Nuke Ops and Bounties: How to Balance this

[Baka]

Okay, it's time for me to talk about the big elephant in the room, which I have discussed with Sound Scopes and a few others last night. This is mostly his idea, I'm just presenting it.

I suppose that you all are familiar with the sub-reddit for this game. There has been some complaints about Nuke Ops and bounties on this server, how seemingly in a game full of 30-60 people, a lot of Nuke Ops only focus on one or two people constantly. I personally believe from a player's perspective and a trial mod's perspective that is rather unfair to players, for the reasoning being that doing so, the round doesn't involve most players, just a select few, security, and head of staff.

I understand that regulars can provide good roleplay, it's people you trust, but at the same time there are plenty of newcomers too who are very good at roleplaying but are overlooked because they don't have a special bounty on the forum.

My proposal:

Overhaul the current bounty system and instead make a system where there are 3-5 names of crew members chosen at random, with a random bounty ranging from 15,000 to 50,000.

It would be more balance, people would be more genuinely surprise if Nuke Ops were trying to kidnap them, could result in more character development for characters mostly overlooked in this round type, and there would be no more accusations of favouritism.

Of course, there's going to be people who want to do special bounties, but I think the system above should precede the special bounties, and it would just be an "extra bonus" rather than making one person the entire round.

edit: And, if you do not want to have a bounty on your head, there should be an option to opt-out as a nuke op target in the preference panels.

Thoughts, suggestions?

[Chaznoodles]

I actually rather like this idea. This helps to expand away from the few characters who constantly become the focus of rounds due to OOC friendships, often leaving others out inn the cold.

[Guest]

Yep, that should work. Not sure if it's that easy to code.

[Skull132]

Yep, that should work. Not sure if it's that easy to code.

 

Well, let's let the development team figure that out.

[Guest]

I support this idea entirely.

[SierraKomodo]

It would be wonderful to play a nukeop round where Ziva isn't having to flip out over people attacking her cousin for once xD

[EvilBrage]

So in other words, we removed objectives from antags, and now we want to add them back.

Surely you can think of a better nuke op objective than a bounty - this is a step backwards. Just kidnap a scientist or what have you for their knowledge of NanoTrasen's research projects or something. Clear out all the station accounts onto untraceable charge cards and haul them back to the Syndie base. Do a raid and rally up some crewmen for human trafficking.

It doesn't have to be bounties. From what I recall, those bounties are entirely modifiable by simply PMing Incognito; don't make yourself a target and then complain that you're a target.

[SgtSammac]

It would be wonderful to play a nukeop round where Ziva isn't having to flip out over people attacking her cousin for once xD

The fact that the meta-friending is at the point where we can almost guarantee that Karima is going to be kidnapped is fucking ridiculous and needs to stop. End of.

[Guest]

I had a thought on how to enforce this a bit ICly.

 

[Guest]

That would still make people go after the high cost players.

I have an idea that could solve this issue, but need to have time to write it out to make it sound less like I wrote and thought of it after 30 hours no sleep.

Randomization is the key

[incognitojesus]

It doesn't have to be bounties. From what I recall, those bounties are entirely modifiable by simply PMing Incognito; don't make yourself a target and then complain that you're a target.

When the bounty system was originally created, it was meant to be optional.

That means, it wasn't supposed to be the norm.

I entrusted the community to be able to use it as an option if the antags (meaning, not just nuke ops) could not come up with an idea for what they wanted to do. I think that people have taken this system and tried to make it into "let's repeatedly go after this person until we get them." Essentially, this has killed the fun for everyone else, because we all know who's going to be hunted once nuke is voted in.

Also:

-snip-

No. This isn't helping the issue at all. As of right now, for a short period of time, I'm going to suspend bounties on that board.

[LordFowl]

I'm quite on the same thought as EvilBrage. In this case, I don't think the server should be putting in place mechanisms to ensure that players roleplay with everyone in mind; and making antagonists objective'd again will not solve this. Rather, it should be expected of our players that they roleplay to include everyone when they are an antagonist, not enforced by crippling in game limitations.

Furthermore, the critical flaw with bounties is that they sometimes don't include the entire crew; however for most bounty hunts I've seen this isn't true. So long as the entire crew is involved in interesting and enjoyable ways, then I don't think the same bounties being targeted again and again is a major issue; certainly not one that requires remodelling of the antagonist system.

For example, just yesterday there was a syndicate team that in my opinion successfully pulled of pretending to be Sol Alliance personnel looking for criminals. And while the 'criminals' in question included the ever wanted Karima Mo'Taki, I still enjoyed the round.

[Guest]

My idea is not a limitation but an option. The ops would get an option of people if they choose to ask for them. No one will have a set bounty and it would get randomized each nuke round.

[Baka]

Bounties have been and always be an optional thing, something you can take or leave. It is not meant to be an objective, but rather something that if a team is having difficulty figuring out a plan, they can simply look at a sheet of paper next to the nuke code (it's also optional to blow up the station with the nuke), and go "Aha! Urist McQuartermaster is worth 20,000!"

 

-snip-

 

if you wish to file a player/character complaint, please go to the appropriate board.

[LordFowl]

In that case, the main issue is that people are targeting the same bounties over and over again; and as I stated I don't really find that to be a huge issue, because as long as the antagonist does it in an interesting and involving way, then its not really a problem.

If you insist on clinging to this concept you call 'immersion', then perhaps instead of removing the entire system, the person in charge of bounties should consult with the person who is being targeted repeatedly on what should be done about it.

Finally, if the person being targeted over and over again finds it personally intrusive to their roleplay, which really I find to be the only valid complaint (My apologies if I don't place much value on 'immersion', it's an unfortunate defect of mine), then recall that they personally can ask for the bounty to be removed at any time.

Removing the entire system to me is a bit of an overreaction; removing the entire system and then adding a new randomized system is too meddlesome. It lays in the hands of the RPer to make good RP, not in the hands of the server, because the server at the end of the day cannot RP. If an antagonist cannot roleplay their role well, no amount of in game doodads will change this. And if an antagonist CAN roleplay their role well (Look to my previous post for an example), then the only complaint here can be 'immersion', which is in my mind an imaginary fault.

[Guest]

My system incorporates the system that is currently in place. As I keep saying it is an option if they want to use it like it is an option for them if they want to look at the bounty list. Which they do every time because they either want to or don't have time to come up with a whole new plan on the spot.

People go for Karima because of her bounty price? Randomize them all fairly so that she isn't number one on the list. Your previous example is still the same thing. I watched as security held the ops near arrivals for 40 minutes while all the Tajarans were kept in the bridge, everyone else doing their normal work, then the ops were asked to leave so they did and started an assult to get her.

How is nuke ops going after the same person every round any different from them blowing up the armoury, then the outpost, then the shuttles, only to have ert called in for the whole event to turn into one side is down with a sniper to the back?

[NebulaFlare]

As the actual go-to bounty choice, I'm....just.....a little burnt out of being targeted EVERY. SINGLE. TIME. Don't get me wrong, I love the attention, and I don't want that bounty removed anytime soon. But it's becoming way too predictable. I've noticed a pattern. Bounty hunters want Karima. Crew locks Karima up in the most secure part of the station. Wait around like a terrified Tajara until ERT arrives.

Part of the problem I've noticed while playing as Shadow, is that there aren't other bounties to go after. One round I wanted to go after Oliver Stefan - my team decided no, because he was peanut's pay.

As a quick-fix, how about giving out a potential list of objectives to choose from? Go after bounties, steal research, steal funds, put some holes in the station - don't limit it to one objective, but give incentive and reason to pick several. Instead of just focusing on kidnapping Karima. (at this rate, she would have packed her bags and ran. Or be placed in protective custody by NT)

[SgtSammac]

As a quick-fix, how about giving out a potential list of objectives to choose from? Go after bounties, steal research, steal funds, put some holes in the station - don't limit it to one objective, but give incentive and reason to pick several. Instead of just focusing on kidnapping Karima. (at this rate, she would have packed her bags and ran. Or be placed in protective custody by NT)

 

This was the whole point of removing objectives from antags. So they can do things like this on their own.

[Guest]

Antags are still objectiveless, this is a choice they can make in game while they plan, just going to add ic mechanics to allow it to happen in an non bias way. Because having over 70% of the current active crew have a bounty of 50,000 or lower and 3-4 people (one of which actively plays) have a bounty of 100,000.

The suggestion is not to force them to pick one, it's to give them a better choice of ones to pick if they feel like going after a target.

The problem I have noticed with objectives is not everyone can make them up on the spot, some people like the freedoom of having multiple choice of things, others just like to be given something.

I've been thinking of a system of semi-objectiveless antags. Where some of the gamemodes are hard to do because for communication problems or lack of imagination.

This would work where people would be given a list of vauge ideas and then they can pick or get a random one. In the case of teams there could be some kind of vote system just for antags that would allow them to pick an objective If they want to

Everything is optional.

[TishinaStalker]

Can... Can I just ask why the heck people have bounties on their head to begin with? Normal people don't get bounties put on their heads ranging in the 10k-40k. o.O

We literally have cargo technicians, officers, and engineers with extremely insignificant lives that have a bounty on their head. Does the Syndicate just decide "Fuck this random person. Lets put a bounty on their head."

I can understand if it was made for fun, but it feels like it borders "super edgy character" territory if you can say that your quartermaster character has a 15k bounty on their head. Just my two cents from a player POV.

[josh1133]

Part of the problem I've noticed while playing as Shadow, is that there aren't other bounties to go after. One round I wanted to go after Oliver Stefan - my team decided no, because he was peanut's pay.

)

 

Oh my god this, this so much, this this this. I don't think anyone understands how much this is a thing. Its exhausting to go after Karima so much, so someone in the team usually says "Lets try this person" and its immediately dismissed because of the money you make. I mean, I think there has only been one time where the team I was on was like "Lets not go after Karima and thank god for that team (( This is when I'm on teams that focus on bounties)). Its not easy to argue IC wise why we shouldn't go after them either, "Oh no, I think we should go after the person with less money because....", while OOC we really want to just...involve ...someone...else, IC wise we have no real reason to turn down the 100,000 or 200,000 person. A idea could be just make a list of bounties without the rewards put next to their names, so then when someone is captured they learn how much the person is worth when they get paid. I mean, I assume most antags are getting paid to fuck up the station already, any amount onto that paycheck is good right? I dont know, I rather have antags not so focused on bounties but it seems it seems our antags are more focused on getting cash in their pockets then creating RP, myself included.

[Guest]

Can... Can I just ask why the heck people have bounties on their head to begin with? Normal people don't get bounties put on their heads ranging in the 10k-40k. o.O

We literally have cargo technicians, officers, and engineers with extremely insignificant lives that have a bounty on their head. Does the Syndicate just decide "Fuck this random person. Lets put a bounty on their head."

I can understand if it was made for fun, but it feels like it borders "super edgy character" territory if you can say that your quartermaster character has a 15k bounty on their head. Just my two cents from a player POV.

 

Vira got a fucking bounty on her head for myself not knowing how toxins works (and the amazing arrivals bomb that crippled the entire round). And the round wasn't even canon.

But seriously, you'd have to do something /extremely/ noteworthy in your past to get the Syndicate's attention, and most of the time, it's Karima being the synthlover she is and hacking whatever she wants: leading to the Syndicate to want to press her into the Syndies' ranks as a cracker, or wanting a Class-1 NT Captain dead because of their general influence within the Tau Ceti sector. Having them dead would destabilize the sector, for example...

But if you suggest anything higher than 10 credits for a Quartermaster because of whatever edgy reason, your character is a special snowflake.

[SierraKomodo]

Well, if it's any consolation, Sylvia has a very good IC reason to not touch the Mo'Takis, and tell her team she will fuck their operation up if they try it

[LordFowl]

I don't recall my saying price was an issue; but I'm glad you brought it up. Price is an issue. There should be standards for bounties; the bounty application process should be more stringent. I understand, Jesus, that you probably never expected the bounty system to take itself to such a location (Height or fault is irrelevant), but now that it is there, something must be done. While some people are in support of randomization it seems, I think as opposed to randomization we should head along a different path; a pattern to our bounties. Reason where reason is not; /why/ is your quartermaster getting a bounty? Does stealing candy from a baby really justify him being worth 275,003 credits? Is there then an added difficulty that makes the bounty worth it, because of special costs that the bounty hunters must make?

Randomization won't solve causeless bounties; in fact it will worsen the issue. Randomization won't help to controlled character development, in fact it will hinder it. (Honestly, if you're utilizing the bounty board I think you should at least be willing to give up that character; or at least use the bounty to develop them more. Why go through the bother if its just going to be non-canon?)

[Baka]

The thing is, a set bounty on people does not hinder character development in a round type that only gets picked like once every few days. It's nothing more than an optional thing, that's it.