Bottom post of the previous page:
I don't know what to say other than I merged the pr and I think I would understand my own reasons for doing so, even if you believed it was for different reasons than the ones I have put forth.So, secborgs re-enabled anytime soon?
- oranges
- Code Maintainer
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:16 pm
- Byond Username: Optimumtact
- Github Username: optimumtact
- Location: #CHATSHITGETBANGED
- dionysus24779
- Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:03 pm
- Byond Username: Dionysus24779
Re: So, secborgs re-enabled anytime soon?
I went back through the original Peacekeeper thread to check and we're both right as the Peacekeeper was explicitly created as a compromise between both camps, both to mess with whiners who couldn't deal with secborgs and to discourage validhunting as a silicon.beerobot wrote:I don't know what to say other than I merged the pr and I think I would understand my own reasons for doing so, even if you believed it was for different reasons than the ones I have put forth.
These are quotes from Luke Cox who basically created the whole idea and led the charge.
Luke Cox wrote:I designed this as a compromise between the no-secborg camp and the pro-secborg camp. .
Luke Cox wrote:thatsthejoke.jpgShadowDimentio wrote:It's hysterical how you guys are making a hugbot for a secbot replacement.
Luke Cox wrote:What I'm proposing is the most potent law 1-enforcement borg I could think of that wouldn't make people throw a bitch fit. The design is a not so subtle "fuck you" to everyone who couldn't deal with secborgs, and to the admins who wouldn't punish people who broke their laws.
By the way all of that is besides the point of this discussion.Luke Cox wrote:Because that's one of the things people bitched and moaned about with old secborgs. I'd prefer to preemptively avoid the whining by eliminating any form of stun. Plus, we want to avoid any association with secborgs.
But by the way by the way, going through the original thread again there were a lot of ideas to make the Peacekeeper an actually effective replacement for the Secborg, one of the best suggested features would've been an Egg/Grenade launcher that offered a versatile ranged option to silicons, one Idea I also mentioned was an immobilizing (for both borg and victim) "suck in hug" to "calm down aggressors" and give others a chance to flee, but preventing the borg itself from moving too (unless emagged?)
All I'm saying is that if people are still SO damn adamant about keeping Secborgs out we should maybe give the Peacekeeper an overhaul at least. Though as time goes on it seems more and more people want the Secborg back (there was a discussion in OOC a few days ago with most people being pro-Secborg), though as we have already proven polls and such are worthless.
-
- Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:02 pm
- Byond Username: Reece1995
Re: So, secborgs re-enabled anytime soon?
Don't normal borgs have a stun now?
- InsaneHyena
- Joined: Thu Aug 27, 2015 9:13 pm
- Byond Username: InsaneHyena
- Github Username: InsaneHyena
- Location: Russia
Re: So, secborgs re-enabled anytime soon?
Stay delusional, borgfags. Your version doesn't even make any sense.dionysus24779 wrote:As far as I remember it was the exact opposite and meant to mock the players who couldn't deal with Secborgs.beerobot wrote:they weren't added to enforce law, they were added to be a shitty meme module that annoyed the people who wanted the secborg back, that's why they're so ineffective
-
- Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 11:25 am
- Byond Username: Lobstercake
Re: So, secborgs re-enabled anytime soon?
this thread has ran its course
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users