Varuca security ban

[Filthyfrankster]

Coming from this post here: http://aurorastation.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=5276

The varuca are a newly discovered race, and since players are OBVIOUSLY showing IC signs of being little shitlers with having them maul their own kind over 'insulting' the hive all Charles Manson style.

Shamefur.

Since we already have them banned from command positions (For good reason.) Why would we trust them now to handle security onboard the station?

[incognitojesus]

I support this.

Vaurca were discovered within the past year, and I don't care what kind of exam you can take to make sure you're up to 'par' on qualifications, I doubt that you'd let them be 'representatives' on one of your most lucrative research stations. Also, with the players' current conduct as members of said species (in a security role), I'm not exactly so keen on the belief that the players can moderate themselves in this matter, considering how much chatter there's been about shitty ant-people.

I believe that from the start this should have been enforced. I understand that people want to play their new ant-mans in their favorite department, but contrary to what some believe, segregation breeds diversity. We don't need to have every species be equal, they shouldn't be.

[Gollee]

I'd say a high proportion of the Vaurca I have to deal with, baring a few of course, are playing as Unathi with extra stuff; I'd approve of this, or the removal of the whitelists of the ones who just murderise everything.

[Guest]

As one of the original advocates of Vaurca security, I've haven't changed my mind considering some points. I don't know the exact volume or intensity of Antcurity, which makes me think that the entire thing is overblown, and atop of that, I don't think all vaurca players should suffer because of few bad apples.

However, I've concluded that Vaurca Security are unseemly. Their behavior and the entire concept are unseemly. As a human being with normal, inborn reactions to things around me, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't want to put my safety into hands of an alien, cybernetic, insectoid monstrosity. So, from an IC perspective, I would rule it as bad idea from NTs side. NT should, like any sensible company, avoid blatantly bad ideas.

Edit: Sentence restructuring because heavy level autism-spasm.

[SilverTalismen]

It isn't fair to ban a entire species from security, It is like banning diona from medical because they move slowly, or unathi from science because the vast majority of them are warriors or honor obsessed. I made that thread to tell the vaurca players to change how they act, /not/ so someone can use it as a excuse to remove them entirely from a entire department

[Dreamix]

It isn't fair to ban a entire species from security, It is like banning diona from medical because they move slowly, or unathi from science because the vast majority of them are warriors or honor obsessed. I made that thread to tell the vaurca players to change how they act, /not/ so someone can use it as a excuse to remove them entirely from a entire department

It would be fair. It doesn't matter how players act, the lore matters, a Tajara can be 100% loyal and great and everything, but he won't be a captain, it's his Tajaran's lore. That's what makes the roleplaying enviroment seem alive, that races are not equal, that they're different, etc.

Job restrictions are a part of race's lore, just like it wouldn't be okay to disable job restrictions for every race because some of them are great leaders.

As I already stated in the other, other thread, +1.

[Guest Marlon Phoenix]

I always enjoy these things being a "ban, with exceptions" to allow expectation that you can be grandfather'd in.

However, the way Vaurca are being played we're seeing super fanatical loyalty to the hive and bizarre hostility to anything else. IE: "The hive is dumb ayy" gets your face caved in by the frothing bugsec.

Ban them but let them play as cadets, with the understanding that in the future we might give them IC overhauls to let them back in.

[Zundy]

I always enjoy these things being a "ban, with exceptions" to allow expectation that you can be grandfather'd in.

However, the way Vaurca are being played we're seeing super fanatical loyalty to the hive and bizarre hostility to anything else. IE: "The hive is dumb ayy" gets your face caved in by the frothing bugsec.

Ban them but let them play as cadets, with the understanding that in the future we might give them IC overhauls to let them back in.

 

This.

[Jboy2000000]

It isn't fair to ban a entire species from security, It is like banning diona from medical because they move slowly

Except we do, do that. Theres a reason you don't see Diona EMT's, or Security Officers. Because those are roles that just don't make sense for someone that walks so slowly would be in. I don't know where, but that's been specifically mentioned on the forums somewhere. Or OOC. I don't remember which.

[JKJudgeX]

I don't particularly enjoy the flavor or naming convention of the Vaurca at all, to be honest, but preferences aside, can someone with a good deal of experience playing as Vaurca (or anyone with knowledge actually) list the complete benefits and complete drawbacks of being a Vaurca?

I mean, I know there's a ban on head positions, and a pretty damned useful/powerful bite... and a few other things, but, can we get a well thought out pro/con list?

For RP/Lore purposes, I have to say Nanotrasen is getting a little bit loose with who it allows to enforce corporate regulations. How would you feel if you got pulled over for speeding tomorrow and the cop was a Russian or Japanese guy with a THICK accent who had been in the country less than a year? It'd be pretty strange, at the very least.

[Xelnagahunter]

I can see the argument for not banning them right away. NT was promised these things would do their jobs without hesitation and do them correctly. However! that has not been happening on our stations. I like to think players actions, especially cannon actions, should take a roll in our overall lore. So most of our ants are biting people for very little provocation, why not assume this is becoming a problem across all of Tau Ceti where NT stations are concerned? Then your big wigs go "Oh damn. They fucked us a bit." And begin the process of cleaning up (Read: Ban the fuckers from security outside of cadet).

Then the hive should come down on it's unbound harder and the bound should have a change in their behavior settings or whatever to start working on getting that trust back. It's an IC, lore based, way to punish users and give them mandatory behavior change compulsions and helps our cannon rounds make more sense than the Vaurca suddenly acting different from one shift to another.

As was said, maybe start a list of ants who prove themselves via cadetship and let those ants in particular become officers within a few weeks to a month. If we see a change in vaurca player behavior in that time, lift the ban all together.

[ChevalierMalFet]

I don't particularly enjoy the flavor or naming convention of the Vaurca at all, to be honest, but preferences aside, can someone with a good deal of experience playing as Vaurca (or anyone with knowledge actually) list the complete benefits and complete drawbacks of being a Vaurca?

I mean, I know there's a ban on head positions, and a pretty damned useful/powerful bite... and a few other things, but, can we get a well thought out pro/con list?

For RP/Lore purposes, I have to say Nanotrasen is getting a little bit loose with who it allows to enforce corporate regulations. How would you feel if you got pulled over for speeding tomorrow and the cop was a Russian or Japanese guy with a THICK accent who had been in the country less than a year? It'd be pretty strange, at the very least.

The absolute, number-1 advantage of playing a Vaurca is the immunity to kPh. Smart Vaurca players, like myself, dash immediately at the start of the round to get a gas mask and fill up their oxygen tanks - it's all they need in order to survive in the vacuum. Other than that, they have the increased brute resistance and the ability to bite, but I've never actually used that in a combat situation.

Their drawbacks are fourfold. First, they take double damage from fire, heat, and lasers - and what with lasers being security's main tool, that's a bit liability. Second, they're slow - not as slow as Diona, but still quite slow. Third, they can't use hardsuits or softsuits, meaning they can't armor themselves very well. Fourth and finally, they don't heal themselves - if they take even the slightest bit of brute damage, it's on them until somebody heals them with medicine.

Also, they are drawn back by the fact that the for their language doesn't work, and most headgear looks stupid on them.

I'm saddened by this, because one of my main characters is Vaurca security - mostly playing Warden, actually, that's Tlexa, and I feel like I always play as a very competent and professional security officer - but if it's the will of the group, then I'll go along with it.

[LordFowl]

This is a terrible idea, and it was to me a terrible idea when it was first posted, and in that interim nothing has changed. Station security is a general staff position. It holds no greater importance compared to any other role, and thus banning Vaurca only from security makes no sense, especially if you're masking your actions under the guise of IC considerations. Banning Vaurca from every role except for a select few makes sense ICly, but OoCly is unbearable and something I would not stand for. The pattern for race blacklists has always been abundantly clear; roles that already require a whitelist, and thus demand more tolerance and consideration from their holder, experience race blacklists. If security were to be a whitelisted role (Which is an idea I also oppose, coincidentally), then this decision would have merit. There can of course be implied blacklists. Someone brought up Dionaea being banned from EMT (Which is untrue), and while the reasoning for it makes sense, I could hop onto the server right now and roll a Dionaea EMT and be very surprised if anyone took administrative action against me.

Now, this thread diverges from the previous thread in one key circumstance; it uses SilverTalisman's official post as some sort of platform to present its idea. Ultimately, this is a ridiculous notion when you consider the following:

If you ban Vaurca from security roles and justify it as NanoTrasen recognizing that Vaurca are not suitable for security because there are shitty Vaurca players who play security poorly, then what you are really saying is that we should take IC actions based off of OoC failures. The failures of sub-par Vaurca players are not intrinsic to the Vaurca race, but rather their failure to roleplay the race properly, to take the cultural considerations to heart. IC punishment based off of OoC considerations is violating a core tenet of this server, and makes little sense once you realize the very important fact that shitty Vaurca players will be shitty Vaurca players no matter what role they are in. This thread marginalizes the fact that there are shitty Vaurca players in all roles, and really I'm inclined to believe there are more in engineering even than in security, from what I've seen.

IC punishment systems are all fine and good, and they give DOs something to do, and they make a comprehensive universe and all that. But at a certain point they cannot fix the core issue of a player. OoC failures require OoC administration efforts, not hair-brained schemes and IC contrivances to "punish" them 'damn bugs'. The whitelist system is ingenious because it gives us power over players; the power to strip their whitelist. It is time to start exerting that power. IC punishments and DO reports and company decisions no longer stand tall enough to conquer the problem. When Jamison Stamos was fired by the DOs, it did little to stop his player from creating Za'Akaix'Ghul Zo'ra.

I reiterate, in case that my previous words fell upon deaf ears: It is time to start stripping whitelists.

Altogether, while I can support some elements of this suggestion, in its current state I can give it little more than a very heavy '-1'.

[Guest]

Someone brought up Dionaea being banned from EMT (Which is untrue), and while the reasoning for it makes sense, I could hop onto the server right now and roll a Dionaea EMT and be very surprised if anyone took administrative action against me.

As a captain, during one round, I was informed that there was a wheelchair EMT. I reacted normally, but then I was instructed to contact an admin about the issue. I did not do it, but I was told to. While it may seem it's like comparing apples and oranges, I'm just stating that non-written rules and conventions are, at least loosely, suppose to be enforced by the staff. You may recive an admin PM as a Diona EMT if people start taking a mind to it.

 

Now, this thread diverges from the previous thread in one key circumstance; it uses SilverTalisman's official post as some sort of platform to present its idea. Ultimately, this is a ridiculous notion when you consider the following:

If you ban Vaurca from security roles and justify it as NanoTrasen recognizing that Vaurca are not suitable for security because there are shitty Vaurca players who play security poorly, then what you are really saying is that we should take IC actions based off of OoC failures. The failures of sub-par Vaurca players are not intrinsic to the Vaurca race, but rather their failure to roleplay the race properly, to take the cultural considerations to heart. IC punishment based off of OoC considerations is violating a core tenet of this server, and makes little sense once you realize the very important fact that shitty Vaurca players will be shitty Vaurca players no matter what role they are in. This thread marginalizes the fact that there are shitty Vaurca players in all roles, and really I'm inclined to believe there are more in engineering even than in security, from what I've seen.

I agree that stripping options from all Vaurca players because of few bad ones is a shit move. However, I am not one to beat around the bush. As a loredev, I think that Vaurca can hardly fit the profile of an ideal security officer. They cannot talk properly, have an alien mentality and psychology, are hideous. Simply put, completely alien. I don't think they are something most people - and NT as a result - would like to see in security. In this case, should Vaurca Security even be a thing if the loreteam keeps failing to justify their employment there? If you think the lore shouldn't matter in this case, that's fine as well.

And yes, please, if this ban doesn't happen, strip some whitelists already.[/i]

Edited February 26, 2016 by Guest

[UnknownMurder]

+1

I'm not too familiar with Vaurca but I had found two scenarios regarding Vaurca being an issue in Security which I was involved in. (I'm not disclosing personal character information)

Whilst an Officer, I had a Vaurca Officer in a Security Team with me. Vaurca's relation with other Researcher Vaurca of different hive has become a violent rivalry. While they were speaking in their bug language, I can tell that they're yelling and spouting at each other. The Vaurca Officer very aggressive to that Researcher Vaurca. Head of Security fired the Officer Vaurca, yet he is still at it with his attitude. Crew Transfer Shuttle docked the station. Then, ordered me to break them up. So, I went ahead and asked the Ex-Oficer Vaurca in cell at Crew Transfer Shuttle while advising Researcher Vaurca to go to a corner where he can't see him.

I met a different Vaurca Officer who said he completed Cadet Training in one year and suddenly became an Officer because he read so fast and is connected with hive mind of his own species/hive. For me, it just does seems to be a 'special exception'. I became the Interim Head of Security, I ordered the demotion of Vaurca due to being Head Loyalty and following Job Qualification. (Revolution Round)

With these two in mind, I wouldn't want to experience that RP with Vaurca in those manners again. I'm not saying the Vaurcas don't belong in Security, but I am saying that they should not be in Security. NanoTrasen knows relations between one hive and another. Either stripping whitelists or banning needs to happen here.

[Filthyfrankster]

If we're already barring bug people from being head of staff (Again for good reason), It won't seem hard for Nanotrasen to be just "Well if we can't trust these damn insectoids to manage crew, what makes us think we can trust them to GUARD people's lives?"

Think about it

[mirkoloio]

Okay. Let me just throw some counter-measures out here, aye?

First off: It is -untrue- that I am bugbiting people on every occasion. I bit a prisoner only -once- and was told not to afterwards. Done.

Second: The 'ZA' type Vaurca are raised into being warrios. To wage wars, protect, guard, whatever. Do you expect them to be hopping around, picking flowers and singing 'Kumbaya' with everyone they meet?

Third: There was literally Never done any 'groping' or the like with my Vaurca. And I will ask you to -stop accusations like this immediately and for all time- unless you can proove it. Thanky you, Bokaza. The only thing when 'touching' happened was when my Vaurca -touched someone's shoulder and afterwards bowed to them- to pay their respect to them. Since we don't know how Vaurca show people they respect that they do that. I chose this way as it seems quite fitting for an alien race.

[Guest]

What, I didn't say anything?

[Dreamix]

Second: The 'ZA' type Vaurca are raised into being warriors. To wage wars, protect, guard, whatever. Do you expect them to be hopping around, picking flowers and singing 'Kumbaya' with everyone they meet?

...Or you could just not hire them at all, and let them stay where they belong to, in their hives. NanoTrasen wouldn't want to have their security divisions filled with primitive, illiterate, 'raised into being warriors' bugs. You want your humans and skrells to feel safe and comfortable in their stations, and specie you only know for a year is exactly the opposite of it.

It's like if we needed more "warrior" and "honor-driven" species. It breaks immersions or something.

[LordFowl]

If we're already barring bug people from being head of staff (Again for good reason), It won't seem hard for Nanotrasen to be just "Well if we can't trust these damn insectoids to manage crew, what makes us think we can trust them to GUARD people's lives?"

Think about it

 

It also wouldn't be hard to say "If we can't trust these damn insectoids to manage crew, what makes us thing we can trust them to make sure our space station's engine doesn't EXPLODE/research WEAPONS and BOMBS/perform SURGERY on living crewmembers/cook us FOOD!!!"

This logic could've applied to any race when we had a lot more restrictive Head of Staff roles, not too long ago. But we never did that. Why in God's name would we start now? Because of a handful of rubbish Vaurca players? I think not.

[UnknownMurder]

Second: The 'ZA' type Vaurca are raised into being warriors. To wage wars, protect, guard, whatever. Do you expect them to be hopping around, picking flowers and singing 'Kumbaya' with everyone they meet?

...Or you could just not hire them at all, and let them stay where they belong to, in their hives. NanoTrasen wouldn't want to have their security divisions filled with primitive, illiterate, 'raised into being warriors' bugs. You want your humans and skrells to feel safe and comfortable in their stations, and specie you only know for a year is exactly the opposite of it.

It's like if we needed more "warrior" and "honor-driven" species. It breaks immersions or something.

 

They'll be perfect for substituting in human experiments... Am I right, guys? [Anti-Vaurca Experimentation Movement Intensifies]

[CampinKiller]

If we're already barring bug people from being head of staff (Again for good reason), It won't seem hard for Nanotrasen to be just "Well if we can't trust these damn insectoids to manage crew, what makes us think we can trust them to GUARD people's lives?"

Think about it

 

It also wouldn't be hard to say "If we can't trust these damn insectoids to manage crew, what makes us thing we can trust them to make sure our space station's engine doesn't EXPLODE/research WEAPONS and BOMBS/perform SURGERY on living crewmembers/cook us FOOD!!!"

This logic could've applied to any race when we had a lot more restrictive Head of Staff roles, not too long ago. But we never did that. Why in God's name would we start now? Because of a handful of rubbish Vaurca players? I think not.

 

You exaggerate greatly.

There's a major difference in not trusting a group of aliens who are acting retardedly and aggressively in Security roles, than ones who calmly contribute to research, or cook food.

[mirkoloio]

What, I didn't say anything?

 

I've got it on a screenshot. And others saw it. It too was reported. Just don't make things up like this again, Ever. Any lieing won't make shite better, too.

[LordFowl]

If we're already barring bug people from being head of staff (Again for good reason), It won't seem hard for Nanotrasen to be just "Well if we can't trust these damn insectoids to manage crew, what makes us think we can trust them to GUARD people's lives?"

Think about it

 

It also wouldn't be hard to say "If we can't trust these damn insectoids to manage crew, what makes us thing we can trust them to make sure our space station's engine doesn't EXPLODE/research WEAPONS and BOMBS/perform SURGERY on living crewmembers/cook us FOOD!!!"

This logic could've applied to any race when we had a lot more restrictive Head of Staff roles, not too long ago. But we never did that. Why in God's name would we start now? Because of a handful of rubbish Vaurca players? I think not.

 

You exaggerate greatly.

There's a major difference in not trusting a group of aliens who are acting retardedly and aggressively in Security roles, than ones who calmly contribute to research, or cook food.

 

I exaggerate little, and no more than those who want to see Vaurca banned from security, jumping from poorly constructed and excused IC platforms. People seem to fail to realize that the bad apple Vaurca players will act aggressive and retarded no matter what role they are in. Banning them from security won't make your problems go away. Also, if their aggressiveness was canon (Which it isn't) then what would stop them from being aggressive in science or other departments? The fallacious argument that Vaurca should be banned from security is a misdirection of our efforts, and is a gap in logic.

[CampinKiller]

Except some of these aggressive actions have happened on extended rounds, thereby making them canon, so it's not like NT doesn't know.

Also, saying that it isn't canon so it shouldn't be punished makes no sense. If Security starts executing people regularly, but only on non-extended rounds, then I guess we can't punish those people either.