Jump to content
Butterrobber202

Warning Complaint - Evandorf

Recommended Posts

BYOND Key: Butterrobber202

Staff BYOND Key: evandorf

Game ID: unsure, forgot to grab it on my way out last night. The Date was 2018-10-04 04:24:35

Reason for complaint: I disagree with the warning given out here.

c56ea333d6788b5a576cfcded589ed2f.png

Evidence/logs/etc:

Logs that I got before the rest got bumped away:

 

So to explain how I RP when dealing with antags and while an Antag, I run through a checklist that goes something like this

 

- Did they / I pull a weapon the moment they saw me?

- Did they / I attempt to talk before aiming/shooting?

- Did they / I directly move against me/them?

 

I have to make a judgment call on the spot and react accordingly. In the Captain's case, she pulled a gun the second she saw me, I aimed at her, and she moved. Yes, I shot her, and it was fully my intention to stabilize her out of Crit but it took me to long to find the medikit, (which was in her bag for some reason), and talk to her then. Once I down her with the Captain's laser gun, I stunned her a few times with her energy pistol, non-lethally, as it would have been in my favor anyway to capture her alive.


In the AI's case, they was a fuckup on my end, when we arrived I saw the turrets go lethal and the AI's Main door open in the same 3 seconds, so I made the mistake of assuming the AI was trying to snipe me before I made it to the turret controls/intercom. So I charged in with my borgs, I also was encouraged to rush in when I heard over Sec Comms, that they were plotting to come to get me. What actually happened, was that my borgs opened the door, had I known this, I would have put on the breaks and talked with the AI on the intercom for a few seconds, and then continue my charge.


Additional remarks: I understand if this warning sticks, but I don't think I deserve it because it was a set of misunderstandings. Because even after I changed the AI laws, it refused to even talk to me.

Share this post


Link to post

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.

Share this post


Link to post

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.

Share this post


Link to post

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.

 

ad986be81336f54bbca5cd57a589e514.png

 

cb49b51f4e32565990a0d4781f3146b8.png

 

I can post the full logs from the round if needed.

Share this post


Link to post

It should be noted, Myself and Shame are going to be reviewing this. Give us some time to go over our logs and the stuff presented in this complaint, and we'll get back to you!

Share this post


Link to post

I apologize for the extended wait, I've been busy with RL stuff for the past few days. I will go through this and post again tonight with my thoughts.


Edit: this was gonna be reviewed tonight but then I forgot we were about to get hit by a freaking hurricane, can we go ONE month without one smh, I'll try to get it done when we have power

Share this post


Link to post

Alright, Strudels opinion time.


From what I have read, the escalation was a bit on the quick side, and didn't really have much RP on EITHER part (I.E him just drawing a gun within seeing you), so that is somewhat understandable, but still, rushed stuff like that just encourages people to shoot first and escalate things quicker. I can agree that a rewording for this would be good, but I do believe this should be the norm for when issues like this happen on both sides, we've been waaaay too lenient on this type of issue for too long, and it has changed the culture of antag involvement.


Additional feedback on my opinion would be nice, I would like to hear the opinion of both Evan and you Butter.

Share this post


Link to post

Look, personally. Escalation is escalation, RP isn’t just what we type in 'say' and 'me'. The action of drawing a weapon carries weight in any situation. Escalation shouldn’t be this regulated thing we need to milk every time we go into combat. The Captain and I both made a, rushed, conscious choice to drag weapons and begin mechanical combat.


I was RP'ing being an operative with a clear objective in mind, and made choices a professional would make. If someone starts shooting at me, I’m going to fire back to preserve my own life above the other man. There is a lot to factor in when making split second decisions and sometimes they end up with people dead.


It was the same with the AI, it spawned in, was announced over comms, and I was in a position where the AI could serverly hamper me. So, as I said before, the plan was to go down to the AI core and talk to it, and as I said above, it went south over a mistaken assumption.


TD;LR I don’t believe crew versus Antag violence is something thats and issue. Quick escalation is going to happen sometimes in tense situations.

Share this post


Link to post

Additional feedback on my opinion would be nice, I would like to hear the opinion of both Evan and you Butter.

 

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...

 

It was the same with the AI, it spawned in, was announced over comms, and I was in a position where the AI could serverly hamper me.

 

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.

Share this post


Link to post

At this point, the warning is already well on its way, so I'd be fine with a rewording, no reason to drag this out into an argument.

Share this post


Link to post

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

Share this post


Link to post

Alrighty, again apologies on my part for the slow response but with the hurricane passing through, my work, and a billion other things, I've had some trouble.


I will be getting in contact with Evan about a possible rewording and removal of some of the initial warning, but the meat of it will still be there.


Locking when Shame wants me to xoxo

Share this post


Link to post

Apologies again that this complaint has taken so long. Rest assured with this post it will be closed.


[mention]Butterrobber202[/mention], we believe your premise of engaging the captain was legitimate. Them pulling a gun on you is reason to be cautious and possibly shoot them first. It is unfortunate the aim mechanic continues to be broken so it was hard to utilize it properly. Where you went wrong was eswording the captain multiple times after they were subdued for no apparent reason. This really isn't okay in the scope of the situation, and was where you went wrong.


[mention]EJ_Denton[/mention] has been spoken to regarding their in character involvement in the adminhelp by Strudel.


As a resolution to this complaint the warning will be reworded to reflect that it wasn't engaging the captain that was the issue but eswording them. Locking and archiving this, if either of you have an issue please message me over discord or byond.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×