Stationbound nerfs

[Zyrus]

1 minute ago, Chada1 said:

The AI and 'borgs at their core shine at one primary thing which is providing utility to a round, there is positive and negative utility (utility that positvely impacts most players' enjoyment of a round and utility that negatively impacts most players enjoyment of a round), mech piloting is positive utility, unbolting airlocks is positive utility, unelectrifying airlocks is positive utility. Bolting Airlocks is negative utility, electrifying airlocks is negative utility. Why are they negative? because they're used almost exclusively to shut down the Antags and/or shut down Crew and lead to the AI being used by Security/Command against said actors to a level that makes Antags have to actively plan their entire round on how they should avoid you (the AI), if removing bad features is neutering, then so be it. But I don't think it's neutering because the AI is still very effective, it's just not going to be as crap.

This argument can be used to justify all kinds of nerfs. If you're going to neuter the AI to give antags a buff, why stop there? IPC security officers are infamous for being completely ridiculous to fight, yet I don't see active calls to neuter them.

Diona are infamous for being practically immortal. I don't see calls to neuter them.

etc etc...

[Chada1]

13 minutes ago, Zyrus said:

This argument can be used to justify all kinds of nerfs. If you're going to neuter the AI to give antags a buff, why stop there? IPC security officers are infamous for being completely ridiculous to fight, yet I don't see active calls to neuter them.

Diona are infamous for being practically immortal. I don't see calls to neuter them.

etc etc...

Because this is what I play and so this is what I know how to fix. Those, I don't play, and those, I don't know how to fix. That simple, and yet I don't agree at all.

Hecc I don't even think this is a true nerf to the AI since this opens the airlock for the AI to receive a ton of new cool features in the long run, features noone in their right mind would give them if they still had access to this.

This feature as is makes noone want to add features to the AI, because it's 'already too powerful against Antagonists' and other phrasings. If we remove the negative features of the AI we can add more positive ones. If we keep these decisively negative features, noone will want to add more, positive or not.

This is just another aspect of how awful this kind of feature is to the game.

Edited May 19, 2020 by Chada1

[geeves]

3 hours ago, Zyrus said:

Diona are infamous for being practically immortal. I don't see calls to neuter them.

Are you active on the discord in the slightest? Every now and then a call for a nerf comes up, and it usually goes through.

Nerfing the AI has a rediculously easy cost-benefit analysis. The cost is that the single AI player of that round is slightly less powerful, the benefit is that it's easier all the other players to make a round that flourishes.

So, the solution is clear, smack the crap out of it until it isn't validhunter's delight, then implement mechanics so that isn't braindead boring door opening simulator.

[Zundy]

Chads is a stationbound and AI player, he would be the last person who wants to "neuter" them as he'd be "neutering" his own role. It's removing cheesy mechancis which are only ever ustalised to beat the antags and replace them with better ones.

[Zyrus]

6 hours ago, Zundy said:

Chads is a stationbound and AI player, he would be the last person who wants to "neuter" them as he'd be "neutering" his own role. It's removing cheesy mechancis which are only ever ustalised to beat the antags and replace them with better ones.

Bolts are also used to keep the crew from harming themselves or the station. Don't try to pretend this is only used for antags.

7 hours ago, geeves said:

Are you active on the discord in the slightest? Every now and then a call for a nerf comes up, and it usually goes through.

Nerfing the AI has a rediculously easy cost-benefit analysis. The cost is that the single AI player of that round is slightly less powerful, the benefit is that it's easier all the other players to make a round that flourishes.

So, the solution is clear, smack the crap out of it until it isn't validhunter's delight, then implement mechanics so that isn't braindead boring door opening simulator.

I am not, I admit. Discord doesn't appeal to me at all due to the need to maintain alt accounts if I want to appear inactive to some groups but not others.

I can see that majority opinion is against me here, but I still call it unnecessary.

[Pratepresidenten]

Personally, I feel the firelock argument is as useless as the firelocks themselves. Its as Chada says, a momentary nuisance. But it also works both ways, and falling back to my statement of uselessness, almost noone ever respects a firelock. If its not mechanically sealed (Through actual atmospheric hazards), it will be ignored and used as an entry.

And as I think Geeves is saying, it makes for a better round to not have the AI enforce its absolute control over a situation. I, for one, love being kinda helpless when shit goes down, watching crew do dumb shit and make tactically unsound decisions from the comforts of my sky-palace!

7 hours ago, geeves said:

So, the solution is clear, smack the crap out of it until it isn't validhunter's delight, then implement mechanics so that isn't braindead boring door opening simulator.

This pretty much. When synths become basic bitch stuff, it'll be easier to put in new, fun mechanics that benefit all.

[Chada1]

4 hours ago, Pratepresidenten said:

Personally, I feel the firelock argument is as useless as the firelocks themselves. Its as Chada says, a momentary nuisance. But it also works both ways, and falling back to my statement of uselessness, almost noone ever respects a firelock. If its not mechanically sealed (Through actual atmospheric hazards), it will be ignored and used as an entry.

I don't agree with this either, tho, I think the AI will still be able to seal areas if they just inform the Crew not to enter them and give a v. good reason ?, it'll be them having to utilize soft power tho and less hard power (which is what bolting is). Especially in cases like with carp and/or minor gas leaks.

If a Crewmember ignores the AI's express warning and enters an area, that is kinda their fault. The AIs ability to help Crew avoid harm should be directly related to how willing Crew are to heed its warnings, and how many resources ('Borgos and now the AI mech) it has to physically perform its will

In the long term, this may even lead to Crew taking the AI (And 'borgs) more seriously in when it's trying to warn them away from harm, since the primary barrier in this situation from the danger and the crewmember, is the Crewmember actually listening to the AI and respecting that fire lock.

So like, even in this case, I think it'll be more positive than negative in the long term.

Edited May 19, 2020 by Chada1

[Pratepresidenten]

14 minutes ago, Chada1 said:

it'll be them having to utilize soft power tho and less hard power

But the AI has zero power, therefore people dont listen, das the point. People weld their ways through walls and break windows beacuse "lmao the AI is just being a dick, bro. I dont have to listen for shit, its not command."

16 minutes ago, Chada1 said:

If a Crewmember ignores the AI's express warning and enters an area, that is kinda their fault. The AIs ability to help Crew avoid harm should be directly related to how willing Crew are to heed its warnings, and how many resources ('Borgos) it has to physically perform its will

My point was its kinda useless to use firelocks as a deterrent. You can inform them of an issue, and whatever happens next you can do literally nothing about. The ultimate decisionmaking falls on our lovable dummies on the ground.

[Chada1]

5 minutes ago, Pratepresidenten said:

But the AI has zero power, therefore people dont listen, das the point. People weld their ways through walls and break windows beacuse "lmao the AI is just being a dick, bro. I dont have to listen for shit, its not command."

If it didn't have power then it wouldn't be able to shut down antagonists, tho, or literally anything else. There are two different kinds of power in this situation, soft power which is the ability to get others to do a thing, (Which isn't always authority) and hard power which is the ability to directly do a thing.

It does have power -- Just not authority. Anytime a crewmember listens to the AI, it's soft power. The tendencies of Crewmembers to ignore the AI is partially related to a lot of factors like it being capable of doing this thing and bolting everything.

Having to listen =/= listening.

Crew don't always listen to Command either. And if they think the AI has a good reason to do a thing, they will listen to the AI too.

I can't fix the playerbase, this thread is only to fix the AI, and maybe fixing the AI will gradually change how the playerbase treats AIs too.

Edited May 19, 2020 by Chada1

[Pratepresidenten]

? Im all game for these changes.

[Chada1]

I'm glad ?

[Chada1]

9 hours ago, Zyrus said:

Bolts are also used to keep the crew from harming themselves or the station. Don't try to pretend this is only used for antags

Nearly any situation at all that you would bolt for (With the sole exception of Antags), you can also use the fire alarm for and then warn the crewmember. You don't need bolting to protect crew, and if crew don't heed your warnings, that isn't your fault -- That's a fault of their own character.

Edited May 20, 2020 by Chada1

[Carver]

It's somewhat an issue if I die because someone else opened the firelock like a 'tard, but I never see anything bolted (by the AI, Engineers on the other hand tend to be competent and do something) for that sort of reason anyways.

[Hesphos]

I'm just going to wedge myself into this discussion to put my 2 cents in what I think of how many servers do their AI.

 

I never understood the reason why the upload and core have to be a doomfort with laser turrets. I can understand it on lowrp  that the AI needs defenses against the clown but here? Sol shackles AI like its going out of style, Jargon Feds are still slightly upset about that little issue they had with them in the past and even the Biesel Reps have alot of shackled artificial intelligence but somehow somewhere in a boardroom people decided it was a good idea to put laser turrets everywhere under the direct control of said AI. Weren't Security Cyborgs removed for a somewhat same reason? That they were played as mobile gun platforms instead of subservient muscle directly working together with a high rank/sec officer.

Imagine Doctor David Bowman walking into the HAL-9000 Core just to be vaporized by a large laserbeam. Would have made for a whole different movie indeed.

 

What I suggest we do is not directly change the abilities of the station AI to influence airlocks and keep that as is and instead make the core alot easier to access for Heads of Staff to curbstomp any AI rebellion. Forcing malfunctioning ones to carefully plan if or when going loud is an option and cooperate with their borgs to ensure certain vital command officers are in a state where they cant just walk into your core and pull the plug. 

[Zyrus]

26 minutes ago, Hesphos said:

I'm just going to wedge myself into this discussion to put my 2 cents in what I think of how many servers do their AI.

 

I never understood the reason why the upload and core have to be a doomfort with laser turrets. I can understand it on lowrp  that the AI needs defenses against the clown but here? Sol shackles AI like its going out of style, Jargon Feds are still slightly upset about that little issue they had with them in the past and even the Biesel Reps have alot of shackled artificial intelligence but somehow somewhere in a boardroom people decided it was a good idea to put laser turrets everywhere under the direct control of said AI. Weren't Security Cyborgs removed for a somewhat same reason? That they were played as mobile gun platforms instead of subservient muscle directly working together with a high rank/sec officer.

Imagine Doctor David Bowman walking into the HAL-9000 Core just to be vaporized by a large laserbeam. Would have made for a whole different movie indeed.

 

What I suggest we do is not directly change the abilities of the station AI to influence airlocks and keep that as is and instead make the core alot easier to access for Heads of Staff to curbstomp any AI rebellion. Forcing malfunctioning ones to carefully plan if or when going loud is an option and cooperate with their borgs to ensure certain vital command officers are in a state where they cant just walk into your core and pull the plug. 

The point of the doomfort is to keep unauthorized people out of it.

AIs are expensive to produce and so are their cores, it makes perfect sense to protect that investment... and if your AI is subverted, that's a whole other problem.

[Carver]

It's more curious that the AI itself controls the turrets - yet has zero defense against remote law change from consoles made with stolen circuits.

[Zyrus]

1 minute ago, Carver said:

It's more curious that the AI itself controls the turrets - yet has zero defense against remote law change from consoles made with stolen circuits.

Meta wise, we don't assume someone is going to create a pirate AP upload console connected to the station for the purpose of subverting it. That being said, I would agree that a new connection should be known to the AI, since it's on their network.

[Chada1]

I think the best solution is to proceed as we are -- The core doesn't need to be changed, so much as the AI needs to be made less overbearing. This does that.

The survivability of the AI isn't the issue, it's what it can do to people. And this isn't just the AI, this is a problem with my favorite role, 'borgs, too, they shouldn't have access to bolting, it's an objectively negative influence on rounds.

It doesn't really matter if it's as simple as just walking in and hitting the AI twice and destroying it, if the AI is so powerful that you have to actually redirect your entire roleplay, gimmick and everything JUST TO DO THAT, there is a horrible problem.

Sure you can make the statement that you should have to play around the AI, but this isn't playing around the AI, THIS IS DESTROYING/DISABLING THE AI. as a necessary step in your round as an Antagonist. Think about that. To make it easier to kill the AI just hides the problem that they can completely and utterly derail rounds if they aren't dealt with p. much imediately, and that's the problem. So, the solution? Remove their ability to derail rounds. This does that, hopefully with much fewer AI players immediately getting ganked.

The debate I've had here has done nothing to weaken my belief in this, it's just making me realize it ever harsher as a stationbound player.

Edited May 22, 2020 by Chada1

[Hesphos]

1 hour ago, Zyrus said:

The point of the doomfort is to keep unauthorized people out of it.

AIs are expensive to produce and so are their cores, it makes perfect sense to protect that investment... and if your AI is subverted, that's a whole other problem.

I mean, you probably need a full access ID to break in anyway and you could turn the turrets off with said ID.

An AI must be pretty braindead to not notice people breaking through bolted upload doors with motion scanner cameras. So if we go by that logic the captains spare ID needs a laser turret defending it because all turrets can be memed with the turret control console. 

I'm just afraid that if you nerf actual abilities of the AI you just turn him into a pAI with cameras and a handful of laser turrets to protect its meaningless existence.

[Chada1]

12 hours ago, Hesphos said:

I'm just afraid that if you nerf actual abilities of the AI you just turn him into a pAI with cameras and a handful of laser turrets to protect its meaningless existence.

This is a v. valid concern, but I'm not sure we'll go that route and I think I can show a p. good example of why -- There are actually buffs being planned for the AI in other areas that are less detrimental to the game, the same dev who is doing this PR has also coded the ability for the AI to uplink into mechs that are within its network and remotely control them, which is p. darn cool. See here.

I hope that at least relieves some of the worry, and I doubt anyone will want to add new feature like this mech change in for the AI without reducing how overbearing the AI is like this.

Edited May 22, 2020 by Chada1
Typo

[Chada1]

As of now, this is merged. 
Tips for this change:

1. Remember to pull the fire alarms in emergencies, and if you're not in range to do so, the fire shutters can be used to blockade individual airlocks effectively but at more effort.
2. If you need an airlock to remain open so you can spread air out as an engineering 'borgo, you can create multiple objects (I find using metal sheets to make a canister is good) capable of barricading a airlock open.
3. If Crew require an airlock open forever for them, just disable the access requirement which makes it the same access as the public garden.

 

Don't forget to leave feedback.

[armrha]

I don't think I understand this philosophy of anything that hampers the antag in any way 'negatively affects the round'. In your opinion, is a good round of SS13 just any one that the antag breezes through its objectives, doesn't have to make any special plans, and succeeds without any hassle? 

It seems like you view a door being bolted shut as something boring to have happen, while like a security officer shooting at you is interesting? I don't get why, both are challenges designed to be overcame within the game.  AI tracking can be stymied with disguises and antag gear, and how long does a bolted door really slow down a skilled player? If they already figured out the wires, and have tools handy, which they should, it's a few seconds. Screwdriver, cut AI wire, pulse bolts, screwdriver. 

Just reading about these changes makes me feel bad for AI players. I love playing AI on other servers, but I don't think I've ever played it here, as it already was pretty nerfed. Bolting people in is a proactive and fun thing to do as an AI - and as mentioned a good player incorporating AI into their plans, judging attentiveness and making contingencies is all part of being a traitor. But I guess maybe that doesn't apply here? I don't know, it seems like most changes seem to revolve around 'make things easier and easier for antags, and place more restrictions or remove things from everyone else, because SS13 is a game where antags should have fun'.

 

It also seems really callous to reduce the AI to a pAI with a fancy room to sit in and watch its humans die helplessly with the promise of 'we'll add more, better features later, kthxbye!' Like, why make AI players suffer in the interim if you are planning on adding some stuff? Add the stuff then remove the stuff it's replacing. You wouldn't stun batons and stun pistols from security and be like 'Being stunned has negative utility and hampers an antags round, so therefore we're removing stunbatons and security will have to just deal with it until somebody dreams up a new feature, have fun fist fighting guys with energy swords in the hallways!'

Except the AI doesn't even get to fist fight in the halls. Just gets to watch everyone die and actively cannot participate in that in any way, despite its primary mission being centered around protecting and serving human lives in most cases.

[Chada1]

Spoiler

5 hours ago, armrha said:

I don't think I understand this philosophy of anything that hampers the antag in any way 'negatively affects the round'. In your opinion, is a good round of SS13 just any one that the antag breezes through its objectives, doesn't have to make any special plans, and succeeds without any hassle? 

It seems like you view a door being bolted shut as something boring to have happen, while like a security officer shooting at you is interesting? I don't get why, both are challenges designed to be overcame within the game.  AI tracking can be stymied with disguises and antag gear, and how long does a bolted door really slow down a skilled player? If they already figured out the wires, and have tools handy, which they should, it's a few seconds. Screwdriver, cut AI wire, pulse bolts, screwdriver. 

Just reading about these changes makes me feel bad for AI players. I love playing AI on other servers, but I don't think I've ever played it here, as it already was pretty nerfed. Bolting people in is a proactive and fun thing to do as an AI - and as mentioned a good player incorporating AI into their plans, judging attentiveness and making contingencies is all part of being a traitor. But I guess maybe that doesn't apply here? I don't know, it seems like most changes seem to revolve around 'make things easier and easier for antags, and place more restrictions or remove things from everyone else, because SS13 is a game where antags should have fun'.

 

It also seems really callous to reduce the AI to a pAI with a fancy room to sit in and watch its humans die helplessly with the promise of 'we'll add more, better features later, kthxbye!' Like, why make AI players suffer in the interim if you are planning on adding some stuff? Add the stuff then remove the stuff it's replacing. You wouldn't stun batons and stun pistols from security and be like 'Being stunned has negative utility and hampers an antags round, so therefore we're removing stunbatons and security will have to just deal with it until somebody dreams up a new feature, have fun fist fighting guys with energy swords in the hallways!'

Except the AI doesn't even get to fist fight in the halls. Just gets to watch everyone die and actively cannot participate in that in any way, despite its primary mission being centered around protecting and serving human lives in most cases.

 

I'll go by your paragraph 1 by 1, and I can see why you don't understand the methodology around doing this.

Paragraph 1: It's not that anything that stifles the Antag is negative for the round, it's specifically that the AI/'borgs (The 'borgs less so) stifling the Antag in the ways they have available at the moment (Bolting particularly) are wholly negative for the round. It isn't fun for anyone, barely even the Security responding to it, to have the Antag bolted into a room by the AI/'borgs, it's basically just. 'Ok, the antag for this round is dealt with, time to roleplay as if it were extended.' This isn't a good thing and does nothing p. much aside from inhibit the Antag from driving a narrative in the round (Which is to everyones benefit, including Security, they want an interesting round, not a 'I have the Antag dealt with before I even get to fight them' round.)

Paragraph 2-3: Read paragraph 1, IT IS something boring to happen. And the logic behind the Antag having to build their entire round around dealing with the AI is nuts, we don't have that expectation with any other role. Imagine if we just said 'To have a full, engaging round, where you drive a narrative for the entire servers' playerbase, you have to deal with the Warden immediately, or he'll bolt you in from the brig and alert Security instantly where you are so they can kill you.', there is no other role like that in the entire game, there is just the AI. The Traitor has to deal with Security as a whole, no specific role in Security, and yet it has to drop everything it's doing to deal with the AI or have their round completely derailed. Plus, SS13 isn't a game where Antags have fun, Antags not getting instantly shut down by a specific role is exactly why everyone else will have fun. (And this only applies to the AI, literally nothing else, the AI is the only thing in the game that can do this.)

Paragraph 4-5: When the cost-benefit analysis is this extreme and bolting is being actively abused to hunt Antags rather than protect/serve crew (Hell, Security literally will just hound the AI to get them to follow and bolt Antags/suspects in everywhere, it's horrible) then yes, it is better to remove a thing and then add stuff to make the role more engaged at a later time. This is one of the cases where you should remove a thing ASAP and then replace it at a later time because it's just that negative for the game.

Closure: It's just true that bolting negatively impacts rounds. The idea that the Antag should have to build its entire round around countering a single role is absurd, imagine if we applied that standard to any other role in the game? It's actively detrimental to how they can approach the Station/crew. And the AI still gets plenty of abilities to serve/protect, they just can't bolt Antags in anymore. And that's for the better, in literally every single way. Unless bolting Antags is literally what you want to do.

Also! Other servers doing a thing doesn't mean it's positive for the game.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Chada1

[Zyrus]

4 hours ago, Chada1 said:

  Hide contents

 

And the logic behind the Antag having to build their entire round around dealing with the AI is nuts

By this logic, having to plan around security actively hunting down the antag is nuts, and they have far more power to actively handle the situation with guns and armor. Any knowledgable player antag will be able to unbolt doors quickly.

 

All this is, is an excuse to nerf AIs.

[Chada1]

19 minutes ago, Zyrus said:

By this logic, having to plan around security actively hunting down the antag is nuts, and they have far more power to actively handle the situation with guns and armor. Any knowledgable player antag will be able to unbolt doors quickly.

 

All this is, is an excuse to nerf AIs.

No it isn't and I explained why if it had actually been read. No security role has the ability to do the things the AI does, you plan against the entire Security Department (No role within it in particular), meanwhile you plan against the singular AI (Not even the 'borgs! You can treat the 'borgs just like Security in this sense, and no other role on the Station in the same way.). That's ridiculous. The AI literally derails your entire round, if you don't plan for it exclusively you CAN AND WILL be shut down in the majority of rounds.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Chada1