/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

Amelius wrote:

Vekter wrote:About as simple as it gets. Are you purposely igoring your objectives to just slaughter the crew? That's murderboning. Otherwise you are fine. I reiterate that, as with everything, this rule will be handled on a CASE BY CASE BASIS. Odds are most players will not fall under this rule.

> Are you purposely igoring your objectives to just slaughter the crew?

Again, so greentexting, the most boring thing to aim for possible, is the litmus test for whether or not you 'go too far'? Don't mind me while I steal magboots 30 seconds after the round starts, then fart around for the next hour or two out of fear of being banned. What is there to progress rounds then? The crew should be calling the shuttle because shit has gone out of control, but if antags feel their hands are tied (which they will be), then we're going to get a lot more of those tedious extended-esque rounds where very little happens for 3 hours then the shuttle is called because boredom.

This new policy is nonsense, and the community has always been, and still is against it. This is the third fucking time that it's been thrown through the works and voted on, and each time the answer has been a resounding 'no'.

For what its worth I think he means if someone deliberately ignores their objectives to murderbone. I still vehemently disagree with this policy and what it represents. If someone wants to ignore their objectives as an antag, then that is their RNGGoddess-given right.

Also just singling out specific players is making it seem like it only applies to them when in reality everyone is going to fear it.

I think what's really sitting wrong with a lot of people is that this is a very extremely harsh solution to a very small problem. Just get rid of the survivor role. Problem solved.

I think a genuine discussion on the role of the survivor and its implementation should be warranted.

In my opinion, a Wizard that uses a summon guns/magic spell is essentially just throwing away their Wizard round as I have personally never witnessed a Wizard accomplish their objectives in a summon round. Either the crew all kill each other and the Wizard, or they wait for the Wizard to arrive and then kill him.

Luke Cox wrote:I think what's really sitting wrong with a lot of people is that this is a very extremely harsh solution to a very small problem. Just get rid of the survivor role. Problem solved.

It isn't just survivor, the same reasoning applies to any antagonist with easy objectives.

I hate to emptypost, but IMO this is close to the last word on this particular situation. Particularly the last few paragraphs:

Amelius wrote:Originally, antagonist was carte-blanche to do anything but violating cardinal rules (no rape, etc.), and was seen as a reprieve from being constrained as a non-antagonist. It shouldn't be just another restricted role, where you have to worry if you're going to get banned for doing [x]. Furthermore this will just make changeling rounds even worse - there are few of them, they'll have their hands tied under this policy, so most of the crew will be having fun playing 'extended' every changeling round.

Furthermore, SoS, you call removing people from the round griefing, but the reality is that the job of the antagonist is to remove people from the round and progress it in the process thereof. How they do so has always been up to them, and that it should be. How else do you expect the shuttle to be sent?

You seem to be complaining about a dearth of creativity, but I challenge that and say the problem is that there are few ways to implement creativity in murder effectively. A disposals slide into singuloth takes five seconds to dismantle, and fifteen minutes, at least to assemble, and will kill, at most, a few fools and it will immediately paint you with a gigantic target on your back, either during construction, or after. There are so few interesting, especially job-specific tools for traitors that are effective, while, once you get caught for murder, killing any guard you come across is the most effective and fool-proof strategy that tilts advantage to your side, and you're ordering us to slide efficacy for policy, which is nonsensical from a pragmatic perspective.

Combine this policy change (again, with no community involvement) with the combat changes in the pipeline that will utterly fuck changeling, revolution, and DA rounds especially, while making catching greytiders, traitors, and lings a living nightmare in an already-unpopular job, and it's just another point in favour that the coders and co. are completely out of touch with the userbase and wish for this server to go the way of the Baystation. We had a niche, and we're moving out of it for no apparent reason.

Edit:

I forgot to mention that going for greentext is the exact opposite method of having fun in this game. It takes about twenty seconds to get a pair of magboots as an antagonist. Then what? Killing more people goes 'against your end goals' So why the heck would you bother doing anything but call the shuttle at the very start of the round? Greentext is far too easy to achieve, and so find a different litmus test, at least.

As for wizards and summoning and survivor, I think "removing wiz/survivor" is far more "throwing the baby out with the bathwater" than this. This policy on its own takes care of murderboning survivors -- if a survivor decides to antagonize everyone, he isn't remotely doing the things to help himself survive (even the MOST ROBUSTEST MURDERBONERS get caught eventually) and is ignoring his objective totally.

Alright. This shitstorm has finally convinced me to create YET ANOTHER forum account (We've been through like 3 forums, this is ridiculous).

The antagonists role is to antagonize the station. Yes, they have objectives like escaping alone, stealing X, etc. etc. but their broader goal is to create a challenge for the crew to overcome... or try to overcome at least. Being an antagonist gives you free reign to do as you please to the station, which leads to the emergent gameplay that is unique to SS13. Trying to bottleneck antagonists into performing only certain tasks does not "encourage roleplay", but instead I would argue it hinders it. It steals from the creativity and unpredictability that are the only selling points this game has. It turns being an antagonist from the freedom of doing almost anything you want into just another game about completing objectives.

Now I know what your thinking.

Loon, you have no fucking clue what your rambling about. This only stops people from being shitty, unfun murderbonering assholes and that's a good thing.

Heres the thing. If an antagonist wants to murder everyone, we already have an entire department dedicated exclusively to stopping them. By enacting policy regarding mass murder, we are essentially putting a basic traitorous activity up there with rape and exploiting bugs, an IC crime so shitty it has to be handled OOC. I know everyone recoils at the term h-u-g-b-o-x but that's exactly what this is. Mass murder has always been an IC problem that has countless IC solutions. If the crew/security is too stupid to take the right actions and they all get murdered, well that's just too fucking bad. If for some reason the crew honestly cannot hope to overcome the murderboner stroking antagonist no matter what they do, than its a balance issue, not a policy issue.

Now lets just address SoS's concern. If this really is a rule reserved for only the "worst of the worst", than it doesn't need to be a rule at all. If some hulk with insulated gloves, an E-sword, a crossbow, and a hoard of rogue borgs backing him up has killed 60 people and is doing nothing but recalling the shuttle, we don't even need a new policy in order for admins to just tell him to stop being a dick. If someone is going that fucking far to make everyone else miserable, just BOINK him and tell him to cut it off. If he doesn't, ban him for an hour for impeding the round. There is no need to punish every single antagonist for the dickishness of a few.

As for people being removed from the round for no reason? Deal with it. I'm probably the least robust person on this server, I can't fight for shit and when I try to fight I lose. I die. A lot. And you know what, that's alright. Its all part of the game. If people didn't get murdered in Rev rounds, they would be boring as fuck. If people didn't kill each other after a wizard summon guns, than the point of the spell is null. If traitors didn't murder me 4 no raisen, than they wouldn't be much of a traitor now would they? Being removed from the round sucks, but it is a part of the game. If people can't deal with the fact that they are going to be killed, they need to find a new game.

So to end my ramblings:
-Antagonists should have the full freedom to choose how they antagonize the station. Antagonizing people is their job.
-Trying to force people to antagonize others while at the same time not antagonizing them too much is like trying to poke halfway through a balloon with a battle axe. Like that analogy, it doesn't make much sense.
-If some antagonist killed you 4 no raisen, deal with it nerd. Its all part of the game.
-If its that obvious that someone is just being a cunt for the sake of being a cunt, give him the ol' BOINK

I'm starting to think this whole matter needs another discussion at length before being fully implemented.

Vekter wrote:I'm starting to think this whole matter needs another discussion at length before being fully implemented.

Agreed. I don't think it's a stretch to say that this is a very unpopular rule change. Anything this big needs to be discussed with the community first.

Luke Cox wrote:

Vekter wrote:I'm starting to think this whole matter needs another discussion at length before being fully implemented.

Agreed. I don't think it's a stretch to say that this is a very unpopular rule change. Anything this big needs to be discussed with the community first.

The issue is that the server belongs to SoS, so SoS can rightfully make any decision he wants regardless of any discussion that takes place. If the points presented in this thread fail to change his mind, I fail to see what other discussions will.

Loonikus wrote:

Luke Cox wrote:

Vekter wrote:I'm starting to think this whole matter needs another discussion at length before being fully implemented.

Agreed. I don't think it's a stretch to say that this is a very unpopular rule change. Anything this big needs to be discussed with the community first.

The issue is that the server belongs to SoS, so SoS can rightfully make any decision he wants regardless of any discussion that takes place. If the points presented in this thread fail to change his mind, I fail to see what other discussions will.

This is a toxic line of thought. You're basically saying it's not worth discussing because you assume Scaredy won't listen to anyone's concerns.

Vekter wrote:

Loonikus wrote:

Luke Cox wrote:

Vekter wrote:I'm starting to think this whole matter needs another discussion at length before being fully implemented.

Agreed. I don't think it's a stretch to say that this is a very unpopular rule change. Anything this big needs to be discussed with the community first.

The issue is that the server belongs to SoS, so SoS can rightfully make any decision he wants regardless of any discussion that takes place. If the points presented in this thread fail to change his mind, I fail to see what other discussions will.

This is a toxic line of thought. You're basically saying it's not worth discussing because you assume Scaredy won't listen to anyone's concerns.

But is he wrong?

Vekter wrote: This is a toxic line of thought. You're basically saying it's not worth discussing because you assume Scaredy won't listen to anyone's concerns.

I'm not really assuming anything. If Scaredy doesn't want to change his mind and doesn't want to listen to peoples concerns, he has every right in the world to do so. If he does want to listen to other peoples concerns and is open to changing his mind, he has over 6 pages of discussion right here in this thread to come to a conclusion on.

I just don't want policy limbo. In my mind, "further discussion" means we lock this thread and ignore the problem for a while until we eventually feel like talking about it again or it creates a massive shitstorm and we have to talk about it. I'm just saying that there is no point to "further discussion" when we can discuss this issue here and now.

What I've been told, officially, is that the only point of this change is to stop the worst from the worst from being, well, the worst. SoS doesn't want a huge emphasis on people getting objectives they don't like and just buying an esword and going apeshit on the station.

My personal interpretation? Unless you've managed to kill 2/3rd of the station's population and STILL haven't completed your objectives, I probably won't even take a second glance. Even THEN, worst you'll probably get from me is a note.

E: [10:18pm] <Vekter> My interpretation is still that I'm probably never going to apply one of these bans unless someone does something like gets antag, with notes, and murders 2/3rd of the station without even trying to get their objective.
[10:18pm] <~scaredofshadows> pretty much exactly that

Alright so I don't come around much anymore, and I don't play much anymore. But as the guy who was kind of spearheading a lot of wizard stuff, including summon magic, I just want to say three things real quick.

1. It fucking sucks that this happened. I did wizard stuff because it was refreshing not to have to worry so much about the restrictions of balance, and yet here we are anyways.

2. I have a suggestion on how to resolve this without "losing the spirit" of anything. Check https://github.com/tgstation/-tg-station/pull/6387 .

3. Is there anything else I can say or do at this point to fix any of this nonsense? If so please show me where/how.

Loonikus wrote:

Luke Cox wrote:

Vekter wrote:I'm starting to think this whole matter needs another discussion at length before being fully implemented.

Agreed. I don't think it's a stretch to say that this is a very unpopular rule change. Anything this big needs to be discussed with the community first.

The issue is that the server belongs to SoS, so SoS can rightfully make any decision he wants regardless of any discussion that takes place. If the points presented in this thread fail to change his mind, I fail to see what other discussions will.

Being able to do something doesn't make it a good idea. Sure, he can ignore us, but people can also play on other servers, of which there are plenty. I believe that this rule change is very detrimental to the community as a whole. I believe that it's in both his and our best interest to seriously reconsider what is in my opinion a very damaging policy change. TG station occupies a perfect niche between Goon and Bay, and SoS is attempting to treat a rash by amputating the limb.

If the point of this rule is just to warn people who indulge in excess, then why did we have to go through this massively contraversial, and poorly handled, rule change?

Why do you even need a ruling on something that admins can just easily warn someone about.

The ruling affects almost virtually no one, yet the way it's being handled and shown implies it will effect everyone.

Vekter wrote:You're basically saying it's not worth discussing because you assume Scaredy won't listen to anyone's concerns.

He is listening but not responding. This thread isn't so much an open discussion about the current policy as it is a box to hold our complaints. If he insists on keeping this new policy then I won't mind, but stonewalling the community is torture.

SoS, don't play dictator but let the community decide things. If multiple discussions had the conclusion "don't change" then don't be a dick and change it anyways without any form of vote or discussion.

How about you stop making some objectives so insanely hard?

I mean changeling objectives are insane. Steal a brain? Its hard to get surgery tools. I mean changelings get like 5 objectives meanwhile most antags just get 2.

Also is it fine to release the singularity after your objective is done and you want to get the shuttle called?

/tg/station is less fun now.

Bombadil wrote:How about you stop making some objectives so insanely hard?

I mean changeling objectives are insane. Steal a brain? Its hard to get surgery tools. I mean changelings get like 5 objectives meanwhile most antags just get 2.

Ling objectives are quite easy, even the steal-a-brain ones (unless you're the unlucky sap who ended up with a ling as your assassinate objective). Protip: your armblade can be used like a saw, and with some cable, tools, and a bedsheet from the dorms you can do makeshift brain surgery without surgical tools.

Update

scaredofshadows, on singulo.io wrote:'Escape alone' will still be enabled on the servers. Wizard will be re-enabled, with possibly even survivors coming back (with a message about not murdering people unless necessary to survive).

bandit wrote:Update

scaredofshadows, on singulo.io wrote:'Escape alone' will still be enabled on the servers. Wizard will be re-enabled, with possibly even survivors coming back (with a message about not murdering people unless necessary to survive).

This is what shouldve happened in the first place. Now we just need this policy to disappear until the community agrees to it.

Phalanx300 wrote:SoS, don't play dictator but let the community decide things. If multiple discussions had the conclusion "don't change" then don't be a dick and change it anyways without any form of vote or discussion.

This applies to the server.

Here's a question. Why doesn't SoS post in the thread directly instead of telling other people to post for him? Why hasn't anyone rebuffed all these very-legitimate concerns and arguments if this policy is defensible? Why was this implemented ignoring community feedback thrice?

All these admins are coming out of the woodwork and not addressing this nor the earlier concerns. They've been sidestepping comments and trying to make it seem more minor than it is, appealing to a lack of applicability to 'most people'. We know that the new rule applies to antags throwing polyacid grenades on the shuttle - that is nowhere near not 'most people'. I mean fuck, Rob Ust was banned for being too robust.

Come on guys. Answer the hard questions. How do you expect rounds to progress if antagonists cannot antagonize the crew to the point where the shuttle must be called? How do you expect low-quantity antag rounds (ling) to function beyond 'extended' if they cannot mass-murder? How do you expect construct cultists to function without mass-murder and sacrifice? How do you expect the community will react to being ignored three times over? Why hasn't SoS said a single thing in this thread? Why are you tossing rule 2 out the window? Why would you provide functionality for the crew to release the singularity and plasma to be flooded if you don't want people to use them? Why aren't you solving this 'issue' in a far lighter fashion instead, by incentivizing robust players to play security by making antag rolls after job rolls? With more robust security, surely these mass-murderers with not a hint of inconspicuousity would be caught quickly. Why have you, of late, been ignoring community feedback when it comes to changes, yet asking for it all the same?

There's plenty more 'hardball' questions that you folks have outright ignored. This is simply a complaint thread where our words will go unheeded, regardless of logical soundness or debate. Please, do not pretend this policy is defensible, do not pretend that you are not defending SoS simply because he is the server owner, and do not pretend that these concessions (wizard re-added, 'escape alone' still an objective) are not a usual salesman psychological tactic - to make outrageous demands, then demand something still outrageous but 'better' than the last. I will not accept these rules, and I will not abide by these new rules. If I wind up banned, then so be it - but I simply do not see this new policy lasting long, and I do not see any reason for it's existence.

I bet the Jews did this.

Amelius makes a good point, pretty much all of our admins sans ikky have ignored most of our concerns with a "lets just see what happens" statement. In my opinion we already had, a guy got warned for pacid grenadeing the shuttle. As an antag. That seems really not okay and i wish our admins would address it.

Wyzack wrote:Amelius makes a good point, pretty much all of our admins sans ikky have ignored most of our concerns with a "lets just see what happens" statement. In my opinion we already had, a guy got warned for pacid grenadeing the shuttle. As an antag. That seems really not okay and i wish our admins would address it.

He wasn't an antag.

Four years ago SoS had offered to host these servers in place of TLE, but this was on the condition that he would only assume the role of the host and not enforce administrative policies.

We are now currently in a position where he is making sweeping changes to server legislation without consulting the playerbase. This change in policy has been discussed several times in the past, each time shot down, until it was forced by SoS recently. He is now enforcing this new policy by actively banning players who break these nebulous new rules which as of posting have not been properly announced to the playerbase at large. Discussion of this policy has been scattered over several unofficial community channels, but the majority is coming from behind the closed doors of the admin IRC. We have heard varying clarifications about the true purpose of this policy and who it is really aimed at from the admins in this thread, but not from the server owner himself.

SNAFU

Stickymayhem wrote:

Wyzack wrote:Amelius makes a good point, pretty much all of our admins sans ikky have ignored most of our concerns with a "lets just see what happens" statement. In my opinion we already had, a guy got warned for pacid grenadeing the shuttle. As an antag. That seems really not okay and i wish our admins would address it.

He wasn't an antag.

Wait really? If it was a clearcut nonantag killing then what does it even have to do with this policy?

Stickymayhem wrote:

Wyzack wrote:Amelius makes a good point, pretty much all of our admins sans ikky have ignored most of our concerns with a "lets just see what happens" statement. In my opinion we already had, a guy got warned for pacid grenadeing the shuttle. As an antag. That seems really not okay and i wish our admins would address it.

He wasn't an antag.

Who precisely are we referring to? I was an antag two nights ago and got warned for polyacid+plasma+lube smoking the shuttle. Double Agent, specifically.

Pybro wrote:

Stickymayhem wrote:

Wyzack wrote:Amelius makes a good point, pretty much all of our admins sans ikky have ignored most of our concerns with a "lets just see what happens" statement. In my opinion we already had, a guy got warned for pacid grenadeing the shuttle. As an antag. That seems really not okay and i wish our admins would address it.

He wasn't an antag.

Who precisely are we referring to? I was an antag two nights ago and got warned for polyacid+plasma+lube smoking the shuttle. Double Agent, specifically.

And if you're warned for a behaviour, that directly means it is bannable. You shouldn't even get boinked for that in the first place, unless they needed to confirm that it was you throwing PAcid and not anyone else.

It's bullshit.

On sybil Scared said and i quote

OOC: Scaredofshadows: if you guys feel this strongly about it, we should do a townhall meeting

Just putting this out there

Jimthebob123 wrote:On sybil Scared said and i quote

OOC: Scaredofshadows: if you guys feel this strongly about it, we should do a townhall meeting

Just putting this out there

So this 8 page topic and the policy discussion poll isnt enough? ok then, lets make ANOTHER topic so we can all argue and get absolutely nothing changed.

I hope you're all familiar with the saying "today's leak is tomorrow's flood"

Sum Ting Wong wrote:Four years ago SoS had offered to host these servers in place of TLE, but this was on the condition that he would only assume the role of the host and not enforce administrative policies.

We are now currently in a position where he is making sweeping changes to server legislation without consulting the playerbase. This change in policy has been discussed several times in the past, each time shot down, until it was forced by SoS recently. He is now enforcing this new policy by actively banning players who break these nebulous new rules which as of posting have not been properly announced to the playerbase at large. Discussion of this policy has been scattered over several unofficial community channels, but the majority is coming from behind the closed doors of the admin IRC. We have heard varying clarifications about the true purpose of this policy and who it is really aimed at from the admins in this thread, but not from the server owner himself.

SNAFU

If this is true holy fuck

But seriously, let's talk about murderboning. Murderboning is bad. It's uncreative, unfun, and boring to pretty much everyone. But is it an issue that requires admin intervention?

FUCK. NO.

Banning people over a turbulent-as-fuck rule that can mean basically whatever the admin wants it to mean is fucking terrible, especially with how the decision for a new rule seemed to basically come out of fucking nowhere and had no players actually commenting on it until now, where basically everyone's reaction has been one of disgust for the new rule and wanting it revoked, only to be promptly ignored.

tl;dr Banning murderboning is like nuking a anthill. Sure, it'll probably kill the ants, but more than a few people are going to inevitably get caught in the crossfire.

ShadowDimentio wrote:But is it an issue that requires admin intervention?

When there are certain people who do the exact same murderboning over and over again then yes admin intervention can become necessary.

Tsaricide wrote:

ShadowDimentio wrote:But is it an issue that requires admin intervention?

When there are certain people who do the exact same murderboning over and over again then yes admin intervention can become necessary.

Admin intervention was never the issue. In fact, I think that is how most players would prefer to handle this. When a murderboner goes too far, admins start pressing buttons. Send in a mech, mega spess carp, aliens, an ops team or a deathsquad. Or boink the offender and say, "you have three minutes to call the shuttle and end this or you explode."

But what if no admins are on/don't want to press buttons? Ok then tough shit. There's a second server for a reason.

This is a simple and easy way to deal with this and how it should be handled. Murderboners don't care about their green text.

This new policy has tons of people running scared now. We keep getting vague and deflective answers about how, "its only for a few people, I'm gonna enforce it x way", but the best example we have of this being implemented was the poly acid grenade warning. Yes I keep going back to it. Yes its a small sample size. Still doesn't make it any less worrisome.

I'm not quite sure how to feel about this. Initially I was really supportive: I hate it when someone spends their entire round attempting to kill off the whole crew of the station, often in a routine and pretty dull way. Whether it's an EI NATH wizard, a gibbing ninja, or a stun and saw traitor that sort of thing gets boring very fast, especially if they've done a few things that make it super hard to counter them without powergaming up to 11. It's not that fun to be a part of, it's not the sort of thing the station can automatically deal with after a point, and it makes for a pretty shit round.

But on the other hand, I'm seeing this used kind of harsher than I would expect. I was a traitor doctor a couple of rounds ago and my target wandered into medbay, so I did the decent thing and killed him, then hid his body. Afterwards I was a bit bored, so I thought I might work on sabotaging the medical treatment of the station: basically, taking advantage of injured people's state and making them 'disappear' with classic traitor tools like emagged medbots and a radioactive health scanner, maybe thinning out the number of doctors or trying to make sure a couple of critical people didn't get cloned or whatever. Just trying to make the round interesting, harder for everyone else, the sort of stuff that would have made sense previous to this policy change.

Now, however, I wasn't sure. So I adminhelped it just to check and go the response "I'd rather you didn't just murder people for no reason". I thought being a traitor was a reason to murder people before, at least a few people, to spice up the round and keep things interesting. If that's stopping, it's going to make certain rounds (traitor particularly: ling gives you full license to murder whichever randoms you want in the name of genomes, team based modes speak for themselves, etc) far more quiet and dull. If it's going to be enforced in this way. I feel like a policy which enforces just sticking to the greentext and not going beyond that if you've succeeded is going to be...kind of dull.

Right now it seems less like a "Don't be shitty" policy and more of a "Don't kill anyone except your target when SoS or Quartz is on" policy.

ExplosiveCrate wrote:Right now it seems less like a "Don't be shitty" policy and more of a "Don't kill anyone except your target when SoS or Quartz is on" policy.

That's actually pretty accurate.

A lot of people, even admins, tell me they simply don't play Security roles, or any authority role, when SoS is on the server.

That is a real problem. Playing security is already fucking stressful enough

I'll summarize what really happened:

>Scaredy says he wants to put admins in place to administrate and keep the server and the /tg/ spirit alive
>Scaredy works and barely pays attention to the server besides keeping it running awesome as fuck and better than pretty much any server out there, really great and free updates to support our bolstering community
>Administration drama (mostly because scaredy isn't around), they prove ineffective at keeping /tg/ sane and using rule 0 to weed out shitters, a lot of bad apple admins intentionally don't enforce rules and policies like the ones for powergaming we've had forever to turn the server into a shitty nox 2.0 garbo fest
>SoS quits his job, steps in to help the administration by making new policy changes, getting new headmins, etc
>People say he is making SWEEPING CHANGES to 'legislation' even though these policies on powergaming and not being a dick to ruin people's fun have ALWAYS BEEN FUCKING RULES

Really though you can leave if you don't like it, your boogyman conspiracy theories about how SoS is ruining the server are fucking laughable and you need to go anyway.



BTFO
T
F
O

Maccus wrote:If I had to guess, snap judgement after some bad rounds.

What's even the point? Antagonists are supposed to be antagonistic, how they do that is up to them, not your autistic baystation definition. When you start trying to tell players how to have fun, you've lost as an admin.

See that quote? That's a damn good point on this.

I've been on the /tg/ servers since they started waaaaaay back with TLE and CommisarFuklaw and the rest. You know what /tg/ has always had going for it? That it didn't fuck it's players for doing what they wanted to do, outside of things like rape or forced ERP, and that it managed to have good code while doing it.

We shouldn't have a policy that does this. Hell, we shouldn't even be needing to have the damn discussion about putting in a policy like this. Not to even mention shit like this: https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=33&t=1508

You made a vote-thread on this, got a RESOUNDINGLY LOUD answer of "No we do not want this. Stop." and then put the policy in place anyway. I'm actually surprised that this is even getting discussed in the first place. The game isn't meant to be a hugbox, don't let it become one.

Cheimon wrote:I'm not quite sure how to feel about this. Initially I was really supportive: I hate it when someone spends their entire round attempting to kill off the whole crew of the station, often in a routine and pretty dull way. Whether it's an EI NATH wizard, a gibbing ninja, or a stun and saw traitor that sort of thing gets boring very fast, especially if they've done a few things that make it super hard to counter them without powergaming up to 11. It's not that fun to be a part of, it's not the sort of thing the station can automatically deal with after a point, and it makes for a pretty shit round.

But on the other hand, I'm seeing this used kind of harsher than I would expect. I was a traitor doctor a couple of rounds ago and my target wandered into medbay, so I did the decent thing and killed him, then hid his body. Afterwards I was a bit bored, so I thought I might work on sabotaging the medical treatment of the station: basically, taking advantage of injured people's state and making them 'disappear' with classic traitor tools like emagged medbots and a radioactive health scanner, maybe thinning out the number of doctors or trying to make sure a couple of critical people didn't get cloned or whatever. Just trying to make the round interesting, harder for everyone else, the sort of stuff that would have made sense previous to this policy change.

Now, however, I wasn't sure. So I adminhelped it just to check and go the response "I'd rather you didn't just murder people for no reason". I thought being a traitor was a reason to murder people before, at least a few people, to spice up the round and keep things interesting. If that's stopping, it's going to make certain rounds (traitor particularly: ling gives you full license to murder whichever randoms you want in the name of genomes, team based modes speak for themselves, etc) far more quiet and dull. If it's going to be enforced in this way. I feel like a policy which enforces just sticking to the greentext and not going beyond that if you've succeeded is going to be...kind of dull.

This is very revealing and extremely concerning. So despite the many vague reassurances from the admins on this thread that this is simply for a select few outlier cases, the way this is actually being applied is worse than we thought. This is very disappointing.

Even worse is the varied responses that we have been getting. So are the admins not on the same page or are their responses in this thread just damage control? If its the former, why would you enact a policy without having a unified stance on it? If its the latter, then its only gonna fool people for so long.

The actions are speaking much more than the words in this case.

Edit: Would you mind saying which admin that it was the PM'd you?

walket wrote:Even worse is the varied responses that we have been getting. So are the admins not on the same page or are their responses in this thread just damage control? If its the former, why would you enact a policy without having a unified stance on it? If its the latter, then its only gonna fool people for so long.

You can enforce a policy without actually agreeing with it.

you kind of have to if you want to be an admin

Some people want murderboners banned, that is reasonable. One person wants most of the station population to leave out of spite due to their changes being disliked, that's Paprika.

paprika wrote:Really though you can leave if you don't like it

There is it guys. Thats the answer you can expect if you try to argue with any changes SoS makes. Yeah your right, this isnt NoX, this is worse than NoX.

Um, I'd like to put in my experience with murderboning.

1: Generally any time I die to someone from a gun/bow/sword in such a way that I can't even type 'say; help' (Especially with most forms of assault interrupting your radio transmissions.) I feel... disappointed. A little frustrated, salty, if you will.

2: This salt turns into raw anger if I learn the person who did it, did it for no reason. (Either an Ahelp or round end objectives listing.) No reason being: I have no association with the target in any real way. I understand if I'm chilling in the escape arm, and I get pewpewed by a guy with escape alone. If I Ahelp it and it's valid (for whatever reason), I just take a deep breath and grab a munchy, maybe play something else if I'm still 'fired up'.

3: I get outright infuriated if the person who killed me went out of his way to make sure the only way I can return to the round is either as a drone or as an event, aka: Permanent disposal of the corpse, either by spacing, or the various forms of gibbing. Valid or not, that could easily mean 50 minutes of me not being in the game.

4: I don't find myself all that bothered if I'm killed from more creative means, an Emagged Medibot, invisible toxic gases from Atmos, heck, even releasing the singu and me getting caught in it is a 'minor' offense, such slow, deliberate methods of murder are avoidable, and at least feel (Mostly) unique, deaths, deaths that make me go 'Wow, I can't believe he managed to set that up.'

4 addendum: Exception being One HUmaning the AI and telling it to kill non humans. (Corporate/Paladin AIs ftw...) There might be some bias here as I am practically a professional robotocist, but a one humaned AI is just as bad as an Emah/Esword on my rage inducer.

What's the point I'm getting at? None really, just a community member stating his opinions on when being Antagonized stops being fun.