Jump to content

[Resolved] Staff complaint - NursieKitty

Recommended Posts

BYOND Key: AmoryBlaine

Staff BYOND Key: NursieKitty

Game ID: bVO-cLZZ

Reason for complaint: I don't find the ban to Security to line up with the 'rambo' nature Nursie claims I have.

Evidence/logs/etc: Unavilable, outside my own testimony.

So, I log on and come aboard as Daniel Carmichael during a hostage situation. I'll refer to Daniel Carmichael as I, as this concerns my behavior, from this point onwards. I'm elevated to seniority because of whatever the fuck reason. I organize the team up, and I am informed of the situation, the demands, ect. That's not what is being contested here, this part is; Me shooting things that are probably going to shoot me if I don't shoot them first.

While gathering items to exhange for the hostage, one of our Officers are shot, aboard the station. This contradicts the previous understanding that the hostage takers were,

a) Not entirely hostile and b) off the station.

This development changes the attitude I have towards what the hostage takers are looking to acquire here, so rather than allow the Cadet, who for whatever reason decided to go alone, unsuitted to the mining deck to hand over the trade items, myself and two other officers moved there and took the locker ourselves. At that point I gave the order to pacify the hostage takers, with whatever means, given that they not play nice. They didn't, and when we arrived at their shuttle with the locker, they choose to take off, while we were standing in their front windows, which were broken for whatever reason. So now we're in space, with two options;

a) Be shot at/or crushed with blastdoors by hostage takers and be forced to jump into space, or b) move into the shuttle.

I'll let you guess which one we chose.

Now we're in the cockpit, with people in a number of different Voidsuits, none of which match. I start firing at the one that took off and brought us to space, because why would he do that when the items they were requested were literally right there, and visible as I opened up the locker to show them, then another one who looks like a Taj comes out of the East-side shuttle compartment with something that looks a lot like a flagpole, or energy glaive. I have NVGs on, so nothing is RGB correct, and my stupid fucking glasses don't have HUD and flash on at the same time. Given that there may have been flashes in play at the time, I had flash on, and this hindered me from viewing both HUD statuses on the Hostage taker and the hostage, so It's only after opening fire that I realize that it was the hostage, which made no sense to me as I was staring at them, but could not make out the shape at all. This is apparently where I 'rambo'd'.

So, because I feared for my own safety, over that of the hostage which I could not even tell was in the room, and was unable to verify who or what they were at a glance, due to the situation being us forced into space and now sitting between a rock and a hard-place with hostage takers that had previously opened fire without any reason and were admitted by the one negotiating to be "Outside of [his] control", with NVGs on blurring what everyone was wearing via colour and stupid as fuck aviators masking their HUD statuses, I am now banned. I do not want to be banned, I very much so enjoy playing here, but if it is not removed or at the every least placed as a 'warning' I have no real reason to play now having been robbed of my flagship character, unfairly, in my opinion, being the keyword.

I'm not aware of my history of rambo'ing, and I'd like to contest that whole history as which was claimed to exist by NursieKitty.

Additional remarks: N/A

Link to comment

Hi. I will be taking this complaint.


then another one who looks like a Taj comes out of the East-side shuttle compartment with something that looks a lot like a flagpole, or energy glaive. I have NVGs on, so nothing is RGB correct, and my stupid fucking glasses don't have HUD and flash on at the same time.

[mention]AmoryBlaine[/mention], after the hostage was downed, did you see for sure what they were actually holding?

Link to comment

Hey, I was the Cadet that went alone, for "whatever reason". I went alone, unsuited, because they said, as I told you all numerous times, that if they even saw anyone in EVA outside the station they were going to kill the hostage. They told me what to do, and I followed what they were saying, because so far the Taj had at least been true to his word, and claimed he cant control what the others did. I had spent the whole round negotiating with him what he wants, over comms.

I went to mining, as they told me to do. Then I see you, Dakota Lloyd, and some other officer, two of you in Hazard Rigs, walk up, snatch the locker away wordlessly, walk right into the cycler, and tell me im out of my league while cycling out. I asked what you were doing, and told you to stop, because, as they had already said, numerous times, and I told you, each time, they were going to kill her if they saw anyone in EVA gear. Again, wordlessly, you just walked up.

You never said over Security Comms what you were doing, and didnt give the slightest clue when you came through in Mining. From what I saw, you were just going up to kill them. And if I were a raider, I would have jumped away if I saw 3 officers with guns, 2 of which in Hazard Rigs, standing right outside my ship.

Link to comment

Hello, I was Whiskey, the heister that was negotiating. Nothing that fresh said was wrong. I did say on comms, and made myself pretty clear, by using bold text that if someone was seen EVA, the hostage, ReadThisNamePlz, or Kie'ra Nejem, would die. As soon as the deal was planned, I was moving towards the airlock with Nejem in a bubble, about to head out, I start to hear glass breaking. When I look at the cockpit, I see three officers, of which two were in hazard suits , breaking into the ship. I quickly grab Nejem by the neck, and move out, being hopeful that they would not open fire, and cease trying to break in. Though, it was the opposite. They opened fire, in which 90% of the shots landing on Nejem. She fell over, gasping, and about to die. They kept on trying to break it, wordlessly. They only began to talk when we were heavily wounded, locked inside the storage area of the ship. They did not seem to care that the hostage had died at all, although i had lost some of the conversation, due to an EMP grenade going off. After managing to break through a wall, by shooting it off, they executed us on the scene. This was my side of things.

Link to comment

[mention]ShameOnTurtles[/mention] I still have no idea what they had with them. I only saw the hostage after they removed their voidsuit, and were dead I think. After that I got ahelped. The cause of this visual misreprentation is a mixture of my using the NVGs, the lack of a functioning SecHUD, and the fact that the hostage taker was using an aggressive grab on them, thus holding them on the same tile. All this together plus the immediate stress of the situation does not equate to an easy time identifying what is what.

[mention]FreshRefreshments[/mention] You should not have gone there at all, as I was still trying to deal with Lloyd, and the one we saw on the station. Bilbray was to take you and the other cadet to find the one that shot Phi. Why you, as a cadet, would go without any support to meet with the hostage takers for an exchange when they had shown themselves to not be trustworthy, and their locations unspecified other than "South of Mining", being the supposed location of their shuttle and unknown locations of their team, is unacceptable in almost every instance, no matter what rapport you built with one of them- the rest of whom are outside of their control, evidence being Phi shot immediately.

After the round this was revealed to be a aim mistake, but during the round we had no information concerning this. So to us that is still an immediate engagement.

You saying things to me means nothing if I do not hear them. I am playing broken telephone with the Hostage taker speaking through you and a loud droning static at the same time, being half the station antagonizing the raiders on the same comms. I am unable to read and process everything that is being put in the chat. I was at the time focused on handling Lloyd's inflamtory comments, getting Bilbray prepared with you two to find the one aboard and having the assistants' earpieces taken as they kept telling the hostage taker to shut up over comms, which wasn't helping.

This is why I was calling meetings. Everyone stands in the same room, I speak, it stands out from comms, everyone hears it. You running off with the locker and saying you have to do that doesn't communicate to my scrambled mind anything but "I really want to be captured by the raiders and cannot be bothered to wait." Had you not run off with the locker, and told them you were waiting we would not have had reason to take over at that point.

I had no intention initially of doing the exchange while we had the confirmed presence of a hostile on the station. But when you are there, at the door waiting for them. I really don't have a choice but to go with that flow.

Link to comment


There was a breakdown of communications, yes, as I was rushed to make a decision, by the cadet, rather than move at my own pace, then forced to choose between space and the shuttle, and trying to rationalize why your team took off with us and not the locker. Frankly, had things gone slower, none of this would have happened. My main concern prior to having to take the locker out, was the part of your team that went back on the station- something the cadet didn't seem to care about.

Link to comment

Apologies for the delay on resolving this.

I went log diving and read through the replies to this thread. In my opinion, AmoryBlaine's responses to the situation as it developed, such as deciding not to go through with the trade, were justified and not punishable OOCly. The main point of error here was the shooting of the hostage, who was brought into the room in a neckgrab of another raider, so in the dark and NVG screen it could have been mistaken that it was just one person who had walked in the room. However, effort should have been made to verify whether this was a viable hostile contact to engage immediately or not.

To clarify one minor point, energy glaives are still blue in the NVG overlay. For some reason it doesn't change their color.

As for your history:

Went overboard (after given sufficient reasoning) harm-batonning someone, after not noticing they were handcuffed. Told to make sure it doesn't happen again.

Had a small talk about providing proper RP and not just, rushing in to baton someone. Regardless of escalation, in this case, I excused it, but if it gets to be too bad, warn them.

Had a talk about knifing someone's neck, after they did surrender, as the ert, pretty much they were killed by the cult, come back as ert and cut the throat of someone that did surrender, keep an eye for some shit behavior as ert or when it is related to antags.

The last one of these notes posted is from a long time ago, but this behavior shows a trend of going overboard. I believe this is one of the main factors contributing to your ban.

I have thought about this for a while and I am going to lower this ban to a three day security ban. Your history is still a factor in this, and will be taken into account if there are any future punishments that need to be applied. The lead-up to the situation was acceptable, however more care should have been taken to avoid the loss of the hostage.

I will lock and archive this in around 24 hours, to give time for closing comments.

Link to comment

For clarification on the last note, it entirely disregards the situation that was occuring and gives a false understanding to anyone who reads it. It could be refering to one of two events in the past, one being that, At the time I was occupied with detaining an individual, who was refusing to comply on Code Red, and ended up having to kill them due to the fact they were an Unathi, able to break their cuffs in a matter of seconds - and actively doing so- with no other equipment on hand but a tactical knife, and zipties, while they resisted my attempts to disable their legs, so they couldn't cuff resist. The Unathi was in every sense but verbally asking for that outcome, which I obliged, after sufficient verbal warnings that if they did not stop, I would have no choice but to kill them. I believe they responded along the lines of, "Do it, bitch." This whole situation played out over minutes with a fair amount of escalation as they continued to resist at every chance they got.

The other scenario, equally undesirable, I was able to detain a cult member but due to the lack of a secured holding area during a hostile engagement- one in which the cult was overwhelming us- where in the rest of my team was being attacked tiles away from me, and grenades were going off- I could not lend myself to breaking off from the team to keep the detainee secured, decided to neutralize them- given the extrodinary situation which I was in. My team-mates and their safety, which ensures the safety of the station came before an individual who was likely to escape other.

Actually, thinking it over all the notes listed lack any sort of context to them. I only recall both Cult incidents because they were so un-natural. Frankly, I am bound to rack up notes over time as I play Security quite often, with such a mass diversity of scenarios, so like anything it would make sense for the notes to be given proper context on said scenarios. I'd like to think my responses to adminPMs are quite sufficient in explaining thw circumstances to each scenario, this is supported by the fact that for none of those incidents I was given very little punishment- but over time as they pile up to the nature of being in a very easy to bwoink occupation, I do not believe them to carry the correct message to those reading them, for information on my Security play.

I don't think my opinion is one of arrogance, or wanting special priviledge. I think all notes should be given context no matter who. Maybe it's a bit more time consuming, but it's a lot more useful later on than refering to behavior as 'Shit' without any context as to why outside the immediate action that was talked of to the player about.

Really, I play about three or four rounds as Security daily. So that, contrasted with my notes should be able to convey something on its own; Would I really be able to have such a constant presence on High pop Sec if I was actively powergaming, jumping the gun or playing to win on the regular or even semi-regular. I don't think so, and I'd hope not. I've seen those officers, and they get banned after a few rounds. I don't think I'd have made it this far if I was one of them.

Anyways, the decrease in punishment is appreciated, was the investigation taken. I have no futher comments. Thank you.

Link to comment

Alright. Marking this as resolved, locking and archiving.

I will be unbanning you shortly after this post because since making it you've already been banned basically a week, so...

In regards to your closing comment, context in notes can sometimes be an issue. I can only promise that we are constantly improving how we operate.

Link to comment
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Create New...