Stationbound nerfs

[Zyrus]

1 minute ago, Chada1 said:

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, meanwhile you plan against the singular AI (Not even the 'borgs! You can treat the 'borgs just like Security in this sense). That's ridiculous.

Can't agree, at all. Bolting is not nearly as game ending as a security force with weapons on the warpath. It's ridiculous you think otherwise.

[NerdyVampire]

Playing as BUDDY I'd like to voice my opinion as well. I am disappointed that this has become a discussion of mechanics, when the role have always been a matter of the player itself. Good AI players can really help rounds along for both the antags and the non-antags. I feel that this is us giving up on cultivating those players, and simply removing a useful and realistic mechanic in the AIs arsenal.

I have no desire to keep electrification in any capacity. Feel free to chug it. Not even that good for antag, bad manners to use it for everything else.

I do not like the idea of removing bolting completely. I could accept it not being a hotkey, or being a hotkey and having a delay, but removing it as a whole makes no sense to me. It's a responsibility just like everything else about the AI,  if we can't trust the player with this, then there is no reason to trust them in this role at all. All it takes is for us to agree that the AI as a role has a secondary objective besides obeying its laws; serving the story, and encourage its players to be a little more lenient with antags and the gimmicks they employ for the benefit of the story.

[Chada1]

22 minutes ago, NerdyVampire said:

I do not like the idea of removing bolting completely. I could accept it not being a hotkey, or being a hotkey and having a delay, but removing it as a whole makes no sense to me. It's a responsibility just like everything else about the AI,  if we can't trust the player with this, then there is no reason to trust them in this role at all. All it takes is for us to agree that the AI as a role has a secondary objective besides obeying its laws; serving the story, and encourage its players to be a little more lenient with antags and the gimmicks they employ for the benefit of the story.

Yes I voiced this as well and requested the role be put behind a whitelist -- Specifically Command, which places a lot of responsibility on the whitelistee -- But it was v. much shut down, this is option #2, and I also believe this feature doesn't add any value to the role that pulling fire alarms doesn't also, tho.

I don't think 'borg/AI need this feature to serve/protect the crew, I seriously think it is ONLY used to hunt antags. There are few other reasons you can't use other things for. I think the only one brought up to me thus far is opening an airlock to let air in. That's it.

And so long as this feature exists, Security/Command will request it to be used, and the AI can't refuse.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Chada1

[NerdyVampire]

1 minute ago, Chada1 said:

Yes I voiced this as well and requested the role be put behind a whitelist -- Specifically Command, which places a lot of responsibility on the whitelistee -- But it was v. much shut down, this is option #2, and I also believe this feature doesn't add any value to the role that pulling fire alarms doesn't also, tho.

Other than being a more subtle, versatile and direct solution to the various issues, that doesn't blare in the ears of the crew. I really don't want to see a future where fire alarms are constantly being pulled when a bolted door would have been more appropriate. If I find a spider behind an airlock, I want to secure that specific airlock, not having to alt+click until the emergency shutter pops up, or fire alarm the whole area to the nuisance of crew that might be on the safe side already.

[Chada1]

5 minutes ago, NerdyVampire said:

Other than being a more subtle, versatile and direct solution to the various issues, that doesn't blare in the ears of the crew. I really don't want to see a future where fire alarms are constantly being pulled when a bolted door would have been more appropriate. If I find a spider behind an airlock, I want to secure that specific airlock, not having to alt+click until the emergency shutter pops up, or fire alarm the whole area to the nuisance of crew that might be on the safe side already.

If there's a direct threat to crew in the room, there is no reason you should be trying to be subtle, tho. You should be completely fine with it blaring in the face of crew in that situation. Bolting is negative to the game because it enables you to be subtle (And v. aggressive) about it instead of direct (And not v. aggressive), that's not a good thing.

Hence why it's used nearly ONLY to hunt antags. And constantly requested by Security/Command, that's what makes it so terrible.

And remember again -- If it's being requested by Command/Security, it doesn't matter how responsible the AI player is, if they're following their laws. They have to bolt.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Chada1

[NerdyVampire]

1 minute ago, Chada1 said:

If there's a direct threat to crew in the room, there is no reason you should be trying to be subtle, tho. You should be completely fine with it blaring in the face of crew in that situation. Bolting is negative to the game because it enables you to be subtle (And v. aggressive) about it instead of direct (And not v. aggressive), that's not a good thing.

And I'm fine with it being delayed or removed from the hotkey selection, but why wouldn't NT give AIs control to the bolts? If they are misused against weaker antagonists, then that's a player issue and it should be dealt with by teaching, not through removal.

[Chada1]

Just now, NerdyVampire said:

And I'm fine with it being delayed or removed from the hotkey selection, but why wouldn't NT give AIs control to the bolts? If they are misused against weaker antagonists, then that's a player issue and it should be dealt with by teaching, not through removal.

You can't deal with that as a player issue because if Command/Security request you to bolt you can't refuse them except in extremely unique situations. It is literally out of the players control at that point.

AIs could be refused control to the bolts for whatever various lore reason, including the extreme large presence of Crew who don't trust Synthetics, like the Skrell or Dominians, this isn't really a lore question tho, so much as a gameplay one.

[NerdyVampire]

1 minute ago, Chada1 said:

You can't deal with that as a player issue because if Command/Security request you to bolt you can't refuse them except in extremely unique situations. It is literally out of the players control at that point.

AIs could be refused control to the bolts for whatever various lore reason, including the extreme large presence of Crew who don't trust Synthetics, like the Skrell or Dominians, this isn't really a lore question tho, so much as a gameplay one.

Then that's the time for you as a player to prioritize the story and artificially delay response. I do it all the time when I notice a gimmick brewing, and it's a necessity to ensure that the gimmick gets rolling at all. This is a skill that AI players should learn anyway, and it goes well in hand with learning to handle the responsibility of bolts. I'd rather weed out the players that can't do this, because not being able to bolt wont stop these players from ruining gimmicks.

[Chada1]

2 minutes ago, NerdyVampire said:

Then that's the time for you as a player to prioritize the story and artificially delay response. I do it all the time when I notice a gimmick brewing, and it's a necessity to ensure that the gimmick gets rolling at all. This is a skill that AI players should learn anyway, and it goes well in hand with learning to handle the responsibility of bolts. I'd rather weed out the players that can't do this, because not being able to bolt wont stop these players from ruining gimmicks.

I like this sentiment a whole lot but it can't ever be done if we don't whitelist the role, no whitelist = no this. This is p. much damage control that might prevent this from happening. It may be a solution that disincentivises hunting antags to the point that it doesn't actually happen.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Chada1

[Snakebittenn]

3 minutes ago, NerdyVampire said:

Then that's the time for you as a player to prioritize the story and artificially delay response. I do it all the time when I notice a gimmick brewing, and it's a necessity to ensure that the gimmick gets rolling at all. This is a skill that AI players should learn anyway, and it goes well in hand with learning to handle the responsibility of bolts. I'd rather weed out the players that can't do this, because not being able to bolt wont stop these players from ruining gimmicks.

The player being generous is not a way to balance a mechanic/keep it in check.

[Chada1]

I'll note I'd be open to the bolt delay vs removal IF WE WHITELISTED THE ROLE but it would still be a problem for 'borgs who wouldn't be whitelisted, just much more reduced.

And i'll remind, whitelisting was shot down, it's not likely to happen. this is option #2.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Chada1

[NerdyVampire]

14 minutes ago, ParadoxSpace said:

The player being generous is not a way to balance a mechanic/keep it in check.

It's a mechanic that has been there for years, it only requires balancing when problem players misuse it, just like xenobotany, just like telescience, just like virology, just like about all interesting mechanics we have had. We have a page filled with guidelines to how one should play AI and if players neglect to read it, then that's an issue on their part which should be nudged by an admin. It is a terrible loss to me when we remove mechanics because we don't trust our players. We even have an example on the page demonstrating how important it is to benefit the antag once in a while.
 

12 minutes ago, Chada1 said:

I'll note I'd be open to the bolt delay vs removal IF WE WHITELISTED THE ROLE but it would still be a problem for 'borgs who wouldn't be whitelisted, just much more reduced.

bolt delay vs removal or hot-key removal are the only acceptable alternatives to removal, with or without whitelist in my mind. At the very least it's a swallowable compromise we could try to see if worked, before making a final decision either way.

edit: and I totally agree that it should be whitelisted on principle. It is not a role for new players.

Edited May 25, 2020 by NerdyVampire

[Chada1]

3 minutes ago, NerdyVampire said:

bolt delay vs removal or hot-key removal are the only acceptable alternatives to removal, with or without whitelist in my mind. At the very least it's a swallowable compromise we could try to see if worked, before making a final decision either way.

I'm sorry but even as a 'borg player I just don't agree with this, because even with the delay, the culture shift where Command/Security would stop requesting the bolting of Antags/etc wouldn't happen.

Not to mention we'd still have the players who want to hunt the Antags and look for excuses/wait for reasons to do so, and only make them more inefficient, while bolting removal makes them near actually unable to hunt Antags by themselves, the worst they can do is tell Security where they are.

(Which is being addressed as we speak)

I v. much like your sentiment but for it to happen we need a whitelist. 

Edited May 25, 2020 by Chada1

[NerdyVampire]

2 minutes ago, Chada1 said:

I'm sorry but even as a 'borg player I just don't agree with this, because even with the delay, the culture shift where Command/Security would stop requesting the bolting of Antags/etc wouldn't happen. Not to mention we'd still have the players who want to hunt the Antags and look for excuses/wait for reasons to do so, and only make them more inefficient, while bolting removal makes them near actually unable to hunt Antags by themselves, the worst they can do is tell Security where they are.

How do you know it wont happen? Once the ISD/Command learns that it is ineffective to ask the AI/stationbound to use bolting aggressively, they will learn not to ask for it, unless it's part of a prepared ambush which is reasonable.

[Chada1]

4 minutes ago, NerdyVampire said:

How do you know it wont happen? Once the ISD/Command learns that it is ineffective to ask the AI/stationbound to use bolting aggressively, they will learn not to ask for it, unless it's part of a prepared ambush which is reasonable.

Because it's the culture rn, and for a cultural shift you need either gradual adjustment (Which won't happen while the feature is still here in relatively the same shape) or abrupt removal. Just there being the ability for it to happen will end up with those who request it rn, continuing to request it. Even if it is ineffective, it would take a long time for the shift you're saying there to happen. A LOOONG time.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Chada1

[MattAtlas]

3 hours ago, NerdyVampire said:

Playing as BUDDY I'd like to voice my opinion as well. I am disappointed that this has become a discussion of mechanics, when the role have always been a matter of the player itself. Good AI players can really help rounds along for both the antags and the non-antags. I feel that this is us giving up on cultivating those players, and simply removing a useful and realistic mechanic in the AIs arsenal.

Here is the problem:

1) People say it's a player issue.

2) It's not a player issue, because the role forces you into validhunting because of laws. This is what the role is MADE to do, hunt antags by bolting them in. There is no way around this.

3) Now that we know the AI itself is the problem, we can either remove it or change it.

4) The removal poll was a no, nobody wants to rework it, so this is the only solution left.

 

[Hesphos]

Its been a day since the nerf now I think. I'm giving it some more time and to sneak in an AI round instead of a Cyborg round to see how this nerf feels. At the moment I'm still not happy about it but that might change? Probably not.

 

I wasn't part of the poll because I didn't know it existed. But it seems like that since the poll ''lost'' its goal of getting the AI removed it's now being used as ammunition to nerf the AI until its no longer fun or useful because for some reason thats the only solution left? Why? It seems like a minority is trying to push for this and because they lost their poll they are still trying to somehow force their will through.

 

How about we start another poll? That asks if we should nerf the AI yes or no? If the poll results are that we should nerf it then we can look at ways of doing so. If it says to not do so, well. I mean. That's it then isn't it?

 

 

[Skull132]

37 minutes ago, Hesphos said:

How about we start another poll? That asks if we should nerf the AI yes or no? If the poll results are that we should nerf it then we can look at ways of doing so. If it says to not do so, well. I mean. That's it then isn't it?

And if the answer is "Yes", then we should probably start another poll to determine in which way the AI can be nerfed, yes?

[MattAtlas]

36 minutes ago, Hesphos said:

I wasn't part of the poll because I didn't know it existed. But it seems like that since the poll ''lost'' its goal of getting the AI removed it's now being used as ammunition to nerf the AI until its no longer fun or useful because for some reason thats the only solution left? Why? It seems like a minority is trying to push for this and because they lost their poll they are still trying to somehow force their will through.

This sentence is mostly baseless conjecture that's pretty demeaning to the people who've made said PRs and the people who agreed with said nerfs. Not the best way to get your points across, but I do understand what you're trying to say. Its just not the case. There's definitely a problem with the AI and this server isn't really the only example of it being problematic, because it is everywhere where a modicum of RP is expected from antags. The only way to fix this is to directly nerf its ability to inhibit them. There's not much else you can do without asking a person for a complete rework, which is unfeasible.

[Hesphos]

24 minutes ago, Skull132 said:

And if the answer is "Yes", then we should probably start another poll to determine in which way the AI can be nerfed, yes?

I mean... I love the smell of a direct democracy in the morning. But I think we should first start a poll about our current polling system. Are these polls binding or just advise? What are polls even? :smugclownface:

 

25 minutes ago, MattAtlas said:

This sentence is mostly baseless conjecture that's pretty demeaning to the people who've made said PRs and the people who agreed with said nerfs. Not the best way to get your points across, but I do understand what you're trying to say. Its just not the case. There's definitely a problem with the AI and this server isn't really the only example of it being problematic, because it is everywhere where a modicum of RP is expected from antags. The only way to fix this is to directly nerf its ability to inhibit them. There's not much else you can do without asking a person for a complete rework, which is unfeasible.

I don't want to sound like Cathy Newman here but you are saying that the poll wasn't made by a person that wanted to get rid of the AI? The goal of the person making the original poll to ask about the AI removal was to have the AI removed because they thought it was the best thing for the server no doubt. Which is fine there isn't anything wrong with that, but to say otherwise and that's its baseless conjecture and demeaning is just silly.

I'm just trying to paint a picture here that I personally think that these AI nerfs are a bad thing. Lets take the robotics rework on mechs. Some things were removed but those same features were changed so we have a more interesting and modular mech system.

It feels to me that these AI changes are just simply taking out mechanics and then adding mechanics that are unrelated to eachother and infact make the core problem that the pro nerfers feel is a thing maybe even worse by giving the AI a mech to validhunt in.

I rather have to deal with bolted doors then a giant mech stomping me down. I will try to think up some ways that aren't reliant on alot of work to implement that hopefully makes sense to the supporters and opponents of the nerf. No sense in barking about changes without coming up with solutions myself.

 

[Chada1]

3 hours ago, Hesphos said:

It feels to me that these AI changes are just simply taking out mechanics and then adding mechanics that are unrelated to eachother and infact make the core problem that the pro nerfers feel is a thing maybe even worse by giving the AI a mech to validhunt in.

I rather have to deal with bolted doors then a giant mech stomping me down. I will try to think up some ways that aren't reliant on alot of work to implement that hopefully makes sense to the supporters and opponents of the nerf. No sense in barking about changes without coming up with solutions myself.

The issue is the AI validhunting as an AI. Even figuritively if it did validhunt with a mech, it would actually be weaker at validhunting than even a 'borg. That's the thing, it's all around better of a feature in this than bolting, bolting is objectively harmful to the game because it's utilized almost exclusively to target Antagonists, that's why it's being removed. You can use a mech for any number of other things, bolting? No. And validhunting with a mech is a sure fire way to get it destroyed.

Edited May 25, 2020 by Chada1

[Hesphos]

1 minute ago, Chada1 said:

The issue is the AI validhunting as an AI. Even figuritively if it did validhunt with a mech, it would actually be weaker at validhunting than even a 'borg. That's the thing, it's all around better of a feature than bolting, bolt is objectively harmful to the game, that's why it's being removed.

I guess we can agree to disagree then.

[Chada1]

Just now, Hesphos said:

I guess we can agree to disagree then.

? but do note I edited my message a little which might make it a little more agreeable.

[Zyrus]

6 hours ago, Chada1 said:

because it's utilized almost exclusively to target Antagonists

This is bullshit, and I can't believe you're still trying to peddle this opinion as fact.

Bolting is useful for all manner of things. Don't pretend AI players abuse this as a matter of course. It's insulting.

[Chada1]

39 minutes ago, Zyrus said:

This is bullshit, and I can't believe you're still trying to peddle this opinion as fact.

Bolting is useful for all manner of things. Don't pretend AI players abuse this as a matter of course. It's insulting.

AI players don't have a CHOICE. They either have to artificially delay requests for bolting or they target Antagonists. You can use a Fire Alarm for actually near anything else that doesn't involve Antagonists.