Chaznoodles Posted February 16, 2015 Posted February 16, 2015 I feel like this is being dragged out a lot, for no real reason. As previously stated, it has been cleared by a member of staff under certain conditions. If you want any changes to be made, I would advise posting them under the Suggestions forum and not here.
Guest Posted February 16, 2015 Posted February 16, 2015 Removing a game mechanic because you weren't robust enough to deal with it seems incredibly petty. Why dont we replace the armory's contents with bike horns and crayons while we're at it?
Guest Posted February 16, 2015 Posted February 16, 2015 No, this is not power-gaming. I think it's clever, and clever thought should be applauded, not frowned upon. Because the description states it is used to make a human into another, yet it works on monkeys also is clear evidence that the developers of the function wanted to reward changelings who were clever. If we try to dispatch clever thought on mere technicalities, we ruin the point of the game. If a changeling wants to farm for more power, ( in a way that doesn't kill players, mind you all ) I say sure. Why the hell not? Normally it ends with their capture and being sold away to Xenobiology anyway. There's a fine line between game mechanics and role-play that doesn't need to be there. If it's about being a serial killer, being a serial killer is about power. It's about the thrill, the feeling. But why should every changeling be a cold-hearted serial killer? Some changelings can be intellectual, can farm, can put themselves into society. I'm not against monkey farming. However, if he abused the powers he got from this in a way that violated the rules / lacked role play, he deserves punishment for it. Recently, during an event I ran, someone had abused the chameleon projector to avoid getting hit by an L6 SAW and a pulse rifle. They disguised themselves as bullets, for example, and given the code at the time had set their density to zero, they couldn't be hit by conventional weaponry. You could say this was clever, but it was still severe powergaming and abuse of game mechanics. You couldn't have reacted to this in an RP sense. This was summarily fixed just recently. Same shit, different day. This is abuse of a game mechanic in order to give the antagonist an extremely unfair advantage, and it hardly facilitates RP. I would much rather be deathstung by someone who was murderboning the entire crew and lurking in maintenance than to be surprise ranged deathstung when I'm trying to arrest them for something completely unrelated in terms of dealing with the antag. I'm just repeating what Frances and the others have said at this point, but apparently the rest of you are still deadset on doing nothing about this. Mirk needs to be informed that powergaming in the fashion and intent for winning is not okay and the behavior needs to be curbed. Newer standards for what constitutes as powergaming and what doesn't, may have to be facilitated.
George VI Posted February 16, 2015 Posted February 16, 2015 I don't like that mindset, "Behavior needs to be curbed." It's like you all think you're psychiatrists. Very well, though. The bullet idea is clever also. It gives an unfair advantage because it's supposed to, not because it's a bug. Not every instance of RP needs to result in the antagonist dead / captured / exploded.
Chaznoodles Posted February 16, 2015 Posted February 16, 2015 Mirk needs to be informed that powergaming in the fashion and intent for winning is not okay and the behavior needs to be curbed. Why do all of you people are mad about me avoiding to kick players out of the round? I cleared this with a moderating staff earlier and they stated it is Ok to eat protohumans as long as I do not go on a gankfest with deathsting. Can we shut this thread down now, before it delves further into the realms of an attack on a player? If you have a disagreement with the way mechanics work, take it to the suggestions forum.
Susan Posted February 16, 2015 Posted February 16, 2015 Chaz, you seem to forget that moderation staff can in fact be wrong, and in this instance I am saying that whoever cleared this is wrong and this should not be acceptable behavior. It has nothing to do with mechanics, it has to do with staff justifying or allowing powergame.
EvilBrage Posted February 16, 2015 Author Posted February 16, 2015 I mean, I'm not even going to go into the specifics of light-rp, but you'd think that on a heavy-rp server, a gamemode based on progression and escalation wouldn't possess a workaround letting the antag unlock all of their powers/abilities immediately with minimal RP or effort. If feeding on monkeys isn't playing to win, why is it still an existing game mechanic nevertheless? It does not create any roleplay, and if anything, puts changelings willing to eat all the tasty monkeys at a clear advantage over those actually putting effort into finding worthwhile victims. The blurb above summarizes my concerns with Mirk's behavior - the mechanics themselves are easy enough to fix (even easier than I'd initially thought) and even since this complaint I know of at least one instance in which he's made the exact same rush to deathsting. In my opinion, the unnamed "moderator" who "cleared" this behavior prior to the use of this technique was either not given a full explanation of the behavior in question, or they do not deserve to be a moderator. I remember an earlier case in which moving a medical hardsuit to the medical bay was deemed powergaming - for that to be so and this instance to be acceptable behavior is impossible. I'm not trying to make a case that Mirk should git b& or whatever, but rather trying to firmly establish that yes, this was powergaming. If anyone deserves punishment, it's the moderator.
Frances Posted February 16, 2015 Posted February 16, 2015 I'll try to rephrase what I think I understand Chaz's point is. The player in question had the courtesy of clearing his actions in advance with a moderator, and was given permission to proceed. Now that we know that, it wouldn't really be fair to pursue a player complaint, because the player stuck closely to the permission they were granted, and as such should not be blamed for doing something they were allowed to do by staff. Most participants in this discussion seem to be opposed to the idea of the action itself, not this specific instance. This should thus be discussed either as a rule change/clarification, or code change. I personally have no problem with wrapping things up in this very thread, but if some people feel like a new thread might be best to discuss this, I don't see the harm in it. PS: I can see very well how this is a debatable idea, and don't think anybody should be blamed for it, as there's no well-known precedent. In fact, it'd be nice to see the involved mod join the discussion to hear what they have to say, if they have not done so already.
Skull132 Posted February 16, 2015 Posted February 16, 2015 Okay, Regarding the usage of monkeys from the cargo bay to feed a changeling. I wish to further the following point: action described bypasses intended mechanics of the gamemode, and the escalation it brings with it. By that point, it becomes powergaming, and is also seen as behaviour with intent to win, as opposed to involve people in a round. The excuse of, "I do not wish to remove people from the round to gain power" further proves this point: the gameplay style is not aimed towards creating conflict, but instead to gain access to an arbitrary number of genome points and powers. Consider that any actions taken with the highest level powers will usually include severly harming, if not killing someone. If that is not your intent, then what meaningful conflict do you expect to bring into the round as an antag with such great powers? And as a final argument: should the presedence be set the other way, and this deemed acceptable behaviour, then any changeling playing cargo bay would not only circumvent the build up in the round, but also receive a very distinct, if not damning advantage over other lings. This would become acceptable and spread MO, and thus remove the frail and careful changeling phase that is present in a round. Ultimately, had this been kept to single occurrences, I would not mind. But for the reasons above, I do not want to see this as an acceptable and thus spread MO. Presedence set, future offences would be punished. And regarding the Moderator clearing that. I have a name, so I'll look into the matter.
Frances Posted February 17, 2015 Posted February 17, 2015 Everyone's intent (both staff and involved players) to keep the moderator's name under wraps makes it look like some big blunder that shouldn't be outed publicly. And I really don't think it is. Like, I think there's been so much buildup around that (when there shouldn't have been any) that you might as well not mention the moderator any further or get them involved, only for their sake. But it's not something that calls for punishment, in my mind. I've moderated, I've done calls that were wrong, but there was never any malice or neglect behind it. Sometimes an idea sounds good in your mind, and after reevaluation you find out it wasn't, or others don't think it was (even if you might). So you talk it out, clear things up, and you're done. Doesn't take more than five minutes. And I feel sorry that someone is seemingly being thrown under the bus here instead of having that.
Skull132 Posted February 17, 2015 Posted February 17, 2015 As a note, I have no intent on punishing anyone concerning the matter outlined in my earlier reply. Presedence was unset, ergo, administrators and moderators conducted actions based on what seemed best for the round, in that specific, isolated case. That's how these things go. I checked the adminhelp logs for 09FEB today, and the matter is nothing more than the administrator in question conducting as they saw fit for the round, and not managing a punishment on an issue up for debate. That's just about it. With the presedence now set, all members of staff will be advised on how to manage future cases like this. EDIT: if anything, you are dealing with a failure of management and institution: a failure of my own in letting this matter persist for this long. Well, I'm here now, so let's manage this.
Skull132 Posted February 24, 2015 Posted February 24, 2015 Alrighty, no further arguments presented. The usage of deathstings did bring Mirkoloio's judgement as an antagonist into question once more. Coupled with other offences that did a similar thing between the time of the complaint being submitted, and now, it ended with a ban from antagonist roles for Mirkoloio. Complaint resolved, then, referencing the following posts: http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1325&start=50#p12999 http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=1325&start=60#p13044
Recommended Posts