On Validhunting

[Tainavaa]

I'm telling you. Death by PowerPoint and lecture. Mandate it. It will be good training.

[Skull132]

I actually have some experience with this as well. I tend to play a round or two as a not-so-well-known character that does shady shit for IC reasons, but it's usually just: hm, this dude is being caught up on by Sec, I guess I'll warn him and give him a heads up. One round, I warned an antagonist of the fact that their attempted disguise was identified, and that sec was going after him. Through IC dealings, people find my PDA messages, and arrest me. Lo and behold: this Forensic Tech rolls around with "evidence" that I was involved in every single terrorist act to date, despite the timeframe of me actually getting on station proving the opposite. All of the evidence was pointing to the fact that someone with black gloves done did stuff.

Second round, different day, different shit: I find limbs on the cargo belt shenanigans. I know where they came from, due to previous IC happenings, I know whose they are, how they died, everything. So, I bring sec in, and here's what happens next: the detective rolls around, investigates the pile of garbage that the limbs are in, sees some empty cans of ramen. He thinks the following: "Huh, I saw a scientist eat a lot of ramen and flush them. I better go talk to them!" And off they go! But here's the kicker: while he was doing that, I was literally pleading with him to listen to me for one second. Did he listen? Nope. I even taunted him on general while he was trying to chase down a scientist, and he didn't listen. The saving grace of the situation was one officer out of 3, who actually listened to my story and dealt with the investigation properly. Everyone else was literally useless forever.

And I've seen this as a semi-constant standard for my ghosting period as well. Which is, unfortunate. Like, okay, being blunt: stupidity is not something that we can outright ban for. Or, at least, not that people would approve of. But stupidity in a position of responsibility? Yeah, I'm for banning that. But the curious thing is that not a lot of adminhelps end up noting that issue. Yes, we do get them whenever sec gets waaay too overzealous on something like a wizard round, at which point our usual MO is: if first offence, warning; if second offence, sec ban (and we usually follow through with this).

I'm also curious as to how this problem could be identified, beyond holding massive frackars in the complaints thread, where everyone throws the fucking real life laws around like it adds to the size of their imaginary e-dick and suddenly gives them justification to be a dicklord.

EDIT 2: And I would prefer we not push this to the point where Sec is violated to the point where they just sit the in the corner and cry, meagerly waving their batons infront of the antags faces. That is to say: any action should be conducted with them remaining a legitimate threat to an antagonist. So, while I would prefer the idiocity and baseless arrests to be thinned, I still want to keep around the, "Hey, we can still fuck your face up if you go full retard here!" bit (that is to say: keep the game legitimately balanced, instead of just having antags rule them all because of bullshit meta protection. Good sec play should also be rewarded, and if you fuck up your antag-bits and a good sec officer catches you, then guess what, you done fucked up).

((One sneeki-breeki idea: activate the player age requirement, and see how that changes things. It'll thin out the present security roster by a mile, I think, and do other fun shit there as well.))

[Tainavaa]

I'm still pushing for the lecture idea, Skull.

[Skull132]

If you get folks to execute, then execute. I can provide assistance as required.

[Jakers457]

Second round, different day, different shit: I find limbs on the cargo belt shenanigans. I know where they came from, due to previous IC happenings, I know whose they are, how they died, everything. So, I bring sec in, and here's what happens next: the detective rolls around, investigates the pile of garbage that the limbs are in, sees some empty cans of ramen.

 

My bad, I decided that we had no reason to keep the limbs... and decided they should go to the crusher.

[Skull132]

Second round, different day, different shit: I find limbs on the cargo belt shenanigans. I know where they came from, due to previous IC happenings, I know whose they are, how they died, everything. So, I bring sec in, and here's what happens next: the detective rolls around, investigates the pile of garbage that the limbs are in, sees some empty cans of ramen.

 

My bad, I decided that we had no reason to keep the limbs... and decided they should go to the crusher.

 

Well, no, that's not the issue. The issue is the fact that the detective chose not to listen to an witness who was willing, even poised, to offer information regarding the incident.

[Jakers457]

Perhaps I'll go Detective sometime and redeem the job.

[Jamini]

A few minor personal notes on a few instances brought up here.

 

There's certain people who I will absolutely refuse to play as any ind of antag AI when they're online, for the sole reason of validhunting /and/ powergaming by these players. I had a round a few days back where I was playing AI. I wasn't even an antag. Said AI, Kunai, has quirks, errors, and glitches from time to time. had to go AFK for a bit, so I decided to post up the announcements like I usually do saying there was a fatal error and it had to shut down for a time. I came back to find my core open, and that I'd been carded by the chief engineer. I don't think anything was event actually /said/ prior to my being carded.

It really needs to be handled and toned down.

 

I was the chief engineer in question here. To clear up a few things.

1. The AI is joint responsibility between the CE and RD. If it is acting unusual, quirky, or potentially dangerous they are expected to investigate it assuming they have no major objections from command/the captain.

2. You, as you said, were playing a notably unreliable and quirky AI. To the point where the captain/command as a whole were growing concerned. When you messaged the "Hard fault" line over public communications, regardless of your OOC intentions, there was a request to look Kunai over command. I did indeed bring the subject up to command, and they agreed it would be wise to check you as a precaution.

3. Like any potentially subverted, malfunctioning, or dangerous AI. Your integrity was checked. As you had left your turrets off and your core open a law check was performed as well while Nasir was checking for any physical access to your core while he was there.

4. You were not an antag (and I knew that OOCly before going in. Frakly, I don't /use/ the main upload if Nasir has any reason to suspect he is going to get shot by the GGNORE turrets.). That is simply how one checks up on AI's that may have problems. I had full intention of putting you back once I was done checking things over well enough to satisfy the rest of command.

To be really frank. If you want to play a questionable or slightly quirky character/AI/borg that is perfectly fine. But do not complain when command bring such things into question. You in particular have little ground to stand on as Kunai, as it routinely checks employment records against the NT finances document and other such things. If you report a fault, you should expect someone to at the very least check up on you. (Had you not went SSD, Nasir probably would have politely asked to card you to check on your laws.)

 

I actually have some experience with this as well. I tend to play a round or two as a not-so-well-known character that does shady shit for IC reasons, but it's usually just: hm, this dude is being caught up on by Sec, I guess I'll warn him and give him a heads up. One round, I warned an antagonist of the fact that their attempted disguise was identified, and that sec was going after him. Through IC dealings, people find my PDA messages, and arrest me. Lo and behold: this Forensic Tech rolls around with "evidence" that I was involved in every single terrorist act to date, despite the timeframe of me actually getting on station proving the opposite. All of the evidence was pointing to the fact that someone with black gloves done did stuff.

 

I do apologize for that. I was also the one that caught your messages accidentally. Unfortunately, "Terrorist Collaboration" is pretty much textbook what you did. I can't speak for how security treated you, but I did have them detain your engineer on those grounds and did have enough evidence to back up the claims.

I was quite frustrated and surprised when I found out that both engineers I was working with were helping the Quartermaster (His ploy was interesting, but considering he was trying to frame a non-existant miner... nobody was really buying his story.)

I will admit I was a little hurt when I found out that my warning to the rest of the engineering team resulted in a compromised security response. Since when people do that it does tend to weaken my own stance ... well towards this topic exactly. It's harder to justify keeping your own department in the loop when one or more members within it start giving out information security generally doesn't give out.

 

---

---

 

I do feel security hunting for valid briggings and kills is a little excessive. I've had some interesting stories of my own (Such as, as a wizard, having /all/ of security trying to kill/detain me with tasers out when I'm doing nothing more than Magic Missiling them for trying to tase me in the first place) I'm also not saying I am perfect (though I do try, daily, to improve my own play in all aspects).

As a whole, we need to step back on both sides of the spectrum. Crew need to give antags more breathing room and suspension of disbelief, and antags need to be willing to give the crew a chance to play along or surrender. Both sides need to de-escalate if anything is to be done.

If I may, one of my favorite moments on Aurora.

---

---

 

In one of my first rounds on Aurora, I was playing as Atweeke in science. It was dead hour. I was alone, getting used to your new toys.

While I'm working, Old Red(Hawkins <3) runs up with a revolver. He targets me and orders me to the ground. As an unarmed civilian, I complied. I kept my mouth shut, as Edwin didn't want to die.

Old Red ties me up with some cable, takes my headset and ID+PDA, and tosses me in toxins. Giving a short damn apology. He then steals some research and leaves.

After uncuffing myself, I end up breaking the windows to toxins to get to an intercomm. And call out for help from the AI and security. My compliance not only saved my life, but it gave Old Red a good 10-15 minutes or so head start on sec.

I miss those days, sometimes. Perhaps both sides of the equation need to step back and try to bring that back a little?

---

---

Peace.

[jackfractal]

It's harder to justify keeping your own department in the loop when one or more members within it start giving out information security generally doesn't give out.

 

But isn't that a good thing?

I mean that non-sarcastically. I'd think it would be a good thing for people to spread sensitive information because it's interesting.

[Jamini]

It's harder to justify keeping your own department in the loop when one or more members within it start giving out information security generally doesn't give out.

 

But isn't that a good thing?

I mean that non-sarcastically. I'd think it would be a good thing for people to spread sensitive information because it's interesting.

 

Ultimately all it serves to do is keep people from sharing information and keeping non-command in the loop. Which is bad overall as it leads to more early CTs.

[EvilBrage]

[...]Then, I powergame and try to kill as many officers as possible, with no RP at all.

I have to say, I don't feel any guilt at all and I don't feel like I'm doing the wrong thing.

Security will not roleplay with antags. We've got countless threads, complaints, shitstorms and the like about Security not roleplaying with antags.

Based on my observations, for as long as I have played an antag, security will not fucking roleplay with antags. Like, seriously. You can whine about this on the forums as much as you'd like, but it isn't happening. Nope.

Forget whatever RP gimmick you might have had, unless it involves force gloves and a revolver. If you don't, you'll just end up being disappointed. It is far more fun to valid kill the whole security team and have them whine in LOOC about how you didn't let them get their greentext, than it is to get silently stuncuffed and thrown in the permabrig for trying to roleplay.

Should a HRP server be based around valid hunting? It definitely shouldn't be. However, valid hunting is what you're going to get, so you might as well get used to it.

 

You are part of the problem. This, as outlined above, is literally the problem.

You're not offering any solutions, but rather encouraging the perpetuation of the problem, saying we "might as well get used to it." Did you post this to validate your own actions, or to actually weigh in and help us figure out how to make the server a more enjoyable experience for everyone? I'm seriously curious about what would possibly lead you to think this was constructive in any way.

[Eliot Clef]

-snip-

 

You are part of the problem. This, as outlined above, is literally the problem.

You're not offering any solutions, but rather encouraging the perpetuation of the problem, saying we "might as well get used to it." Did you post this to validate your own actions, or to actually weigh in and help us figure out how to make the server a more enjoyable experience for everyone? I'm seriously curious about what would possibly lead you to think this was constructive in any way.

 

Yep. This kind of behavior causes a feedback loop that trains Security to not give people a whole lot of breathing room.

[Guest]

Nah, you guys just play to win.

Like, every time we had a thread where I was like "Guys stop playing to win so much" i'd get a response like "Well, an american policeman would play to win, so I am going to play to win too!" or something silly like that. If I tell you to quit playing to win so much again, all you're going to do is try to justify why you should be allowed to play to win, like you usually do.

Security always has an excuse as to why they can't give people a lot of breathing room, most of it boils down to "Roy Wyatt called my character a doodoo when I arrested him, once. He has been traumatized and torturing the prisoners ever since ;_;" or something ridiculous. I am sick of trying to solve a problem when the other side is only interested in perpetuating it. You want to win, you want to get greentext and call it a day. That's just it.

I am tired of being stunbatoned during a *me, or being lasered during a peaceful gimmick. If you want powergaming, I will respond with powergaming and if you consider the prospect of having your greentext target actually fighting back instead of trying to talk while you silently baton it so horrifying, then too bad - you are the one who perpetuated this behavior with your intolerable Antag hunting AIs and complete lack of sportsmanship. I am tired of having my antag rounds ruined by you, so I'm going to respond to powergame with powergame.

And, before anyone tries to say this- I don't care what a real policeman would do in whatever situation.

I really don't.

I guess you can tell me how a real policeman would do this sort of thing, but I wont really care because nobody here is a real policeman, and we don't have real policemen in game, okay?

Edited June 8, 2015 by Guest

[Skull132]

The thing is. I think we're at the point where it doesn't really matter who done started it. Natural evolution of sec and traitor MO simply ended with us up at this point: a dead loop. As such, any attempt to fix it should, ideally, encompass both sides. However, since security players are people who regularly populate their position, as opposed to traitors, who get picked once in a blue moon, it is easier and more practical to start from sec. The traitors should, then, notice the change and adjust accordingly.

[Eliot Clef]

Nah, you guys just play to win.

 

If you've decided that Security is just categorically awful players -- which you have, with the stated intention to simply kill the entire sec team whenever you can -- there's no real point in engaging you in any kind of prolonged discussion. I'm not inclined to deal with this kind of naked aggression very much, and I doubt there are a whole lot of people who are more willing than I am.

I've personally stopped using some Security tools (mainly cameras) specifically because it makes it too easy to catch antags unacceptably early if you use them right. I've also gone to talk to antags and immediately gotten fireballed in the face for my trouble.

Lately, I've actually had way more problems with non-antags than with antags, but that's another problem for other threads.

EDIT: I actually enjoy it when Haruspex roams around acting Overtly Weird/Irregular. Have people really pulled guns on you for this? Did you report it? Because that shit does need to be reported.

[Guest]

I've also gone to talk to antags and immediately gotten fireballed in the face for my trouble.

 

Then, consider why the alternative to these endless shitstorms I present may be a viable solution.

Things are simple, now. Security reacts to my slightest agression with their fully armed response; they want to take me out of the round and I want to take them out of the round. In this arrangement, there are no people breaking the rules as much as there are losers and winners.

There's no need for complaints that one side acted too fast and unsportsmanlike, or that RP of some sort was ruined, or that a brig sentence was too long. You've got two teams - antags and security, against each other - No obtuse convoluted rules of RP engagement, just clickspam gameplay and brief prayer to the RNGods before combat.

Now, what I describe here is the law of Low RP servers - may the most robust man live. I realize that implementing it on a HRP server is probably a poor decision, but I have had too much antag rounds ruined by security to care. RP can still occur between antagonists and the rest of the crew, just not between security and the antagonist.

This is a mutually beneficial agreement, the way I see it. Security gets their greentext, the antag gets their murderbone, both sides have a good fight and supposedly fun is generated somewhere in the exchange of redtext. Neither sides have to worry about complaints, reprecussions and whatnot.

A lovely all out melee between the two opposing 'factions'. Wouldn't that be fun? And I don't mean that in a sarcastic way. From my experience it seems obvious that the people who demand combat RP are either salty they lost, or a very small part of the community. Why not get rid of that salt and just have 2D spacemen murder each other in creative and visceral ways?

[Frances]

To reply to inverted, some roundtypes/scenarios are very difficult to make happen if security is constantly trying their best to murderbone you. Cult is fun with fighting, but Nuke tends to end with the 12:50 bloodbaths + bridge bombings that make everyone mad, wizard creates a lot of collateral for little RP, and regular autotraitors get BTFO by sec. Additionally, if being on sec essentially makes you a valid ganking target, I fear a lot of reasonable sec players will stop playing on sec, while those that are looking for combat at every turn will be further engaged to fuel this loop in a way that results in less and less RP. (Which is what you're saying you want to see happen, but there's a minimum of RP even around non-RP combat, and I'm afraid we're going to see sec officers who do not RP at all.)

I'm not saying non-RP combat doesn't have its place (RP combat is hard to make happen anyway), but there are a lot of situations which would be much more interesting if both parties made an effort to play along with each other for at least a short while.

[EvilBrage]

-snip-

 

So your "suggestion" is to be like every other server and strip the HRP from our title?

I'm beginning to wonder if this is the right server for you. You've categorized an entire group of players as "terrible" when I've seen some security players who actually (in my opinion) play along fairly well. Don't say "security" is terrible - point out the individual players and if there's a legitimate concern, that's something we can work with. You claim real life doesn't matter and that no one can speak out because they're not police officers (I'm a detention officer, so almost) like you'd rather just throw realism to the wind altogether. This very mindset is the problem we're having, and you're doing nothing but contributing to it by thinking about the game in terms of "winning" and "losing." Being an antagonist doesn't entitle you to free passes to carry out your plans, just like being security doesn't entitle you to be the OOC police of the server.

Sometimes, you will lose, regardless of job or antagonist status.

Sometimes, you will die, regardless of job or antagonist status.

Can you honestly not see that?

[Guest]

This is what Im talking about, and this is why all my posts in this thread have a peculiar aroma to them.

We're once again delving into "Let me tell you about the policemen!" and "Hey my sec officer doesnt do that".

In my eyes, this is just Antisec thread #724 in which people whine sec plays to win, and Sec rambles on and on about policemen.

There.

I literally described every argument on this subject we've had so far, and likely the ones we will have in the future.

Now, tell me. How is this thread going to be different? What productive solution to the presented problem will this thread bring? Do you intend to incite a positive change in the community using this thread and if so, how? Why should I pretend this thread has any purpose other than to be a vessel for mine and other people's salty loser tears, and security regulars' counter-tears and policeman related rants?

We've got three initial posts of people yelling at security, okay.

How does that help? Will those newbies come over here, look at this thread and go "Hey, we should stop being badcurity"? No. I honestly don't think they're going to do that.

This is a whine thread, and unless someone proposes an alternative to whining, our topics of discussion are going to be security playing to win and policemen, like they usually are.

[Frances]

This is a whine thread, and unless someone proposes an alternative to whining, our topics of discussion are going to be security playing to win and policemen, like they usually are.

I was hoping for people to begin suggesting solutions. You can either help us, or add to the whining and counter-whining. I'll let you decide which is more useful.

As for me, I try to play at least one round a day as HoS and make sure nobody on sec does anything too stupid. However, I believe the problem will only be solved when the general mindset of the department changes, and officers start to cover for each other, instead of having to rely on 1-2 reasonable players being around to keep everyone in check.

[Tainavaa]

I say we start employing drill sergeant heads of security to get those officers in line.

[Saintsbury]

I say we start employing drill sergeant heads of security to get those officers in line.

Drill Instructor - Sol Alliance Marine Corps. That's the Head of Security Aurora deserves.