Re: Security antag is back (on Sibyl/Basil)
Posted: Tue May 13, 2014 7:44 am
Bottom post of the previous page:
People seem to forget that they can't control everything in this game and then whine when they get killed.tgstation13.org
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/
Bottom post of the previous page:
People seem to forget that they can't control everything in this game and then whine when they get killed.imblyings wrote:it's about not making sec shit again.
This Is like saying Security will grief assistants because assistants are able to be antag, thus giving security an excuse to do so.Neerti wrote:It gives assistants an excuse to grief security.
Additionally, you can't trust your comrades, meaning there's less teamwork.
Traitors spawn stun gear lings are shit, yes starting with stun gear is stronger no it doesn't make them indestructible.imblyings wrote:>Would it not just be the same security force, with the addition of antagonists doing antagonist shit as well? Like literally every other role on the station?
>like literally every other role
>every other role starts with stun gear
>every other role can come up with legitimate excuses to arrest you and then make you disappear
>every other role requires teamwork and communication
>every other role already is a high-risk job frequently targeted by and obliged to come into conflict with dangers
yeah no
just stop
Antag Sec is terrible for the people who are nominally the only force of law and order.Neerti wrote:It gives assistants an excuse to grief security.
Additionally, you can't trust your comrades, meaning there's less teamwork.
So what happens when some greytider comes after an antag-sec and has to go through the rest of security? What happens when you get brigged by a non-antag security officer who got dunked shortly afterwords for some bullshit reason given by an antag security officer? What happens when someone takes down security because he thinks they're antags when they really just made a completely justifiable mistake? It's more than just griefers and shitcurity, antag-sec opens up far too many grey areas due to the fact that security's held up to a somewhat higher standard in some ways and that they also have more leeway to do things in others.Brotemis wrote:This Is like saying Security will grief assistants because assistants are able to be antag, thus giving security an excuse to do so.Neerti wrote:It gives assistants an excuse to grief security.
Additionally, you can't trust your comrades, meaning there's less teamwork.
See how stupid that argument is? Ban bad security players and ban the griefer that make good security's jobs hell. Or just let the bad security deal with griefers
How about you try to make a rational argument without 4chan speak?imblyings wrote:>I'm sorry. I forgot people on this server play to win and not the experience.
>security being less painful for the few that play sec somehow equates to playing to win
>using catchphrases you don't understand
>double paranoia on top of a punishing job is a better experience than an experience involving good teamwork
>People seem to forget that they can't control everything in this game and then whine when they get killed.
it's about not making sec shit again.
It's already a "Sec vs Station" battle most of the time, its just that you know your fellow sec team mates WILL back you up, not just shoot you and leave you for dead when you're already being swamped by a tide of grey.mrpain wrote:I'm sorry. I forgot people on this server play to win and not the experience.
One of my fondest SS13 memories was being a captain on /vg/station. The HoS ended up being a traitor and was trying to arrest me to try to assassinate me. I somehow ended up breaking free, he ran off, and the station and security were essentially divided in two trying to kill off both sides.
There is an in game force well placed and fully able to do this. He is called the Head of Personnel. Despite how beleaguered they usually are sec rarely asks for reinforcement or equipment supply, probably because an antag getting into the force and gun cargo make them piss themselves in fear as evidenced here.Ikarrus wrote:We should have security numbers scale to population, like traitors.
Something like 1 officer per 6 crew, with a minimum of 4.
Sec being able to maintain order is bad. The metal deathtrap is supposed to go to hell in a handbasket, that's where the most interesting rounds come from.elyina wrote:I did some experiments during a 90~ population round on sybil the other day. I removed the limit of officers that can join, reinforced the brig (all windows in the office and permabrig replaced with rwalls, maint entrances removed and replaced with rwalls), spawned many extra gear lockers for the new officers, and changed all maint entrances to security and engineer access only. There was around 10 or so fully equipped officers by the end of the round, and they were actually able to somewhat keep order on the station with those numbers. This is a case of extreme buffs that people would never support, but I'd never seen security actually manage to keep control of such a high pop round before.
MisterPerson wrote:Someone answer me this. Why are sec antags so bad that they need to be removed, but engineering antags are 100% kosher? Engineering needs to be able to trust each other. Engineering wants a cohesive department. Engineering running smoothly is, in my opinion, FAR more important for the round than security. Engineering antags can release the singulo and use a beacon to kill an assload of people and ruin escape. Why is this ok, but someone bumrushing one player with a taser-baton (vs an ebow and esword) somehow not ok?
The AI or an atmos tech can release plasma and absolutely destroy multiple people with no chance of escape or prevention. Scientists can gib people with no warning or way to prevent it. Sec antag, meanwhile, can only kill you by stunning you and beating you to death, which will get cries for help. We can always cut down on the number of ways security has to dispose of bodies, if that's the major problem. Or make it easier to find bodies, that's also an option. There's ways to solve the problems with sec-antag short of removing them.
In any case, the pure silliness and meta of "OUR loyalty implants don't do anything, but meanwhile CENTCOMM'S somehow prevent people from being traitors" and "security can be trusted because of OOC reasons" is retarded and further reduces any motivation people have to RP and take the game events seriously.
^elyina wrote: Engineering isn't the department entrusted with protecting the crew, and given the trust of the crew and the authority to imprison/execute people for the round without many people questioning it.
Because Engineers don't get access to free stun weapons.MisterPerson wrote:Someone answer me this. Why are sec antags so bad that they need to be removed, but engineering antags are 100% kosher? Engineering needs to be able to trust each other. Engineering wants a cohesive department. Engineering running smoothly is, in my opinion, FAR more important for the round than security. Engineering antags can release the singulo and use a beacon to kill an assload of people and ruin escape. Why is this ok, but someone bumrushing one player with a taser-baton (vs an ebow and esword) somehow not ok?
The AI or an atmos tech can release plasma and absolutely destroy multiple people with no chance of escape or prevention. Scientists can gib people with no warning or way to prevent it. Sec antag, meanwhile, can only kill you by stunning you and beating you to death, which will get cries for help. We can always cut down on the number of ways security has to dispose of bodies, if that's the major problem. Or make it easier to find bodies, that's also an option. There's ways to solve the problems with sec-antag short of removing them.
In any case, the pure silliness and meta of "OUR loyalty implants don't do anything, but meanwhile CENTCOMM'S somehow prevent people from being traitors" and "security can be trusted because of OOC reasons" is retarded and further reduces any motivation people have to RP and take the game events seriously.
So they're too trusted by the crew to have anyone question their behavior? Well that blows the "sec antag = security can't be trusted" argument out of the water, but it does once again bring up the interest value (or lack thereof) of sec antag vs other antags. And I'm simply arguing that they're not really worse than other antags. Other antags can gank you in ways that are just as bad or WAY WORSE. At least when security kills you, they're physically there, it takes awhile, they make a lot of noise while doing so, they can be stopped mid-murder, and they then have to dispose of your body. A scientist can take you from full health to gibbed without doing anything suspicious, without you knowing what's about to happen, with you standing in the middle of a hallway or other public space, and without even fucking being there.elyina wrote: Engineering isn't the department entrusted with protecting the crew, and given the trust of the crew and the authority to imprison/execute people for the round without many people questioning it.
All traitors have access to free stun weapons.Vekter wrote: Because Engineers don't get access to free stun weapons.
Skyclad.Observer wrote:^elyina wrote: Engineering isn't the department entrusted with protecting the crew, and given the trust of the crew and the authority to imprison/execute people for the round without many people questioning it.
Security's ability to do their job effectively requires them to be able to trust each other, and the crew to be able to trust them. If I know that every sec is a potential traitor? Taking me to the brig for questioning becomes murderspace. Taking me into interrogation becomes harmbaton bodybag. Taking a shortcut through maint because the main hallway got bombed becomes getting absorbed in maint by Officer Changeling, whose buddy set the bomb in the first place.
Being arrested by security, for any reason, becomes a situation potentially resulting in round removal - Much the same as being stuncuffed by any other player, and the average player will act accordingly. This will greatly decrease co-operation with security, greatly increase paranoia and distrust towards security, and greatly increase paranoia within security. I will no longer be able to trust my fellow officer to stand next to me, and the brig is no longer my safe haven.
If you can't see why and how that's bad, then there's no point arguing with you.
Also the things that engineering can do, like release the singularity, cut and fuck up power and release gas all over the station are global. They affect everyone and that makes it more fun. No one really gets pissed off when a singularity eats half the station, or all the oxygen is replaced with hellfire, because it's fun, interesting, kills plenty of people so that the round will end more quickly and is a problem that people will team up to overcome. It makes for fun and interesting rounds.MisterPerson wrote:Someone answer me this. Why are sec antags so bad that they need to be removed, but engineering antags are 100% kosher? Engineering needs to be able to trust each other. Engineering wants a cohesive department. Engineering running smoothly is, in my opinion, FAR more important for the round than security. Engineering antags can release the singulo and use a beacon to kill an assload of people and ruin escape. Why is this ok, but someone bumrushing one player with a taser-baton (vs an ebow and esword) somehow not ok?
This mainly because it takes 5mins each time you adjust ANY single job. That means lowering a count or raising a count on ANY job starts a 5min cooldown.Incomptinence wrote: He is called the Head of Personnel. Despite how beleaguered they usually are sec rarely asks for reinforcement or equipment supply, probably because an antag getting into the force and gun cargo make them piss themselves in fear as evidenced here.
How is antag captain somehow more fun and less annoying than antag security? People trust the two more highly than, say, an assistant.Skyclad.Observer wrote:MisterPerson - Antag Security drastically and adversely affects team cohesion and the relationships within and between Security and the station. Antag Captain, however, is Classic SS13™, and should be in.
Until someone can work out which of these two competing arguments is more important, I'm going to disregard the entire issue. I refuse to argue against myself.elyina wrote: Engineering isn't the department entrusted with protecting the crew, and given the trust of the crew and the authority to imprison/execute people for the round without many people questioning it.
A fair point, but I believe these issues can be solved in a way that doesn't involve outright removal of sec antag. For example, complete removal from the round is awful and I'd be 100% in favor of making it easier to get people back into the round, easier to locate hidden bodies, and harder to completely destroy bodies outright. I also would love more warnings that someone is dead/dying, so it's harder for people to just disappear out of the blue. But that's an issue for the Ideas subforum, not so much here. My point is that these issues are not show-stoppers, although they are obviously quite serious.Stickymayhem wrote: Also the things that engineering can do, like release the singularity, cut and fuck up power and release gas all over the station are global. They affect everyone and that makes it more fun. No one really gets pissed off when a singularity eats half the station, or all the oxygen is replaced with hellfire, because it's fun, interesting, kills plenty of people so that the round will end more quickly and is a problem that people will team up to overcome. It makes for fun and interesting rounds.
A security antag will, because of their lack of anonymity, generally have to kill people one at a time, and completely remove them from the round to be on the safe side. This is not fun. It affects a single person, who is alone in the experience and will not get to play again in what could be an extremely long round.
More often than not, it is obvious that the captain is a traitor, or at least a comdom. On the other hand, a lot of Sec will take security's side, even if it's an antag shitcurity whatever.geilebeer wrote:Traitor captain is less annoying because you will have to deal with on person instead of multiple sec officers.
Which one is it?Skyclad.Observer wrote:On the other hand, a lot of Sec will take security's side, even if it's an antag shitcurity whatever.
... This will greatly decrease co-operation with security, ...
People still do this, although it's mitigated quite a bit by restricted antags. I think this can be resolved in a satisfactory manner without banning antag sec though, as I said before.SKyclad.Observer wrote:Being arrested by security, for any reason, becomes a situation potentially resulting in round removal - Much the same as being stuncuffed by any other player, and the average player will act accordingly; passively avoiding/distrusting security or actively fleeing from or yelling for help. This will greatly decrease co-operation with security, greatly increase paranoia and distrust towards security, and greatly increase paranoia within security. I will no longer be able to trust my fellow officer to stand next to me, and the brig is no longer my safe haven.
Both - In the former, uninformed security will take security's side, over all else. If a botanist is screaming shitcurity, traitor, et cetera, I'm going to blow him off because we get that when we're doing our job normally, too.MisterPerson wrote:Which one is it?Skyclad.Observer wrote:On the other hand, a lot of Sec will take security's side, even if it's an antag shitcurity whatever.
... This will greatly decrease co-operation with security, ...
That's a problem with your playerbase, then. Here on <redacted> our sec are pretty good and everyone likes them.Incomptinence wrote:I really have not seen any anti sec behaviour stop, why care if you are a traitor when the most feared officer is an incompetent one and everyone is always ready to believe they are incompetent?
I have to at least pretend that I'm not a sock puppet for <REDACTED>, that lovable* elitist shitposting dinosaur.MisterPerson wrote:You don't have to redact that, Jesus.