 'Don't open secure areas for assistants', or 'This crewmember has a history of drug abuse and shouldnt be allowed near heavy machinery" The AI doesn't serve the crew equally, it serves the chain of command That is not a simple purpose, it takes a very complex intelligence to do it. There's also one important point: NT Sucks at making AIs. So station AIs are most likely either bought from some other coirporation, or made by one of many competing scientists within NT each experimenting to try to find the best AI, and thus trying lots of approaches Remember the exodus is a research station. We have experimental weapons in security, an experimental engine in engineering, and a dedicated science department. The AI, too, is likely an experiment being live-tested, and what you see in the exodus may not be reflective of other stations in the galaxy

Thats hardware, though. Things with a physical body. Their intelligence is likely tweaked and trained over a long period, before being copied into these multitudinous mechanical forms

curious to see this is still going A couple of people have been getting really wierd lately. UnknownMurder up there, pulled out a laser and shot me when i was a mouse. Inside his own office. With wooden floors and furniture. Ive had security officers firing through windows too, into their own boss's office, because he had a mouse as a pet. I've had an ERT open fire on me in a hallway with an LMG I've had people disarming me out of someone's hands so they could get to murder me first. Started a few brawls that way And cadmus has discovered how to instabaton mice while they're under a table. These things kind of go beyond normal pest-control RP. I think you guys are just bored, and desperate for something to kill, while you wait for an antag to show up.

I think bleeding wounds heal too fast on their own for this to be much use. though that could be changed I rarely see people have major blood loss unless its internal bleeding, or they got vamped

Why would AIs be mass produced? There's a bit of a logical disconnect here. They are software, you don't mass-produce software. You just make a copy as needed. You can spend a century writing the most singularly perfect software and then create an infinite number of copies with zero effort. I doubt AIs would be mass produced. They would be trained. Programmed to learn, and gradually developed like children, taught how to do their duties best, and various nuances about the humans they serve. A well trained and mature AI could be worth billions of credits The strict rules are the AI's four laws. There isn't one of them that says 'don't lie'. The laws are kinda open to interpretation and debate, but there's plenty of room within them to lie in certain circumstances An AI openly breaking its laws is an admin issue, but an AI bending them and interpreting them unconvnentionally is an IC issue imo. If the AI becomes too much of a hindrance it can be re-lawed, destroyed or carded. Actually AI offers a lot of RP flexibility. Your laws are technically equal in importance, but the interpretation of whether any action equally follows them all is quite subjective. Its common to see AIs that favour certain laws, and can rules-lawyer to be obstructionist or unhelpful You already got them. Tishinastalker, page 1, Primary Administrator

I honestly don't agree with removing real books If a real book is in the library, then you can read it while playing, like while sitting at your desk waiting for something to happen. A real book written by a famous author is probably more likely to actually entertain you. Also if someone asks what you're reading, you can show them here and appear cultured maybe we can have them cordoned off in a special section like Historical Fiction, since they were all written 400 years ago

perhaps making them disposal inlets would be good, along with a proper name

Past two days i'm on a little bugfixing frenzy. Combing through all the issues starting with the oldest, and fixing them Look at all this stuff i''ve fixed! Quite notable in there is a fix for pAI candidacy and personalities, to not keep forgetting your settings. Also i reworked extinguishers and spraybottles a bit, so that when spraying water they'll now hit all the mobs in the tile, instead of only one. This fixes an issue where slimes standing on corpses were invincible

i've seen a better bomb defusing system in some other server, might port it

This also applies to cyborgs, AIs, drones, pAIs, and several types of antagonist. mice are known as vermin because they dig into places, eat and chew things, and make a mess. I don't see how cable chewing would do anything but enhance mouse RP As for sabotage, engineering is often lacking things to do, something else to contend with wouldn't be bad. A good engineer can quickly diagnose a cut wire by lack of input to the upstream station, and diagnose its location by which departments are affected Completely false. Mice have several counters, including: Moustraps. Place one on each vent to instakill any mouse that enters the room. they can't open doors, so its a pretty foolproof way to ban mice from an area. can also be placed in narrow halls with no way to go around them. Welding vents Drones Throwing objects at them Remember that many maintenance tunnels lack vents, and mice have no ability to remove floor tiles, greatly limiting areas in which they could chew stuff A cable being cut every five minutes would be annoying, but it'd probably also lead to security patrolling maintenance for saboteurs more often, catching mice in the act and batonning them to death hey i'm certainly not implying the same level of importance. An assistant with yellow gloves and wirecutters can do a lot more in a single life before he's caught, than a mouse is likely to do respawning over a round You can ban people for griefing, which is frequently done. We don't remove things because someone might abuse them. I'm sure you could make an argument for entirely removing public tool storage and atmospherics on those grounds, but it'd be silly This thread is about mice. If you want to discuss something that isn't mice you can go and make/post in a thread which isn't about mice. Also, SS13 is a game, its fun. Everyone has their own different definition of fun. Some of us want to captain a space station, some of us really just enjoy being space mice and stealing the space cheese. Fun is fun, its not quantifiable and can't be assigned an absolute value great! make that thread, ill probably post in it

Also, the one time i played as a traitor mouse, i had the following impacts on the round: -Observed a hostage situation fail, and the ransom money be recovered, and then stole some of that ransom money. -Got hunted down and captured by a mad bartender who had claimed the money, bargained for my freedom -Stole some phoron from chemistry, and sparked some radio panic about mice stealing chemicals -An ERT trooper opened fire on me in a hallway with an LMG, though i escaped unharmed -Started a brawl in departures, as a combination of ERT, bartender and several other people who wanted me dead started fighting over me -Got some fun mentions in postround ooc as a result I'd say i had a reasonable impact on the round, interacted with a significant number of people, and created some memorable moments for several of those involved

we have observers for that, though People tend to treat playermice more as a distraction, something to keep them occupied until major stuff happens. Some people chase them around with crowbars, some people adopt them as pets, some people don't have the time for it Either way imo, mice are minor participants in the round, not really observers. Much less important than crewmembers, but still having fun and RP value I was actually thinking of implementing this, with some obvious risk like death by electricity I'm not sure what the issue with these is, if a mouse doing these things annoys someone, then they can kill the mouse. If the mouse is too hard to kill? Then git gud. there are plenty of techniques to kill mice very easily Its the same with any role in the game, SS13 leans towards freedom of actions, and our RP environment leans towards consequences for actions, without removing the ability to take them.