[1 Dismissal] Remove the AI role

[Ron]

The AI is almost always a disruption to the flow of the round. Instantly spotting a kidnapping that would've developed into something larger, bolting the antags down with the click of two buttons, and acting as an unwanted intrusion in most channels who has no real ramifications for their actions because they are just a computer. I suggest the complete removal of the AI, malf gamemode, and AI chamber. Borgs can remain as they do not suffer from the same issues as the AI. I'm keeping this brief as a majority of people who've played as an antag or just played in general know how intrusive to the round the AI can be. And no, this isn't an April fools suggestion.

[Snakebittenn]

We did this on Baystation12, for two weeks. The only downside was a lack of door access. Otherwise, antaggery went much smoother without a gangster computer God to bolt people down at the slightest provocation.

I also advocate for the removal of combat borgs.

[Chada1]

I don't support outright removal, as it still removes a very large part of the Cyborg gameplay from the game, and basically destroys multiple gamemodes. (Malf AI, Paranoia, ETC) with very significant features and code backing.

What i'd suggest instead is to move AI to be a whitelisted role and to apply more standards to their roleplay and escalation.

But i'll make a different policy suggestion thread for that if this one is dismissed.

[Ron]

A two week trail period like bay did wouldn't be too extreme.

[Kaed]

Can we not have another Thread about how AI are meanie pants and ruin your gimmick because you weren't careful. I don't know the circumstances of this thread being made, but I'm going to Hazard a guess that it's a knee-jerk reaction to an AI messing up your round.

The station's huge and very hard to watch in its entirety, and there are ways to work around the AIs abilities other than removing them from the game.

-100

I wouldn't mind seeing them be whitelisted though, and put under stronger regulations to not be valid hunting extensions of security.

[Zundy]

I too agree with AI whitelists as poor AI's can damage a round and good AI's (which you'd hope a whitelist would create often) can enhance a round greatly imo.

[MO_oNyMan]

For:

- Ai is a fucky role for reasons specified in the suggestion itself

- Current situations makes it so that AI problems are extremely hard to be adressed ICly

- Removal of AI complements the lore, considering we have an entire race that was enslaved and nearly exterminated by an AI

- AI doesn't really do anything significant except for antag spotting and door opening

Against:

- AI is really useful on deadshifts where there are no command and something really needs to be done

- Access problems

- It's a shame that so many features designed for AIs get removed

- Gamemode erradication

All in all it's a pretty radical change and even though i'm not necessarily opposed to removing the AI as we know it, i would like to see something to replace the lost gamemode, slot and features with before i can side with the suggestion.

As for the whitelist solution, since AI is a singular role i'm afraid there's a decent chance it will just kill the slot. Besides AI being non-whitelisted and having access to command-level stuff is one of its most useful features gameplay-wise currently

[Ron]

Can we not have another Thread about how AI are meanie pants and ruin your gimmick because you weren't careful. I don't know the circumstances of this thread being made, but I'm going to Hazard a guess that it's a knee-jerk reaction to an AI messing up your round.

And now you look like an ass. Sorry bud, no AI disruption knee-jerk reaction here. Moving on.

[Ron]

Against:

- AI is really useful on deadshifts where there are no command and something really needs to be done

- Access problems

- It's a shame that so many features designed for AIs get removed

- Gamemode erradication

For the first one, there are many other options instead of needing an easy access AI to do things. You can fax things yourself, relay things yourself, call the shuttle yourself, etc. Same with access problems. If you need access to something, call a station-bound or find another way in.

As for the gamemode loss concern, Malfunction is not a good gamemode in the least. I will honestly say as the one who did the overhaul for it a while back that it is among the least dynamic gamemodes right next to the ancient blob one. The AI can't move, so we give it abilities. I threw more abilities at it and changed current ones. Too bad those abilities are static, unchanging, and can't be utilized to sport an interesting gimmick other than a select few, which inevitably end up in station destruction one way or another through a nuclear explosion. Other gamemodes have this problem to some degree, but none of the others suffer as bad as malfuction. This is due to the fact that the AI is a disruptive force and just seems, and is, out of place.

Edited April 1, 2018 by Guest

[Ron]

The station's huge and very hard to watch in its entirety, and there are ways to work around the AIs abilities other than removing them from the game.

I wouldn't mind seeing them be whitelisted though, and put under stronger regulations to not be valid hunting extensions of security.

So you want a role that can watch over the station, but you don't want that same role to valid hunt? And you want to give it a whitelist to try and do this? Have you seen the head of staff whitelist? Whitelists != non-valid hunters. The AI has a large amount of power that no other role has, and has very few restrictions on that power. It invites valid hunters to play the role, whitelist or not.

[Kaed]

So you want a role that can watch over the station, but you don't want that same role to valid hunt? And you want to give it a whitelist to try and do this? Have you seen the head of staff whitelist? Whitelists != non-valid hunters. The AI has a large amount of power that no other role has, and has very few restrictions on that power. It invites valid hunters to play the role, whitelist or not.

 

Whitelists are not perfect but they do tend to filter out the lower quality roleplayers in general. People are capable of having the power of an AI and not being a giant prat, so I don't see any reason why it needs to be removed from the game to satisfy some sort of salt reduction agenda.

At the end of the day, many mechanics and roles can be abused, but that isn't a reason to remove them from the game. An entire section of the station is devoted to the AI, people rely on the AI for aid in a great number of tasks they can't do themselves, like tracking individuals, opening doors, and accessing machinery remotely. Removing them from the game to prevent them from interfering with other people would make the game unnecessarily frustrating for many people.

Do you know how hard it is to find someone trying to hide on a sprawling, three level station? The presence of an AI reduces the places they could be hiding to maintenance or places with no camera coverage, making things much less tedious for the 4-6 people that actually have to find them in the round, whether it be security or anyone else.

[Haveatya]

AI is meant to to streamline and aid gameplay for crew. It does this. AI and borgs are meant to be a firstline response team which it does. A whitelist seems well enough appropriate but what prerequisites are you going to look for? Cyborg? Head?

[Scheveningen]

I think any form of argumentation that boils down to "wow you got owned by whatever you're complaining about, lmao get good" (exceptions apply if a person is permabanned and whining about the server that banned them, as that is just a lolcow, community members actively addressing issues is not being a lolcow) should be recognized by the person unironically saying it as a disingenuous form of arguing that would be better off taken elsewhere. Gaslighting is a form of trolling and is posting in bad faith. Keep it on discord or OOC if you must contribute some degree of childish banter but keep it off the forums.

I genuinely believe this part of a systemic problem with roles with power generally attracting power-hungry individuals that wish to enact their power fantasy and exploit any form of powergaming possible. This isn't applicable to everyone as not everyone is doing their job efficiently simply to shit on an antagonist and they're simply trying to act as a tough enough obstacle to not be a complete pushover, but there is such a thing as "tryharding", especially on a roleplay server, to the point where it does not benefit anyone's enjoyment. I can see why for others why it may be difficult to distinguish between "tryharding" and "having a competent and effective character and playing them as such", but you genuinely need to look at the intent and the way they do things before making such a conclusion.

With that out of the way there isn't really an appropriate way to handle this issue mechanically short of the knee-jerk reaction that is, "remove the AI". Because this is a systemic player behavior problem, I do think it more appropriate if players did their best to jump to report awful AI behavior even at the slightest signs of it so that staff know what to look out for. On the staff side, they need to be much harder on AIs that deliberately go out of their way to spot antagonists and point the finger at them. Nobody should ever be legitimately playing like a security-focused AI, ValidOS is never fun for anyone.

[Ron]

With that out of the way there isn't really an appropriate way to handle this issue mechanically short of the knee-jerk reaction that is, "remove the AI". Because this is a systemic player behavior problem, I do think it more appropriate if players did their best to jump to report awful AI behavior even at the slightest signs of it so that staff know what to look out for. On the staff side, they need to be much harder on AIs that deliberately go out of their way to spot antagonists and point the finger at them. Nobody should ever be legitimately playing like a security-focused AI, ValidOS is never fun for anyone.

I agree with almost everything you've said here. The issue is that people have different interpretations of what exactly the AI should be doing. Some people play AI as a security AI, some try to get involved in every command decision talked about over the command radio, others try to bud their way into everything on the entire station, and some try to remain as uninvolved as possible, silently watching. The different interpretations of what the role is a good thing and creates variety, except when it's not and the player assumes the AI is a tool of justice that only exists to strike evildoers down. If those negative interpretations of the role can be removed through staff, then I'd say the role would be less intrusive and enjoyable than it is now. Maybe a whitelist could help with that, but there is no way to tell besides testing it.

[Pratepresidenten]

Ive said it since day one. Whitelist the AI role.

It has just as big of an impact on the round as a command player, if not more.

Im very supportive of some form of quality control for the AI, but not the outright removal of it.

[Sebbe]

I support whitelisting the role, but not removing it.

Yes I've only seen one AI I actually enjoyed, be it a malf AI or a normal AI, but that is probably just because of most of my experiences are streamline and secluded. The only interaction I can remember that I enjoyed was a Paranoia round where the Malfie sold me out to keep its cover and later on mending our devide lategame by saving me and letting me into the engine room.

Other than this my experiences have mostly been uneventfull, the minimum expected roleplay or simply malicious or unfun gameplay from them.

But when everything comes down to it AI is here to stay, the role should not dissapear but with an introducion to whitelist a door opens to fill out more lore on artificial intelligence, AI specifically but I guess it mends down to the IPC loredev.

There is positives and negatives to everything, if neither direction seems beneficial the best course of action might be no action at all.

-Sebbe

[MO_oNyMan]

For the first one, there are many other options instead of needing an easy access AI to do things. You can fax things yourself, relay things yourself, call the shuttle yourself, etc. Same with access problems. If you need access to something, call a station-bound or find another way in.

As for the gamemode loss concern, Malfunction is not a good gamemode in the least. I will honestly say as the one who did the overhaul for it a while back that it is among the least dynamic gamemodes right next to the ancient blob one. The AI can't move, so we give it abilities. I threw more abilities at it and changed current ones. Too bad those abilities are static, unchanging, and can't be utilized to sport an interesting gimmick other than a select few, which inevitably end up in station destruction one way or another through a nuclear explosion. Other gamemodes have this problem to some degree, but none of the others suffer as bad as malfuction. This is due to the fact that the AI is a disruptive force and just seems, and is, out of place.

 

You can't actually access any emergency services without a command access id. On shifts without command staff the only command access ID is captain's spare which is kept in a known and extremely unprotected location. If it gets targeted by an antag you're locked out of help. Faxes are command access locked as well, normal crew can't use them. There was an attempt to adress the problem but to no success.

As for the malf being a bad gamemode, i'd agree. But still it would be great to get a better gamemode in its place if only to please people who get upset by the removal of malf

[Eve]

Let’s not remove the AI indeed.

And whitelisting AI will just restrict the rarely played role even more.

[sdtwbaj]

If we were to do this, I think replacing it with a console in the command wing that lets someone with access open doors remotely.

[BurgerBB]

I'd say only allow the AI to exist in the following gamemodes:

- Extended

- Merc/Raider

- Malf

- Ninja

- Wizard

- Autotraitor

AI during rev is just an instant win for the loyalists. Cult is similar but not that bad.

[Bygonehero]

No. Virtually all problems said so far are solved by ahelping bad AI play. Powergaming and Valid hunting are as just a valid reason to ahelp than anything else.

I believe that if a limitation should exist for the AI role, a timer that counts the number of days you've been with the server. Theoretically one could simply wait this out, but anyone that committed to griefing would be rare, and rarer still to not be caught yet, after something like 30 days.

You've no idea how many times, usually at the very start of the round that I identify or locate antagonists. I do nothing about this information because it isn't fun to immediately shut someone down (also against rules). I very much enjoy interacting with the crew and station as little as possible, a spiderweb of information fed to me various ways acting as a way for me to advise command. I normally only act on overt antagonists actions, and I never really look for antagonists unless someone asks me to.

[Evandorf]

I love playing AI. I have since so started playing the game. AI is just part of my nerd core. I usually go by Patriarch, and I admit that I am probably not the best when it comes to RP or the AI in-game mechanics.

A while back, I took a hiatus from the game because I realized that the lore of the server regarding the stationbounds did not reflect what I wanted for my AI personality. This was after a few forum posts, discord messages, and at least a few warnings ingame when I tried to push the boundaries of non-malf/non-traitor AIs.

Even so, I would hate to see the role be removed. If it needs to be whitelisted, then so be it, but the AI IMO is more of a glass cannon when not in an antag role. They mostly offer surveillance and area denial against antags but the are reliant on cameras for nearly everything. Nothing is worse as an AI than simply sitting in darkness at the end of a cult or rev round because most of the cameras have been destroyed. It leaves you pretty impotent.

I think that's why most AI players are on the lookout for issues. Those that are caught early have less of a chance to gain momentum and turn into something that they can do little about. That just seems like strategy to me and should be something antag s take into account when making early moves.

[LordFowl]

Voting for dismissal. The AI provides a unique and vital service, justifying their existence as a profession. Specific qualms can be dealt with specific solutions.

[Banditoz]

Rehashing ParadoxSpace's post, Baystation did this. Apparently they found out what rounds are like without an AI, which was pretty much already known. The two week test Bay held wasn't very well received.

If AI's really are a problem, jobban the terrible ones.

[Snakebittenn]

It was only not-well received because opening doors was a hassle. Otherwise, antagonist players reported joy.