Lady_of_Ravens Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 I'm sure I don't need to explain how a poorly played AI can fuck up a round, so I'll skip that part. My understanding of why we haven't done this sooner is that it kinda sucks to have a round with no AI. Lately, however, I've noticed that we have no shortage of people eager to take on that role... enough so, I think, that some quality control would very much be in order. Most of the serious AI players are either already whitelisted or wouldn't have any trouble getting whitelisted, so I don't see much of a downside for current players. I'm suggesting adding it to the command whitelist rather than as it's own thing both to reduce admin overhead, and because there's enough overlap in degrees and types of responsibility that it makes sense. And while this may not solve the bad-AI problem, it should at least reduce the rate at which it occurs.
LordFowl Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 I don't think the AI's responsibilities merit the arduous and lengthy command whitelist process. They are really very different roles, even though they do have an overlap mechanically speaking. The primary reason is because the AI has a stringent set of laws that make it very easy to separate the very bad players from the players who can at the very least understand their laws. Beyond following these laws, an AI doesn't really have much responsibility, although there are AIs that go above and beyond said laws to become a truly useful asset.
Guest Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 Nah. It's really obvious when an AI is attempting to do something very griefy, and they get shut down before they even have a chance.
Lady_of_Ravens Posted October 16, 2015 Author Posted October 16, 2015 I don't think the AI's responsibilities merit the arduous and lengthy command whitelist process. They are really very different roles, even though they do have an overlap mechanically speaking. The primary reason is because the AI has a stringent set of laws that make it very easy to separate the very bad players from the players who can at the very least understand their laws. Beyond following these laws, an AI doesn't really have much responsibility, although there are AIs that go above and beyond said laws to become a truly useful asset. Well, first off, the laws aren't that simple. I know because I've seen them fucked up sooooo many times. Usually by borgs, 'cause that's what I see most often, but I've noticed AI characters doing it to. Stuff like going nuts when a cerw member is legally executed, or helping someone hide from the security all round. But, mostly, just being waaaay too casual about everything. It frustrates the hell out of me to see my favorite role, which can be done so well, done so poorly. And don't imagine for a moment AIs are short on responsibility. Besides the borgs, which can be quite the handful sometimes, the AI is the gatekeeper to pretty much everything on the station. Along with all the routine access requests, asking the AI is the standard way to get access to stuff like the captain's spare ID. This sort of thing may not require the people skills that most command staff kinda need, but the need for responsibility and good decision making remains. Nah. It's really obvious when an AI is attempting to do something very griefy, and they get shut down before they even have a chance. I'm not so worried about griefie AIs... I'm sure it happens, but not so terribly often. Rather, the problem is simply poor quality AIs who don't handle their laws that well, mess up people's immersion, and take up a slot that could be better filled by any of the several actually good AI players we have on this server.
Killerhurtz Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 It's an interesting thought. I'm ambivalent. On the one hand, it's true it would increase the quality of AIs (then again, I'm in no shortage of quality AI shackling with EmPrESS and Prometheus). On the other hand, being an AI on the Aurora, very early on (and by that I mean two rounds in) was one of the driving factors towards me staying because of how much fun I had. So I don't know.
Damarik Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 Not sure that a WhiteList is required, either. If anything, a better guide on how to play a proper, functioning, law-abiding AI would better serve. Access to better education is better than termination of access, yes?
Xelnagahunter Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 Not sure that a WhiteList is required, either. If anything, a better guide on how to play a proper, functioning, law-abiding AI would better serve. Access to better education is better than termination of access, yes? A good guide to AIs is always important. Things like understanding the laws and any order of importance (which has varied opinions). http://wiki.baystation12.net/Ai#What_the_AI_Has_To_Do <--- The BS12 wiki has this to say and is, currently, the only reference points we have for the AI.
Frances Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 The addition of stricter rules should be made to remedy a problem. Are bad AIs currently a problem, or do we want to add a whitelist simply because the factors limiting us from doing so are no longer a consideration? If the problem is really, really poor AIs, I'd suggest the rule be put under a timeban (like security) to give new players a chance to witness the role of an AI secondhand first.
Lady_of_Ravens Posted October 16, 2015 Author Posted October 16, 2015 It's an interesting thought. I'm ambivalent. On the one hand, it's true it would increase the quality of AIs (then again, I'm in no shortage of quality AI shackling with EmPrESS and Prometheus). On the other hand, being an AI on the Aurora, very early on (and by that I mean two rounds in) was one of the driving factors towards me staying because of how much fun I had. So I don't know. I've never needed to get whitelisted for any of the roles I've play, my understanding is that it's not especially difficult even for new players, provided they have a reasonable grasp of what's expected. And while I too started playing here as AI, I know I would've been happy to fill out a whitelist app if that's what it took to get my favorite position on a high-rp server. And at least when I lose the AI slot to Prometheus, or any of the several other good AIs out there, I can be spared the horror knowing I lost the chance to play AI that round just so someone else could do it badly. This makes a big difference. Not sure that a WhiteList is required, either. If anything, a better guide on how to play a proper, functioning, law-abiding AI would better serve. Access to better education is better than termination of access, yes? A guide is actually a great idea, I'm even working on one (sometimes, in a very piecemeal and half-assed way), but to have any hope of effecting change in a player, that player has to read it. Anyone who can't be bothered to check out the guides section of the forum (which, I'm assuming, is quite a few new players), won't benefit. However players who want to get whitelisted for a position have to visit our forums and, hopefully, learn some about our community and how we do things.
jackfractal Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 About the wiki guide, Jackboot has been after the lore team to update some of our guides rather that relying on the Baystation guides. I'll be looking to revise the guide over the next week or so, and I'll be looking for feedback. I like the Baystation guide but I think it's a bit dated and some of the advice is a bit strange (The whole thing with Dave stealing from the Captain has always felt off too me). I'm opposed to whitelisting the AI because I think it's an unnecessary burden on the staff. People have wildly different levels of ability, and none of us start off as experts. The AI is a tough role and it takes a while to get good at it. Part of the reason it's so tough is that 99% of the time, there's only one AI. There's no AI equivalent of the crusty old atmos tech teaching new players about pipe layouts because they're always alone. This is another situation where a mentor system might be useful.
Xelnagahunter Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 And at least when I lose the AI slot to Prometheus, or any of the several other good AIs out there, I can be spared the horror knowing I lost the chance to play AI that round just so someone else could do it badly. This makes a big difference. Not to be a dick, but from the first time I read this thread This thought has stuck out to me. Whitelisting becomes a way to help players have less competition for their favorite role, especially limited/one slot roles. I understand that the rest of your argument has valid concerns but it just feels like we are creating too much limitation. We are on this whitelist bandwagon now and it really does need to stop before someone just suggests a whitelist to join the server. =/ The answer isn't a whitelist, it's education and player assistance. See and AI do something odd or potentially problematic? Jump to the core and LOOC them. Be helpful, especially if you are just observing. This can put immense help on strained staff shoulders, even if you just get them to send an ahelp instead of doing something that will get them in trouble. I played AI early on in my time, it was a blast and is something I still enjoy when I feel like not playing a head of staff or a criminal. I ranted a bit and lost my focus. Sorry if this argument is scattered.
Recommended Posts