/tg/Station 13

I lost the original post, so I'll try to sum up my idea:

1) Membership would be extremely easy to obtain, a short application with basic details would suffice.

2) Membership would not be as easy to retain. A whitelisted antag must have basic knowledge of the game and of the antagonists they apply for, along with a willingness to listen and learn where they lack knowledge (low bar, just don't be a complete idiot). They must have demonstrate a high level of teamwork, not acting selfishly. They must communicate when reasonable to help the team, contribute to plans, warn of danger or opportunity, etc.

3) This is not an MLG xXNoScope360Xx Elite 6k MMR minimum Triple Platinum Eagle Commander rank only type of group. The focus here is teamwork and communication. A forum would be dedicated to applications/removals/discussions. Removal can only occur based on behavior during a designated round, you won't be removed for behavior in regular rounds.

4) This would only apply to a special trigger that occurs in a small (<5-10%) percentage of games on high-pop rounds. It could apply to just one game-mode like NukeOps, a variety of team modes like Cult and Gang War, or even "Team-Optional" modes like Traitor or Ling where you would be encouraged to co-operate above all else.

5) Designated rounds could be called "Expert Nukeops/Cult/Gang War/Etc."

6) Adding and removal would go to one volunteer. There would be limited due process for removals, but permanent removal would also be reserved for only the most extreme behavior.

7) This mode would invariably improve round quality when it occurs. Almost every antag type suffers on high-pop and having antagonists that focus on operating as a team will produce much more intrigue, excitement, and all-around more memorable rounds for all sides of a conflict (watching a good nukeop team while dead is far more entertaining than most rounds are while alive). It could simply be a trigger when a team gametype is selected with a sub-roll for whether the "expert" version would occur, or just its own gametype with datum antags or whatever.

Given what I've seen from the framework for role permission, this doesn't seem too hard to implement. It would also give room for admins to give special instructions to certain teams (e.g. No ranged weapons for NukeOps) since, unlike a regular team where that would just be badminning, the whitelist team has the potential to make it work and the understanding that their roles inevitably include greater limitations on what they can do (e.g. not whipping out a cult blade at roundstart).

The more I think about this, the more I really want to see it attempted. White list is a cursed word and even I would cringe at this title, but in this context I think it would really work and doesn't suffer from the major issues that other white list proposals involve.

I like the idea but several limitations exist. Logistics (creation and maintenance of the list and so forth) especially. Best you could do is limit it by game time/rounds played (by antag type) to something reasonably high.

While I do kinda like the idea, this sounds like a total pain until we get datum antags.

Maintaining the list would be the real challenge. Very easy to fuck that up.

MisterPerson wrote:Maintaining the list would be the real challenge. Very easy to fuck that up.

1) Add anyone, short of troll applications, who applies to the forum with the basic info requirements. There'd be an initial surge of work, but it would die down very quickly.

2) Remove them from the list if there's a clear violation of the rules. If it's iffy give them a warning and make sure they understand what type of behavior to avoid.

3) Removed players can re-apply after two weeks by default, repeat or extreme transgressions would merit longer or permanent removals.


Not so hard. Forum records would suffice for keeping track of warnings/removals/etc. Doesn't need to involve admins at all.

The great part about this is that unlike bans/job-bans/BWOINK'ing this is a very low-stakes area of management. No appeals, no second-opinions, if you get removed you aren't out of the game for two weeks, or even out of a role. At even 5-10% chance you'll typically see ~1 expert game every 24 hours. Even then being on the whitelist doesn't guarantee you'll be selected, so the reality is that being on or off the whitelist is going to affect a single player in only a tiny fraction of their games. This isn't an elite combat group so you avoid the most toxic aspect of "X ISN'T ROBUST ENOUGH TO BE A MEMBER, HE CAN'T EVEN QUICK-TABLE".

Just super low-risk, low-stakes addition that would have the potential to really enhance the game. Being on a whitelist team would always be an improvement, and the crew can take satisfaction from those rounds where they beat the experts.

By virtue of being rare, it also means the incidents for removing a player for also rare. Admins have to deal with the full spectrum of behavior in every single round, a list maintainer would only have to deal with a limited set of behavior in a very rare round. Aside from the initial surge of names, I don't anticipate much activity on this list. Biggest issue I could forsee is if the experts aren't given clear notification of their status and screw around thinking its just a regular flukeop fest and its time to buy an LMG. This isn't a difficult problem to resolve either.

Unless I'm missing something, I don't see how it's easy to fuck up.

This goes against the nature of SS13. No.

Amelius wrote:I like the idea but several limitations exist. Logistics (creation and maintenance of the list and so forth) especially. Best you could do is limit it by game time/rounds played (by antag type) to something reasonably high.

You can already ban people from specific job or antag slots, would it be that hard to just have an antag slot that is locked by default and can only be unlocked through an admin command?

I need a better understanding of the system, but even if there are enough players on for "cult", "cult" won't be selected if only 1-2 people have it enabled.

Would it be possible to have the game select "Expert" when appropriate and then "re-roll" to determine what game mode the experts are given?

Hell, just try this out I'd be fine with just re-adding Extended, calling it "The Professionals", and then having an admin sit there with a 20-sided die rolling for which players are selected and which mode will be forced through admin-tools. This isn't a cake-walk to add, but it's not an insurmountable one.

Game time/Rounds played is completely insufficient for what I'm going for. That would still give you players like Bryce Pax who will promptly spawn as many guns/swords as he can and rush toward the brig.

iamgoofball wrote:This goes against the nature of SS13. No.

And what nature is that? Having competent antags?

It's such a small % of rounds it's hard to go against the "nature" of anything. Admins press more buttons "against the nature of SS13" every day than would this game mode occur. The process would be invisible to the people who didn't care about it and it does nothing to change the substance of the actual round that plays out. The worst case scenario is that a heavy player gets 1-2 less antag rounds per week.

Since you're probably the least credible person in the universe as to what belongs in SS13, I'd politely ask you to refrain from posting unless it's going to be something of actual substance.

So every now and again the most skilled players in the game group and up and curbstomp everyone? Yeah that sounds like heaps of fun robustin

Oranges nailed it, as usual.

>cant remove people for grievous incompetency

oranges wrote:So every now and again the most skilled players in the game group and up and curbstomp everyone? Yeah that sounds like heaps of fun robustin

Except it' has almost nothing to do with skill. I made that pretty clear. There's already time limits to play antags (last I checked), this is just a similar requirement to make sure the entire expert round wouldn't be spent trying to explain so some lizard how to reload guns.

You also have no idea if it would be a curbstomp, high-pop nukeops are a struggle no matter how good you are. Plenty of robust players either won't sign up or won't be selected for antag status, I think it would be a lot more competitive than you're giving it credit for. Keep it out of the high win rate antags if it really bothers you, or just tweak the stats so that experts would start with less crystals/cult members/etc.

And honestly, even if a round did turn into a curbstomp... I would much rather ghost and watch a well organized team carry out an objective than the usual "in antag v. sec, the winner will be whoever just fucks up less" conflict I see every round.

Scones wrote:>cant remove people for grievous incompetency

I'm pretty sure I said in the post that a clear violation of any of the three requirements could get you removed. Grievous incompetence would be a violation of the "know the game/antag basics".

I am with this idea 100%.

With the antag datum this might be easy to implement, there's just the question of who would maintain the whitelist. How about you?

I feel like the only way it could work is if there are always special challenges enabled. Otherwise I would agree with oranges and say every round would be a one sided curbstomb. In my experience, when team antag is very competent usually they end up winning before even half of the station knows about their presence.

Melee only nuke ops, cultists must always wear robes, gangsters must always wear uniforms, etc.

Oldman basically just doesn't want to get shot in the back anymore, and I know how he feels.

The amount of players who use the forums regularly is comparatively small. There are good players who never post. No.

bandit wrote:The amount of players who use the forums regularly is comparatively small. There are good players who never post. No.

Do they want to play the role? Then they can take a few minutes to show they want to.

Shad0vvs wrote:Oldman basically just doesn't want to get shot in the back anymore, and I know how he feels.

While that is a sentiment I have, it wasn't the reason for this.

I'm just continually disappointed by what the team antag rounds COULD be versus the reality of them.

Right now cult is shaped more by its fuckups than its successes, often the same holds true for flukeops. I want to see what happens when Nukeops show up and they actually stick together. Team gametypes are shaped by the weakest link on the teams, and that typically means that team antag modes are always played at the lowest common denominator. NukeOp tactics, cult strategy, gang leadership, it's all driven on the assumption that everyone you're working with is completely fucking stupid. These games all become repetitive (as do lings/traitors) because all the shit that balanced for a "team effort" when such a thing simply doesn't exist.

I also would love to see this tried for traitor and ling, two modes that have become incredibly stale. Do I fear lings in their current form? Absolutely not. Would I fear them if I knew they were working in concert and actively assisting each other? Fuck yes I would.

Same thing applies to traitors, hostile traitors have extremely limited item choices right now... but traitors had to work in some "cells" to complete high-difficulty objectives, well then you start creating a lot of interesting options.

Reimoo wrote:I feel like the only way it could work is if there are always special challenges enabled. Otherwise I would agree with oranges and say every round would be a one sided curbstomb. In my experience, when team antag is very competent usually they end up winning before even half of the station knows about their presence.

Melee only nuke ops, cultists must always wear robes, gangsters must always wear uniforms, etc.

If that's everybody's concern then sure, then yea make that an added obejctive/requirement for every game type. It would still serve the chief purpose of basically re-inventing several gametypes by allowing teams to actually use the 80% of tools/weapons/tactics that are simply suicide in most games because they require communication and teamwork.

Hard part would be enforcing that in conversion gametypes, though it might just be enough to have it apply only to the "originals" and let the converts play like normal.

I have seen the kind of community that spawns from whitelists. Fuck that. Its the last thing /tg/ needs.

The only thing i'd ever like to see come out of this is an RP-oriented cult, otherwise fuck no. Well shit that wouldn't work anyway because nobody else would care and just space the first person caught standing near a tome. Circular logic, etc.

In theory the suggestion does not seem that bad, on the whole its essentially a whitelist that anyone can join, but the onus is on you to ensure you're up to the task of being able to work and communicate with your fellow teammates in the relevant game modes to retain your whitelist position.

Alex Crimson wrote:I have seen the kind of community that spawns from whitelists. Fuck that. Its the last thing /tg/ needs.

The last thing /tg/ needs is shitters and they're here anyways.

Reimoo wrote:I feel like the only way it could work is if there are always special challenges enabled. Otherwise I would agree with oranges and say every round would be a one sided curbstomb. In my experience, when team antag is very competent usually they end up winning before even half of the station knows about their presence.

Melee only nuke ops, cultists must always wear robes, gangsters must always wear uniforms, etc.

Those challenges are shit. They force you to go loud and Oldman specified that this is not about being robust in spessmen combat. Good challenges would be "take the captain alive" for nukeops, or "replace the chain of command" for changelings.

If the problem with team modes is that people don't work together well, then I feel we'd be better served by adding better ways to help those teams work together. Because right now most of the communication methods available to them are awful, it's hard to know where they are, it's hard to know what to do, etc. A whitelist might help in the rounds where it pops up, but it's not a solution. That one round might be better but the other 16 rounds that day are still just as bad as ever.

Having said that, if someone is willing to volunteer to maintain the whitelist and the admin team agrees to it, then sure, why not?

It could work for nukeops and traitors but what about modes relying on conversion like cult/rev/gang? Would you get a prompt if you try to convert someone who isn't on the whitelist, like "the person you're trying to convert is a scrub, maybe you should reconsider?"

The whitelisting could be made slightly more automated by having rating system at the end of the round for team antags, something fairly simple like 3 star rating where 1 is negative, 2 is no opinion/didn't see/eh 3 is positive. Only the team antags could vote and it'd give a bit of statistical element to it.

Marflow wrote:The whitelisting could be made slightly more automated by having rating system at the end of the round for team antags, something fairly simple like 3 star rating where 1 is negative, 2 is no opinion/didn't see/eh 3 is positive. Only the team antags could vote and it'd give a bit of statistical element to it.

implying people won't 3-star their metafriends and 1-star to troll

Alex Crimson wrote:I have seen the kind of community that spawns from whitelists. Fuck that. Its the last thing /tg/ needs.

I played on Goon where the HoS was whitelist only and it certainly felt like a detriment there.

Suffice it to say that this doesn't resemble any other white list I've encountered and doesn't share in their flaws. This is something that players will rarely encounter and its primary purpose is to shake up gametypes and provide an interesting experience for both antags and players.

This isn't based on robustness, or being friends with someone, or your reputation, or anything. This isn't something that will affect every round like white list security, or even a significant percentage of rounds, it's something that will happen once a day on average, if that.

You at least have to elucidate your complaints too, some of the most opposed to this addition are also the ones who insist on posting one-liners about how they "know" how bad this will be.

Grazyn wrote:It could work for nukeops and traitors but what about modes relying on conversion like cult/rev/gang? Would you get a prompt if you try to convert someone who isn't on the whitelist, like "the person you're trying to convert is a scrub, maybe you should reconsider?"

No, while there is tension with trying to mesh a whitelist with those game modes, only rev is the one where it really wouldn't make sense. Gangs still exercise leadership and control over their converts to an extent, so the bosses can still decide their chosen strategy and try to influence their followers to keep with that strategy. Cult doesn't have leaders, but it's not as conversion driven, the whitlist cult can make important decisions about where to base themselves, how to carry out their objectives, whether to convert or construct, or neither (mass-murder and then raise the dead as homunculi, a single cultist can summon nar-sie like this). Rev is where it makes the least sense since the leaders don't even know each other and don't have a safe way to communicate, and their mission is pretty one-dimensional, flash everyone you can without getting caught. Whitelist wouldn't add much to rev. Regardless, there won't be any weird barrier to converting non-listed players into a whitelisted antag team.

Marflow wrote:The whitelisting could be made slightly more automated by having rating system at the end of the round for team antags, something fairly simple like 3 star rating where 1 is negative, 2 is no opinion/didn't see/eh 3 is positive. Only the team antags could vote and it'd give a bit of statistical element to it.

This will be a relatively rare event because (1) it prevents the list from having a significant influence on the game and (2) because maintaining it becomes that much easier. Aside from the initial rush of applications I would expect the complaint/removal process to be a pretty light workload. Avg. one whitelist round a day, I would hope that at most 1-2 people would draw complaints from their teammates during that round, and adjudication would be much more straightforward since the stakes are also very low. There's no need to make this more controversial and harder to implement with some kind of automated process.

MisterPerson wrote:If the problem with team modes is that people don't work together well, then I feel we'd be better served by adding better ways to help those teams work together. Because right now most of the communication methods available to them are awful, it's hard to know where they are, it's hard to know what to do, etc. A whitelist might help in the rounds where it pops up, but it's not a solution. That one round might be better but the other 16 rounds that day are still just as bad as ever.

Having said that, if someone is willing to volunteer to maintain the whitelist and the admin team agrees to it, then sure, why not?

While I agree that having good communication is essential to any semblance of teamwork, that's only the first step. Even extremely effective communication tools will never be sufficient to ensure any kind of consistent teamwork experience. Cult, Nukeops, Gangs, and even traitors have had their communication abilities enhanced (thank god) due to the recognition that team antag without team communication leads to, at best, mindless directionless violence (see: rev). But even when you're nukeops or a gang, it's still pretty disgraceful how little people will communicate and no amount of tools will ever fix that... at some point changing the players is all you can do if you hope to change the fundamental experience of a round.

Of course, whitelists have many risks too, but that's why I'm proposing it in a very limited context to ensure that it doesn't come to define SS13 on our servers.

It's true that communicating in ss13 is difficult, but if everyone involved is competent the communication needed is significantly less and more efficient. A whitelist would help with that.

Inevitably this would become a circlejerk. You all know it.

Whitelist blob, instead.

The only people who push for whitelisted jobs are hardcore tryhards, the kind that spazz for 10 minutes in deadchat every nuke round.

Cheridan wrote:The only people who push for whitelisted jobs are hardcore tryhards, the kind that spazz for 10 minutes in deadchat every nuke round.

Hey, I take offense in you implying that I'm pushing for whitelisted jobs.

> Lay out detailed plan as cultist
> All words discovered
> 3 cult bases prepared, 2 artificers and a juggernaut online
> Crew has no clue cult is coming
...

> CMO uses our secret teleport network words in middle of medbay maint, in a lit area, for no fucking reason, without telling anyone
> Use teleport rune to visit minercultists
>Get sent to medbay maint instead, 3 security inspecting the rune, I get dunked instantly
>Cult has no leadership, constructs have no master, everything goes to hell and the cult is easily wiped out in its disarray

I need this whitelist in my life.

No, you just need to help others git gud.

Fuck whitelists.

To be honest, there's not much you can do to help other's "git gud" by yourself during a round.

A sort of tutorial system where players can play a pre-made map detailing how antagonists work in a single player environment would be a good solution, but we can't do that.

A whitelist otherwise is the only other alternative solution, since it ensures the people in that whitelist have a certain level of competency. Overall its not even a issue of communication as it is a issue of competency.

Steelpoint wrote: A sort of tutorial system where players can play a pre-made map detailing how antagonists work in a single player environment would be a good solution, but we can't do that.

This is basically the endgoal of the SNPC system - mobs which can imitate the average assfuck well enough to keep the station breathing on lowpop / theoretical singleplayer / players-are-all-the-antag-modes

SNPCs can move when they're stunned (and in crit, and dead, I think), somehow. It makes them quite difficult to take down. Perhaps a little too difficult, for a solo cult adventure...

TheNightingale wrote:SNPCs can move when they're stunned (and in crit, and dead, I think), somehow. It makes them quite difficult to take down. Perhaps a little too difficult, for a solo cult adventure...

As someone who uses SNPCs really, really frequently for testing the various retarded weapons I code, I have never once, at all, seen a behaviour at all like this. It should also be impossible codewise, because humans can't do it, and SNPCs are a child of humans.

Hrm. You're talking about /mob/living/carbon/human/interactive (or something along those lines; friendly, angry, greytide versions), right? It might be patched by now, I'll check.

DemonFiren wrote:No, you just need to help others git gud.

Fuck whitelists.

I am literally the most helpful cultist on this server. I will spend the first few minutes of my round, when I could be rushing word research and spamming stun paper, explaining in great detail in commune how cultists should act, what our strategy is, where we should set up, what we should avoid, etc.

I always emphasize in nice huge red caps for everyone to see, that BEING CAUGHT is the single worst thing that can happen to a cult, and if anyone is unsure about what to do, just ask first/contact me/etc.

Yet the last 5 cult rounds have been completely decided by the most idiotic cultist giving the cult away with completely unreasonable behavior in less than 20 minutes. Yea the chef just whipped out his tome while sitting in the public side of the kitchen, and the atmos tech literally slipped and left his tome on the ground and walked off, or some superstar brings in the toxins scientist for conversion but doesn't restrain him - BOOM goes the entire cult base -, or some jerkoff did a sacrifice in an on-camera area, or some idiot uses our crucial teleport network and puts an exit out in an open, lit, commonly traversed area.

There is just too much of a rotation of new players who refuse to read wiki's or just chill and listen instead of running off and doing their own thing. This is what the whitelist would attempt to address, breathe new life into many gametypes by letting us see how a fight against these antags might change when they're truly working shoulder-to-shoulder.

It would be very one sided.

The greatest limitation to team antag modes is competency, teamwork and a willingness to communicate and listen. Or even just to follow someone else's lead instead of doing your own thing.

I could see some modes being one-sided. However, last I checked, almost all game modes heavily favored the crew these days with exceptions for Rev and Blob, which are among the least likely modes to be incorporated into the whitelist.

For example, I really don't think a whitelist nukeops group would bump its win-rate more than 10%. Flukes face a wide host of challenges and while one idiot running off usually spells disaster, its still very easy just to be overwhelmed by the crew even with a decent ops group.

At the very least I think it's worth trying before presuming that whitelist anything would just curb-stomp the crew every time.