Enable IC_PRINTING in game_options.txt

[iamgoofball]

Bottom post of the previous page:

Circuits are going to be replacing R&D pretty soon here with the techwebs merge and decentralization of R&D, and right now, why would I bother making anything complex if I can't save my work?

Things that can happen without the ability to back my work up:
"oh, rev/gang/wizard/cult/clockcult/nuke round just ended 15 minutes in, RIP my design I was halfway through building, no way to back it up before round restarts"
"hey check out this cool logic module I made to use in other configurations, too bad I can't save it and reuse the technology elsewhere"
"here's an example on how to set up locomotion, oh wait, I can't give you the design"


Potential issues:
"people will spam stun bots!"
we nerf the stunner/make it traitor only
"people will spam the same bots over and over again and wont improve their design"
they already do

[cedarbridge]

If we can store four designs do you think bits of AI that can be used to develop a botany bot are gonna be saved or three finished killbots and one finished "HELP I GOT STUNNED" circuit

Is that a persistence problem or a "the system itself is so obtuse it requires cross-round cooperation" problem?

Answering a question with another question to get out of actually answering is a logical fallacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy
Stop posting.

[iamgoofball]

If we can store four designs do you think bits of AI that can be used to develop a botany bot are gonna be saved or three finished killbots and one finished "HELP I GOT STUNNED" circuit

Is that a persistence problem or a "the system itself is so obtuse it requires cross-round cooperation" problem?

Answering a question with another question to get out of actually answering is a logical fallacy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_fallacy
Stop posting.

I didn't say Q is false, I pointed out that P is a fallacy and asked him to answer like a real person. He still hasn't.

[cedarbridge]

Considering Kor's question is rhetorical I don't know your point.

[Grazyn]

It's still a system that encourages people to make their stuff on a private server and then copypaste it in game, that or hide in a locker while you program your thing and hope it isn't one of those "sudden round end" game modes.

You've failed to explain to me why people would use private servers to make stuff if they can make it here and back up their progress?

Alright, so they're not making it on a private server. Instead, they are literally hiding in a locker until they're done (given they save every minute in case of random bombing, missed radiation warning, sudden round end or any other event). I think there can be a middle ground between "scientists holing up the whole round" and "shitting out powerbots with no effort at all". I already suggested this

One solution would be to allow cloning, but only in-game: the code is saved to a buffer inside the analyzer and isn't actually displayed, you can then load it directly from the analyzer (think multitool quantum pad buffers). So you can still make your OP machine and mass-produce it inside the same round. Or an in-game database of blueprints which carries over between rounds (BUT ONLY if the blueprint server wasn't destroyed/wiped), and prints disks that you can load into the circuit printer (again, without displaying code). You can add your designs to the database in the same way using the buffer in the analyzer.

This way you can still have your sexbot carry over to the next round but players can't rely on a permanent pastebin repository, they have to make it live on the server at least once, and they have to remake their own machine from scratch whenever the server is destroyed.

But maybe I'm wrong and we're soon gonna see useful civilian bluprints pop up on the wiki page, and people mass-producing them every round for the joy of everyone, or maybe we're just gonna see the same killbots, alarm-o-bots and annoy-o-trons over and over again.

I guess only time will tell

[TrustyGun]

From the sounds of Goofball's proposal, there would be no copy/pasting of code or no way to save code, it would all be saved serverside. You actually would need to put in the effort to make your personal killbot 2000.

[Cobby]

i gotta be honest the real reason I stopped playing(aside from burning out) was the fact that I already learned everything that's a set prefixed path, so the only entertaining things anymore are gimmicks that are out of the ordinary to produce out of the ordinary rounds, and circuits, because circuits are 100% modular and have loads of shit you can do with them(because its programming)

all the upsides of programming for ss13 without having to deal with PRs, balance, arguing about ethics and borg journalism, etc.

Being able to start from midway = you exhaust the feature faster though?

"Dang if only I had a few more minutes I could have fixed that kink, now I gotta try again from start/ well let me try a new project instead"
vs
"Oh no worries I can simply finish it next round then work on my... oh wait I did that 5 rounds ago"

[Darkgenerallord]

Being able to start from midway = you exhaust the feature faster though?

"Dang if only I had a few more minutes I could have fixed that kink, now I gotta try again from start/ well let me try a new project instead"
vs
"Oh no worries I can simply finish it next round then work on my... oh wait I did that 5 rounds ago"

On the other hand, this is my opinion from myself and multiple others I've spoken to. We basically gave up before it got enabled due to the fact it was really, really tedious to start from the beginning every time, and it was more or less impossible to make anything remotely complex within a round.

[cedarbridge]

Being able to start from midway = you exhaust the feature faster though?

"Dang if only I had a few more minutes I could have fixed that kink, now I gotta try again from start/ well let me try a new project instead"
vs
"Oh no worries I can simply finish it next round then work on my... oh wait I did that 5 rounds ago"

On the other hand, this is my opinion from myself and multiple others I've spoken to. We basically gave up before it got enabled due to the fact it was really, really tedious to start from the beginning every time, and it was more or less impossible to make anything remotely complex within a round.

ss13.txt

The whole concept is that everything starts from zero at roundstart. Permanence isn't meant to be a thing outside of player interactions.

[Darkgenerallord]

ss13.txt

The whole concept is that everything starts from zero at roundstart. Permanence isn't meant to be a thing outside of player interactions.

I've said this before, but it's either keep the copy feature or just straight remove it. There's literally no purpose in keeping it in without it, and I still have problems with it as a feature even with it in.

[RandolfTheMeh]

ss13.txt

The whole concept is that everything starts from zero at roundstart. Permanence isn't meant to be a thing outside of player interactions.

I've said this before, but it's either keep the copy feature or just straight remove it. There's literally no purpose in keeping it in without it, and I still have problems with it as a feature even with it in.

Essentially.

Any new and interesting machines you may make will take all shift, should this be an actual, semi-complex design. And the issue with our rounds is that there is no predictability. It could be a laid-back round and you could be doing far better collecting your resources required for the IC, yet suddenly at 20 minutes in, operatives arrive and the shuttle gets red-alerted and called and you're only halfway done and now it's the next round and it takes you 10 minutes to get an IC, 5 minutes for the materials, then as you get started the bar you're working in gets bombed and now you need to wait until next round. It's an easily frustrating cycle that has no reward for those efforts you put in prior, and only through IC_Printing can you at least console yourself that at least you made it a little further with your design that round, even if it wasn't brought into fruition.

I have issues with your arguments, Cedar, because you're arguing that the whole point of SS13 is the impermanence of its gameplay, which to me sounds like it was just made up? Not only that, but even if it was, you've clearly not brought up points like "I have worked with these circuits and have come to conclude that IC_printing is harmful to both it and the game". It's more of a personal issue I have with your argument, and so please don't see it as an attack against you as a person, but rather that I feel your argument tries to argue against ICs in general as a concept, as opposed to IC_Printing. Anyone who's touched ICs for more than just a universal translator or personal inducer should know that it takes multiple shift and quite a bit of brainstorming to make a product that'll see actual use.

So although I am against disabling IC_Printing, for the reasons stated in the first paragraph, I agree with DGL that if we should disable IC_Printing, we might as well remove ICs.

[Cobby]

Conversely, we add more features like ICs that take a while to go to full effect so people are encouraged to prolong rounds.

People would be much more inclined to mutiny over stub my toe shuttle calling if they had investment in the round, and I think ICs are a good step in that direction.

your last post

Enable keeping your slimes in game_options.txt
Enable keeping your atmos setup in game_options.txt
Enable keeping cargo points in game_options.txt

While there are some minute meme items that have persistence, most of the game is balanced around the idea everything is set back to normal at the end of each shift.

[Karp]

I personally think disabling IC printing would be better personally if rounds lasted longer than 30 minutes, but until roundtimers start becoming a consistently long enough so that someone could build a complex machine that lasted for longer than 10 minutes tops printing must be enabled so people don't feel cheated by ebin "stubbed toe call shuttle" memes. Unless you encourage killing people who call the shuttle resulting in a divide between salty observers who got killed early and the people who want to antag reroll/get new valids/avoid any conflict against people who want to extend the round until the station is nothing but scraps and only 3 people are alive while everyone else is disconnected/miserable.

Having people hop onto a private test server to check if something is possible or how to do it would happen no matter what anyways with ICs as it's a complex thing that can't be fully developed in 30-40 minutes. It's a shit argument anyways because people can do the same with the supermatter/mining/botany/anything difficult so they can cheese it on the servers and kill everybody.

A generic killbot or two pastebinned scripts in exchange for allowing people to make beneficial and complex machinery is a worthwhile trade.

[iamgoofball]

Enable keeping your slimes in game_options.txt
Enable keeping your atmos setup in game_options.txt
Enable keeping cargo points in game_options.txt

the difference between these three features and circuits is that slimes/atmos/cargo were designed with resetting in mind, circuits weren't

[Cobby]

Enable keeping your slimes in game_options.txt
Enable keeping your atmos setup in game_options.txt
Enable keeping cargo points in game_options.txt

the difference between these three features and circuits is that slimes/atmos/cargo were designed with resetting in mind, circuits weren't

Yet circuits have just as much of not more utility than these items. Isn't that a bit odd?

[RandolfTheMeh]

Conversely, we add more features like ICs that take a while to go to full effect so people are encouraged to prolong rounds.

People would be much more inclined to mutiny over stub my toe shuttle calling if they had investment in the round, and I think ICs are a good step in that direction.

your last post

Enable keeping your slimes in game_options.txt
Enable keeping your atmos setup in game_options.txt
Enable keeping cargo points in game_options.txt

While there are some minute meme items that have persistence, most of the game is balanced around the idea everything is set back to normal at the end of each shift.

In terms of encouraging prolonged rounds:
Notice how the second example given in my post doesn't rely on round length, and that the first will never be impacted by ICs- especially if the nukes ops win. Round length in the post I made was not beginning-to-end length, but how long you're capable of being in it. I have my doubts that this is the sentiment shared by most of those in charge of this server's current game direction, at any rate. I can be wrong in this matter, but the only thing on this matter that I've seen are long-winded posts on the forums with little/no policy changing. I certainly hope the enforcing of name policy is not brought up as a counterexample, given that was a sign of regression over the years, and our inconsistency on enforcing it means this isn't a blanket policy.
Returning to the original point: Rev rounds, Cult rounds, Nuke op rounds- none of these will be reliant on how attached we are to the round. They have set end games. This is assuming you're not one of the antags/killed by the antags.

In terms of the "keeping your 'x'" in a witty connection between two game mechanics:
Notice how each of those examples give you benefits at each step of the way. Cargo points can be used at any point for any crate of that cost or less. Slimes always have a benefit, so if at any point you need to pack up with what you have, you actually physically have something. Atmos, you have something. Tritium takes five minutes. Fusion ten. Stimulum fifteen. Circuits will not have this milestone benefit system because each new concept is either A) Functional or B) Not Functional. And each new concept takes time to make, to debug, to test during normal settings to ensure functionality, etc.

You had also retorted to Goofball's post in regards to this last point, stating that "circuits have just as much of [sic] not more utility than these items. Isn't that a bit odd?" Then I'd be more than glad to see what sort of inventions you've managed to get out within the first fifteen/twenty minutes of the round even with cloning. I literally have to bribe the scientists with a relatively sizeable amount of materials in order to get an upgraded IC printer reliably- and most circuits aren't built to function independently. These circuits need prep work that goes into them in order to get them to operate correctly, meaning that they require quite a bit of legwork to get functioning. Yet again, this doesn't seem to be an argument of "I had worked with circuits and disliked it for 'x'", but instead an argument of "I dislike the concept that goes into them and therefore we must change it", which is how I've read just about all the posts in this thread except unironically Goofball's, who has stated rather crassly that without IC_Printing no one will do ICs for much beyond memes, because he understands just how vexating it is to put in work that'll never see fruition. And please, do not state that they have "as much, if not more utility" to things like xenobio, where you can raise your own xenobio army, gain access to wizard spells, and make yourself into an immortal changling. Back with the shocker circuits I could certainly see that parallel, but now they're literal shells that even when fully crafted required exterior components.

Or cargo, which can get access to traitor gear through an emag.
Or atmos, with their easy-to-make bomb kits, stimulum supplies, and kill potential.
In hindsight, they actually have less utility than those examples you stated- they just have a more tailored functionality.

[Cobby]

If these things are so inconsequential as written then sure I have no problem with copypasta scripts much like tcomms memery.

[cedarbridge]

I have issues with your arguments, Cedar, because you're arguing that the whole point of SS13 is the impermanence of its gameplay, which to me sounds like it was just made up? Not only that, but even if it was, you've clearly not brought up points like "I have worked with these circuits and have come to conclude that IC_printing is harmful to both it and the game".

No other department in the game sans the library computer database (which has essentially zero impact on actual gameplay) has any form of permanence. Our server policy dictates against carrying grudges between rounds. We do allow some character knowledge carry-over between rounds as a matter of policy (nobody's required to suddenly rediscover everyone's name from scratch) but no actual gameplay mechanics contain any notable level of permanence. Its not something that I made up. Its implicit to the design. The round starts, tech levels are zero, the engine isn't set up, SMES systems are powered only to a default level, medbay is stocked only with the roundstart basics and virology only has roundstart cultures. Permanence does not exist and has little reason to exist in a game world where station roles shift wildly with each round. This is also true in the sense that rounds are often ended with cataclysmic events. Nukes vaporize the station, an eldritch horror springs into the living world, etc etc. None of these events would give even the slightest hint of "and then I just went back to work the next day when everything calmed down and picked up where I left off."

[oranges]

ss13 does not cross rounds, end of story

[iamgoofball]

ss13 does not cross rounds, end of story

Poly does

The fact none of you read my post about design involving permanence is proof enough our community can't handle circuits

[DemonFiren]

that statement would be equally valid coming from jmad

[iamgoofball]

that statement would be equally valid coming from jmad

Please explain how this contributes to the discussion?

[DemonFiren]

if your posts do, so do mine

[Grazyn]

ss13 does not cross rounds, end of story

Poly does

The fact none of you read my post about design involving permanence is proof enough our community can't handle circuits

Well but how does the fact that it was designed with permanence in mind affect the argument? Note that this isn't true either, otherwise they wouldn't have added a config option to disable copypasting.

>"this thing is OP because it's available at roundstart with no effort and nothing that can reliably affect the round should carry over to the next"
>"no but you see, it was designed to be available at roundstart with no effort and to reliably carry over between rounds"
>"oh alright then"

Also, Randolf, you keep stressing the fact that permanence is essential to circuits because otherwise it takes too long, and so what? If you need an extended round or a traitorling round lasting 2+ hours to pull it off, so what? It isn't even true that all long term projects except circuits give you something at every step. Transit tube network? Quantum pad network? Experimental bomb mix? Oh, the round ended before I could finish/test it, well it sucks, now I have nothing and I must start over from scratch but that's how the game is designed.

And you DO have stuff to work with even if your circuit isn't finished. Let's take your example, xenobio. I want to make sentient spiders. Oh the shuttle is called, I'll never reach gold slimes in time. I have other slimes though? Too bad I don't give a shit about the metal or silver slimes I made in the process. It's the same with circuits. Oh the shuttle is called and you'll never finish your machine in time? Well go check your protolathe, I guess it unlocked other stuff on the way to circuits, didn't it? Go play with that instead.


You are all trying to force the concept that if something needs effort and you can't reliably make it in every game mode, it should carry over between rounds. This is lazy design and it will snowball into something bad.

[Karp]

ic printing was standard until people argued that leaving it in would cause people to hate ICs and get them removed

The issue with your logic on permanence though is that you can easily complete a basic killing machine in 10-15 minutes. If you want ICs to be used for their full potential and not just as another advanced egun for science I don't think it's possible without saving. It's not a matter of every gamemode, it's a matter of not being possible outside of rare scenarios like the pop dropping below 50-40 people, hits extended without people wanting to minorly grief their way into a shuttle, or a traitor/traitorling round that isn't chaotic at all.

A decent IC setup can eat 30+ minutes easily, whereas piping a transit or pneumatic/quantum pad system is something that takes 10-15 minutes maximum after researching it. Experimental bombmixes themselves DO save over in your mind though, you know the impact of the mix and can work from there to get an even higher dev bomb and the steps to get there. The challenge in bombmaking isn't in the factual production, it's in the theoretical work of what you need to do to gain a functional mix of how to burn gasses and react it.

[PathOfChaos1]

Input into the game a device that can shut off bad bots, and other such things. make it available to order by cargo, producible by science, and have a spare inside security. Do not restrict the ability to combat IC devices to only the people who know how to use IC devices. If we are going to have a dump of all the "Best" IC stuff at least make it just as easy to combat. If it is indeed super difficult to do anything of note than yeah perhaps we should have it available since its difficulty isn't tied to the game, or progression.

Spoiler:

Unless it is then fuck you.

Afterwards just make it harder to get better parts or something that load more/better/complex codes easier.

Its such a niche thing that only Coders get to play with, and Coders get to play with the whole fucking game. Why you gotta get in here and shit on our rounds actively anywho?

[Grazyn]

If you really have trouble understanding ICs and think that only coders can play with them, I suggest you hone your skills by playing yesterday's Google Doodle.

[KeyboardCreature]

The way I see it, the current application of integrated circuits is frustrating and time-consuming. The systems of chemistry, xenobiology, and engineering can do a lot in a single shift, but to wire a semi-complex machine might take the entire round. There's very little reason to even attempt to use the IC system if you can't save your work or make robots in bulk, so this extremely compelling system goes unused. From what I've gathered, the three objections are from the fear of "copy-paste circuits", the construct that "ss13 does not cross rounds, end of story", and that IC is too powerful.

There's a lot of worry about copy-paste circuits, but disabling IC printing is a terrible solution. This is like trying to prevent "copy-paste chem-mixes" by only allowing the dispenser to dispense 1 drop of reagent at a time, or trying to stop people from making "copy-paste bombs" by decreasing the rate of mixing. Sure, disabling IC printing, jamming the dispenser, and slowing mixing will reduce copy-paste, but that's just because people will just stop using the system altogether. It's a band-aid fix over a broken leg, covers the bruises, won't actually help.

Even so, how does disabling IC printing even begin to fix that problem? Is there even an actual problem with copy-paste circuits? If it's the problem of effort, know that anything worth making requires more than just the circuits to function. To make a robot gunner, you need the gun itself. Steal it from security, possibly. You need to replace and charge batteries, you need constant maintenance, constant attention. To make even the most basic suicide mine, you need to steal ingredients from chemistry or set up a chemical dispenser yourself. Even something as simple as a time display requires access to metals and power cells. A circuit is a physical object with physical dependencies. This is the part that is variable and unpredictable. You can't just paste a script into the assembler and have it work automatically. These physical requirements are the "fun" part of custom robotics in this game, not the repetitive wiring of established designs.

If the issue is the copying of ideas, is copying pasting into a text field somehow wrong while opening a second monitor to a circuit diagram and clinking the same buttons monotonously every single round somehow fairer? If people really wanted to copy circuit designs, disabling IC printing just means that they will just have to click manually; it's still faster to copy a design than to create it from scratch. Honestly, this issue is so hypothetical and minuscule that it baffles me why it has gained so much traction. I hope that we don't crucify chemists when they learn new recipes or ideas. I hope that we don't ban people for learning steps to making maxcaps. The sharing of ideas, stories, and knowledge is the foundation of this game.

When I observe the flow of this game, I find it hard to believe that this game isn't persistent. People gain new knowledge of traps, precautions, and ideas. We bring our past lives to the next and the game evolves. When a shift begins, physical signs of persistence is ever-present in the form of secret satchels and Poly. It's a contradictory feeling in a game that otherwise might seem like discrete rounds. If there are any hard design rules for this game, global non-persistance is obviously not one of them. Any non-persistance in this game exists for specific reasons: to allow deceit, repair, and the continuation of the game. All sins abolished, all injuries fixed in the next round. The world is reset so that scientists can continue to research and botanists can continue to plant.

But, even after the reset, knowledge is preserved. The chemist can record her results in a piece of paper on her desk, and replicate her findings in two minutes. The captain writes a custom AI lawset copied on a notepad somewhere in a second screen. He found that the last round with the law set was fun, so he decides to do the same in the current round. Do we expect the chemist to repeat the same experiment and blow herself up again? Do we expect the captain to delete his notepad, forget his last round, and retype the law set from the very beginning? The chemist gains knowledge of past experiments, and this information continues on in the next round. The captain copies and pastes that notepad from his second screen directly into the current round's AI.

However, the programmer must repeat essentially the same process from scratch. To get to where he was last, he will spend as much time as he has always done before, mindlessly clicking buttons for the entire round, stuck in RnD forever, with no changing variables and no new information. Unlike the xenobiologist, who can create monsters in bulk, the programmer must spend another 30 minutes wiring his circuits if he wants a second robot, using information that he already should know in his head. The programmer has experimented and tested his designs. Let this information flow to the next life, like everything else. Think of IC printing not as a cheat, but as a necessary abstraction of programming. In the same way that we don't expect people to type AI law sets from scratch every time, we shouldn't design circuits around wiring the same thing every round for 30 minutes.

But then, without the life-draining, monotonous barrier of wiring, what will prevent IC from being overpowered? Although disabling IC printing will harm the game, we can't allow death machines to be built in 5 minutes either. The solution is quite simple. We fix it like how we should fix everything else. ACTUAL BALANCING. If machines are too quickly made, we should adjust the cost of circuitry or link it to the tech web system. If death robots are too powerful, we should actually fix the problem and work out the speed, damage, and power consumption. Bots should have weaknesses and countermeasures to make them more nuanced and fun, for both the programmer and the targets. Everyone wants a quick fix, but the only way to truly improve this game requires time and a shitton of effort. Disabling IC printing for the sake of balancing was a mistake. Enabling IC printing is the first step toward dealing with the real problems at hand.

I believe that this IC system might potentially be the best system in this game. It may not look very presentable now, but I know that the component-based nature of the system allows for it to be accessible to everyone once more work is put into the UI and underlying systems. Once it is fully developed, this system allows for an endless amount of new evolutions and designs, for many years to come. Now that this system is finally created, a system so full of creative potential is finally brought to this game, are we willing to ruin it for the sake of combatting speculative threats and unsubstantiated traditions? We have to fix the real problems of IC, not rashly issuing sledgehammer beatings for the sake of preserving the status quo.

[cedarbridge]

ss13 does not cross rounds, end of story

[KeyboardCreature]

ss13 does not cross rounds, end of story

I'm not sure that's entirely true. Either way, we can't let tradition get in the way of good ol' engaging game design. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon

[cedarbridge]

ss13 does not cross rounds, end of story

I'm not sure that's entirely true. Either way, we can't let tradition get in the way of good game design. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon

Its not a bandwagon fallacy. Its not tradition. Its a statement of fact as much as fact can be applied to game design.

Space station 13 is a game about a space station. Were it not a game about a space station, it would cease to be space station 13.
Space station 13 does not cross rounds. The beginning and end of all things (apart from poly I guess) is the start and end of the round. This is for many reasons that may include the fact that many rounds end with the total destruction of the station. Altering a fundamental part of the game design in order to make a newly designed feature work is not "good game design." Its shoehorning.

[Qbopper]

does knowledge of previous rounds/characters/etc. not count?

did that smuggler's satchel thing get scrapped?

[KeyboardCreature]

ss13 does not cross rounds, end of story

I'm not sure that's entirely true. Either way, we can't let tradition get in the way of good game design. https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/bandwagon

Its not a bandwagon fallacy. Its not tradition. Its a statement of fact as much as fact can be applied to game design.

Space station 13 is a game about a space station. Were it not a game about a space station, it would cease to be space station 13.
Space station 13 does not cross rounds. The beginning and end of all things (apart from poly I guess) is the start and end of the round. This is for many reasons that may include the fact that many rounds end with the total destruction of the station. Altering a fundamental part of the game design in order to make a newly designed feature work is not "good game design." Its shoehorning.

I believe that we are in agreement in 3 instances.

1. You believe that SS13 is a game about a space station, which implies that a fundamental feature of the game is the resetting of the station to preserve continuity. In this, I agree. A main drawing point of the game IS the allowing of continuity through the resetting of the station, which exists not simply for the sake of resetting player progress but to encourage new play from a fresh perspective. This leads to my second agreement.

2. I agree that disabling IC printing it isn't a bandwagon fallacy and the impermanence of the station isn't tradition. This is partly due to the fact that SS13 doesn't actually enforce this facet of design globally. As I mentioned in an earlier post, what actually gets reset between rounds is exceptionally selective. We retain memories; we gain knowledge; we are encouraged to make notes on chemical reactions and toxin ratios. We copy fun AI law sets to be used for future rounds. We retain experiences.

3. In addition, I agree that "altering a fundamental part of game design in order to make a newly designed feature work is not 'good game design.'" However, this reasoning neglects the impacts of these systems. Suppose if altering a part of the game makes the game more engaging, would you say that the addition was bad? We would simply alter the fundamental of this game into a more nuanced evolution rather than a hard and fast rule. Consider Poly. If the fundamental of SS13 was truly global impermanence, Poly would be an enormous exception. A silly example, but it proves one thing. Design is malleable and changes to better the game. If something makes the game better, it's sillier to ignore it. As above, improvement isn't always easy, but I know through a bit of elbow grease, we can make this game much better.

But of course, re-enabling IC printing doesn't actually alter the fundamental game design anyways. In fact, I believe that it adheres more truthfully to the design of SS13 than disabling the system in the first place. SS13 doesn't center around true impermanence, rather, it's about what we do retain. Experience is the teacher that allows every new game to be fresh and new. We become better at our job, we find new ideas, new things to do. The reset is a fresh canvas for these ideas to flourish, not an obstacle that stunts progress. We find this in the way that a chemist can write down notes on chemical recipes, in the way that bomb makers can notate ratios, or in the way AI law sets can be copied and passed around for future use. In this way, SS13 is a game about constant improvement and the chaos that results from this. The IC printing system encourages this improvement. It's impossible to retain knowledge of circuits into the next round for future use, or at least, not practical. Therefore, the IC printing system is really an abstraction from this obnoxious task. No one wants to memorize the 30+ wires of every mechanism. And even after that, it's painfully impossible to apply it to the next round in a reasonable time. Without a way to print integrated circuits, getting "good" at IC just means getting eye strain and carpal tunnel from flipping through diagrams and constant clicking.

In a final support, I can find various examples of successful systems that truly embody the SS13 philosophy in other servers. Take the Goonstation chemistry grouping functionality, for example. You can set custom grouping for chemicals so that you won't have to manually click on each button like a robot. Using what you know from the last round, you can modify these groupings to improve your speed and efficiency. This is an example of streamlining mechanics to better fit the central game design. The IC printing system is different, but I hope that you can see how there are proven successes in mechanics that truly adhere to the design of this game rather than follow the surface interpretation.

[KeyboardCreature]

does knowledge of previous rounds/characters/etc. not count?

did that smuggler's satchel thing get scrapped?

I can spawn the satchel on my own server. I don't know if it still exists in-game, but I haven't read anything in the changelog that indicates otherwise.
https://www.digg.com/r/SS13/comments/ ... _satchels/
https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/ ... gelog.html

[cedarbridge]

words

You wrote a lot of words to being told "No" but forged on ahead anyway. There's a word for that.

[KeyboardCreature]

words

You wrote a lot of words to being told "No" but forged on ahead anyway. There's a word for that.

I think the word is persistence? Kind of like what the game has? There's not a lot to discuss unless we actually address each other's arguments. I've stated my position and supporting evidence. But here's a short summary.

1. Even if SS13 is actually non-persistent, it can still evolve and change. As long as the game improves, there's no reason to stick to hard rules. I gave an example of Poly, who supposedly doesn't fit with the current SS13 game design but stuck anyways because it was more fun. Insert something about secret satchels.
2. SS13 isn't actually non-persistent in a true sense anyways. Game never actually resets, people retain knowledge. No reason why circuits can't do the same. IC printing is the only practical way to carry knowledge to the next round. Nobody wants to restart their work every time they start on a new round and no one wants to memorize 30+ wire connections. People copy law sets, chemical ratios, toxin mixes, over multiple rounds, no reason why circuits can't do the same, ect, ect. IC printing is abstraction because otherwise, it's way too annoying.
3. Gave example of good implementation of game design that actually follows the SS13 philosophy, the Goonstation chemical grouping system. Rewards player for experimentation and helps efficiency. Doesn't stick to hard rules, instead actually makes game better.

This was a brief, sleep deprived overview, don't quote this post, quote the

words

post I wrote earier. I explained it a bit clearer there.

Also, does it even matter if this breaks some sort of SS13 convention (it doesn't)? I actually fail to see how this is going to harm the game. Something like, "IC printing breaks SS13 convention, protect the sanctity of SS13 or SS13'll run into identity issues, then

SS13 ceases to be Space Station 13

" or something? Like a slippery slope argument? https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope I don't think SS13 has an identity problem or anything, but if something as tame as a quality of life feature "fundamentally alters the game", it's not a very solid foundation to place the game on anyways. It's obviously super restrictive toward bettering the game. Either way, as stated above, SS13 doesn't even follow that rule.

It's dark, I'm tired, feel free to address my argument or attack my character or whatever.

[cedarbridge]

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

Fixed that for you.

[cedarbridge]

words

You wrote a lot of words to being told "No" but forged on ahead anyway. There's a word for that.

I think the word is persistence? Kind of like what the game has?

Its called stubborness. You were told by a maintainer that the game will not contain major persistent effects or systems like the one you're forging forward about being added. In spite of this you continue to insist that it should happen. That's also been known as "wasting your breath."

1. Even if SS13 is actually non-persistent, it can still evolve and change. As long as the game improves, there's no reason to stick to hard rules. I gave an example of Poly, who supposedly doesn't fit with the current SS13 game design but stuck anyways because it was more fun. Insert something about secret satchels.

>even if it is what it is it can still change
Yes, the game changes literally by the hour. What it does not do is change into a different sort of game. A game with major persistent features is not a game of SS13. By definition. I explained why this is before but you forged on head insisting that it is about persistent features because it can become one. Which is itself a logical black hole. Also bringing up satchels like they actually do anything is a non-starter. Poly is literally a joke character NPC with no in-round effect of consequence. The only thing that persists is that poly populates his dialog text from a list of heard words. That's not persistent gameplay. Its a gimmick. Comparing Poly to literally carrying projects between rounds is so far out of the realm of comparable things it actually baffles me to hear it clung to like this.

2. SS13 isn't actually non-persistent in a true sense anyways. Game never actually resets, people retain knowledge. No reason why circuits can't do the same. IC printing is the only practical way to carry knowledge to the next round. Nobody wants to restart their work every time they start on a new round and no one wants to memorize 30+ wire connections. People copy law sets, chemical ratios, toxin mixes, over multiple rounds, no reason why circuits can't do the same, ect, ect. IC printing is abstraction because otherwise, it's way too annoying.

"In the true sense"
In the true sense the map resets to its default state. Any additions or subtractions to the map are reset to their original states. Any items created, moved lost or destroyed are also reset to their original state of being or unbeing. In a true sense there is no meaningful persistence. The game always resets. The players are not lobotomized between rounds but that doesn't make the game itself persistent or give it mechanics that carry from round to round. Chess is not a persistent board game. The game does not continue after it has finished. The peices move back to their original locations before a new game can be played. The players retain their knowledge of how peices move and maybe even remember how they moved them. Chess is not a persistent game.
>Printing is the only way to make circuits work
Then circuits is the problem. If the system cannot work without altering a fundamental principal in the game's design then its a feature that does not fit with the game. I'm sorry if you're really fond of the concept, but that means it will either have to be reworked to fit with the game's design criteria or just cease to exist like every other feature over the years that doesn't fit within the game's design space.
>people copy lawsets
Custom law boards do not remain on the station for players to find after being used in the round previous. What you mean is "players remember the laws they've used previously or just store them in text files for later copy-paste use. Which is a non-starter because its still not an in-game system or effect that is causing this. Law boards do not persist.
>ratios, toxins mixes
Player knoweldge is not a game mechanic. You've had a hard time getting past the "storing my work between rounds so I can press a "make what I made 10 rounds ago" button and "Oh yeah I remember how to max clonex."
>Otherwise its too annoying
See above. That's a problem with the new feature not with the game and not something the game should have to mold itself around.

3. Gave example of good implementation of game design that actually follows the SS13 philosophy, the Goonstation chemical grouping system. Rewards player for experimentation and helps efficiency. Doesn't stick to hard rules, instead actually makes game better.

You gave an example of a quality of life feature. That does not make the feature "Good" it makes the game easier for the player by reducing their button presses. QOL features dumb down gameplay and speed it up in equal measure. You've not explained why either of these things are desirable. You've merely asserted that something is "good" because you've said it is "good" and that it "improves the game" in some undefined way. You do that a lot, actually.

This was a brief, sleep deprived overview, don't quote this post, quote the

words

post I wrote earier. I explained it a bit clearer there.

Too late. I don't really care to dig through that many walls of text at 2am.

Also, does it even matter if this breaks some sort of SS13 convention (it doesn't)?

Wouldn't chess be a better game if all the pieces moved themselves and were also robots? I mean, it only breaks some of the conventions of chess but its probably ok because I like robots and I'm also lazy.

I actually fail to see how this is going to harm the game. Something like, "IC printing breaks SS13 convention, protect the sanctity of SS13 or SS13'll run into identity issues, then

SS13 ceases to be Space Station 13

" or something? Like a slippery slope argument? https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/slippery-slope I don't think SS13 has an identity problem or anything, but if something as tame as a quality of life feature "fundamentally alters the game", it's not a very solid foundation to place the game on anyways. It's obviously super restrictive toward bettering the game. Either way, as stated above, SS13 doesn't even follow that rule.

This is what I meant earlier about empty assertions. You have a very dedicated love for QoL. You're also very sure that if the game does not match whatever you need it to be to make room for your QoL de jure that it should morph around the feature instead of the feature being adjusted or scrapped to fit the game. Persistent gameplay mechanics defeats a fundamental design feature of SS13. That design feature outweighs your desire for a QoL feature by definition.

[KeyboardCreature]

Alrighty, finally. Now we're going somewhere. You addressed my arguments directly (thanks for that), so I'm pretty exited to start. But to recap, let's begin with some ground rules and summaries. Here We Go.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I. VALIDITY OF THIS DISCUSSION

Its called stubborness. You were told by a maintainer that the game will not contain major persistent effects or systems like the one you're forging forward about being added. In spite of this you continue to insist that it should happen. That's also been known as "wasting your breath."

First, let's establish the validity of this discussion and set some victory conditions, luckily, most of this is already established by PkPenguins's "How to Properly Use Policy Discussion", so it's not too much work. Here's the link to Policy Discussion rules.
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 33&t=11057
Specifically, I would like to quote from the first rule written on that link:

Ultimately, the thread ends when some majority of headmins have made a ruling on putting the proposed rule into action or ignoring it.

You know, I hope that I'm not wasting my breath. Still, for the purpose of debate, I'm going to assume that my delusion is correct and that this forum actually makes some sort of difference. The bell has not rung and the jury has not decided. Neither of us has convinced the majority of the admins to sway to one side or the other and we haven't really even discussed most of the pros and cons of IC Printing. It's too early to call it quits, so I'm very inclined to keep this discussion moving. Anyways, if the intent of this discussion is to improve the game, it's best for both of us to be a bit stubborn. We can't just end it on a one-sentence dismissal of each other's ideas and I honestly don't know why you keep insisting that the rest of us just shut up.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

II. OUR POSITIONS

Let's both establish our stances on IC Printing for the purpose of clarification.

1. POSITION 1 - DISABLE IC PRINTING
Cedarbridge, you believe that IC printing should be disabled because IC printing is detrimental to SS13 and its design. You stated that the implementation of IC printing will destroy SS13's identity and lead to its destruction. By implementing this system, SS13 will become quick and simple, which will dumb down the game. This is my interpretation of your argument, feel free to adjust this position and notify me if I am incorrect in this summary.

2. POSITION 2 - ENABLE IC PRINTING
I believe that IC printing is both compliant with SS13's current design and that SS13 has no such identity issue. Disabling IC printing was an easy decision, a quick fix for the game's balance that both reduces its complexity and bloats the game overall with arduous non-depth and non-complexity.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

III. CLARIFICATION

I need clarification on a few of your statements.

1. FALLACY FALLACY

https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/the-fallacy-fallacy

Fixed that for you.

I'm not sure if you're saying that I was making a fallacy fallacy or that I was insisting that you were making one. Maybe I was being unclear, I was not claiming that your argument (that IC printing should be disabled) is false due to erroneous support. My assertion was that your support for this claim (IC printing leads to SS13 not being SS13) was unsubstantiated and was, therefore, a slippery slope fallacy and can't be used to support your central claim.

2. WORD OF GOD
I must be misunderstanding something. If a maintainer decides on a decision, we can't ever dispute that decision? Despite the lively discussion by admins and players alike, it all just stops once one specific person speaks? It's not clear to me how this supposed hierarchy actually works, but I'm going to believe for the moment that there's a lot more nuance to this than just "shut up it's over cus captain said so"?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IV. COUNTERARGUEMENT

1. THE (SELECTIVE) PERSISTENCE OF SS13

>even if it is what it is it can still change
Yes, the game changes literally by the hour. What it does not do is change into a different sort of game. A game with major persistent features is not a game of SS13. By definition. I explained why this is before but you forged on head insisting that it is about persistent features because it can become one. Which is itself a logical black hole. Also bringing up satchels like they actually do anything is a non-starter. Poly is literally a joke character NPC with no in-round effect of consequence. The only thing that persists is that poly populates his dialog text from a list of heard words. That's not persistent gameplay. Its a gimmick. Comparing Poly to literally carrying projects between rounds is so far out of the realm of comparable things it actually baffles me to hear it clung to like this.

First, let me make clear what I mean by persistent. I am not talking about a "persistent world".
persistent (adj.) - continuing to exist or endure over a prolonged period.
Then, let's consider SS13.
1a. Things that are non-persistent in Space Station 13: the physical station. Things like items, research, creatures, ect. Stops you from carrying physical items to the next round, except for secret satchels, I guess.
2a. Things that are persistent in Space Station 13: quite literally everything else.

At this point, I think we're just playing a word game with separate definitions. Again, I never insisted that SS13 is persistent because you can carry items from round to round or that the station isn't reset physically. I also never insisted that SS13 can "become" a persistent game. It is already one, by the very definition of the word. The persistence is in knowledge and information, which gets carried over into the next round. THAT is the persistence of SS13. Just because SS13's world resets, doesn't mean that everything has to.

In the true sense the map resets to its default state. Any additions or subtractions to the map are reset to their original states. Any items created, moved lost or destroyed are also reset to their original state of being or unbeing. In a true sense there is no meaningful persistence. The game always resets. The players are not lobotomized between rounds but that doesn't make the game itself persistent or give it mechanics that carry from round to round. Chess is not a persistent board game. The game does not continue after it has finished. The peices move back to their original locations before a new game can be played. The players retain their knowledge of how peices move and maybe even remember how they moved them. Chess is not a persistent game.

Well, here's where we run into a tight spot. I disagree with the notion that chess is "not a persistent game". Again, the persistent that you are insisting is the persistent world. Which, I think we all agree, chess doesn't contain. However, again, "the players retain their knowledge of how peices move and maybe even remember how they moved them", so it's pretty persistent, by definition. Also, yeah, again, mechanics don't carry from round to round, because that's a physical thing. And yes, players are not lobotomized. But just because one part of the game is persistent, and another isn't doesn't make the entire game one thing or another. It's all parts. It's not valid to insist because my car's wheels are made of rubber, the entire car is rubber. Much of SS13 carries over to the next round, which means it contains persistence. But it doesn't mean that because SS13 resets that literally everything must reset. SS13 does contain persistence. I've given some examples but I might not have elaborated on them as much as I should have.

2. IC PRINTING DOESN'T VIOLATE SS13'S SELECTIVE PERSISTENCE

>people copy lawsets
Custom law boards do not remain on the station for players to find after being used in the round previous. What you mean is "players remember the laws they've used previously or just store them in text files for later copy-paste use. Which is a non-starter because its still not an in-game system or effect that is causing this. Law boards do not persist.

Well, here's the issue then. If copy-pasting laws to the game directly into the AI isn't persistence, then I don't know what is. Let's just say that you scroll up in chat to copy-paste a law. Would you disable copy-pasting from chat? Is chat in-game? If it is, then what makes IC printing so different? If it's not, why aren't we banning this feature? I think the problem is that somehow we encourage people to write down information, but completely prevent people from having a simpler way to do it. IC printing is an abstraction that allows for a more elegant transfer of information than "take a screenshot, open a second monitor, get carpal tunnel" way of doing things. It's in the same way that you wouldn't' need to re-type the law set from scratch.

>ratios, toxins mixes
Player knoweldge is not a game mechanic. You've had a hard time getting past the "storing my work between rounds so I can press a "make what I made 10 rounds ago" button and "Oh yeah I remember how to max clonex."

Yeah, I'm having a hard time seeing a reason why we allow outside copying through notepad but not transfer through a polished in-game system. Is it because you think too easy?

3. TWO KINDS OF "EASY"

You gave an example of a quality of life feature. That does not make the feature "Good" it makes the game easier for the player by reducing their button presses. QOL features dumb down gameplay and speed it up in equal measure. You've not explained why either of these things are desirable. You've merely asserted that something is "good" because you've said it is "good" and that it "improves the game" in some undefined way. You do that a lot, actually.

Wouldn't chess be a better game if all the pieces moved themselves and were also robots? I mean, it only breaks some of the conventions of chess but its probably ok because I like robots and I'm also lazy.

I think this is the actual heart of this debate, this insistence on the game being better when the player follows directions on a screen rather than figuring out problems. The simplicity and elegance of IC printing IS the problem that you see, isn't it?

It seems we have two definitions of "easy": the kind where we dumb down the mechanics of this game, and the kind where we don't have to suffer through long winded-clicking. Complexity and depth are wholly separate from clicking buttons. I don't think that it's lazy for me not to want to press buttons repeatedly every single round with no interesting mechanics. To make a game "hard" would you add 100 more button presses to do something, or actually make the system more complex? Does adding more buttons really make for less "dumb down gameplay"? From this logic, the best way to increase this game's complexity and depth would be to make the UI even worse to make it harder to do absolutely everything. You can see how this type of design is horrible for game design, right? I honestly don't even think you believe in this "inconvenience is good" principle. It doesn't make a game more interesting or fun. It makes it an idle clicker, or a simon says with predefined patterns.

Oh, and by the way, yeah. A chess game played automatically would ruin the game because it would remove all the complexity and depth of the game. Chess is fun because it contains complex systems that require you to think instead of just following a set path. But the way that you would make it hard would be by putting spikes on the pieces instead of increasing the complexity of the game or putting in new systems.

The "easy" that I'm talking about, the "easy" that would help chess is if you could play it on your phone. Or if it recorded the position of chess pieces for future analysis. Here's a hypotetical, if you could play it with holograms so that you won't lose the pieces, wouldn't that make the game more convenient? If these robot chess pieces were controlled by a sensor in your brain, would you say that it's less complex because it's easier to play with? Difficulty through repetition and inconvenience is a pretty terrible practice, when there are so much more intresting ways to play.

4. ACTUAL FIXES TO IC
So, after we eliminate this notion of "button-clicking = complex", we can start looking at real issues with the IC system. I'm not exactly sure if IC robots are actually overpowered or not, but the only real problem I see with IC printing is that it could overpowered robots easily available. There's already multiple proposals about adjusting supply costs, speeds, connecting it to RnD techwebs, and developing drone countermeasures. These are fun, intresting, and mentally involved system that work with the other parts of the game. Instead, we get a sledgehammer fix by disabling the IC printing system on the grounds that inconvenience will reduce op-ness. If someone wanted to make a deathbot, they could still do it. It's the people who want to use this system as a non-antag who are hurt by this knee-jerk reaction. Again, let's face the problem directly.

5. IC PRINTING MAKES SS13 A BETTER GAME BY INCREASING DEPTH AND COMPLEXITY
This game will benefit from the IC Printing system by actually letting the player experience more depth and complexity. Instead of spending the entire round recreating a past design you already made 5 minutes ago (or making a second robot), spend that time to work on a new design. Or, use that time to gather materials, steal guns, meet other departments, or go the bar and show off what you made. You would figure that a social game like SS13 would actually encourage social elements and some sort of cross-department stuff. But of course, we get stuck spending the entire round in RnD. Ironically, removing button clicking allows for more time for the player to actually play the game, who'd have thunk it"?

In the end, if IC Printing turns out to be a horrible system, it's a horrible system. If IC Printing turns out to be a good system, no objections about preserving SS13's sanctity will remove it. Consider the pros and cons of IC Printing as if the game just came into existence with it enabled. We should discuss if it's a better game overall with this addition, not whether it's new or old, whether it was added 12 years ago or just today.

[iamgoofball]

time for the defense to cross-examination

[EagleWiz]

I disagree with the notion that chess is "not a persistent game".

Then what ISNT a persistent game? By your definition any game with any level of strategy is a persistent game. Bowling is a persistent game. Uno is a persistent game. Tic-Tac-Toe is a persistent game. Your definition of persistent game is so broad as to be useless.

[KeyboardCreature]

I disagree with the notion that chess is "not a persistent game".

Then what ISNT a persistent game? By your definition any game with any level of strategy is a persistent game. Bowling is a persistent game. Uno is a persistent game. Tic-Tac-Toe is a persistent game. Your definition of persistent game is so broad as to be useless.

Well, yeah. That's just it. Strategy. Knowlege. Skill, ect. Without its persistence, you can't improve over the next round or become better. All games require some type of persistence in the sense that you can actually evolve your play over time. In the same way that you don't carry physical things over, but you carry concepts, ideas, and experience SS13 is persistent. It's not a label as much as a concept of design that's universal across all games. By reducing IC to a test of button clicking, there's nothing meaningful to carry.

Just because all games include the concept of persistence, doesn't mean that there can't be a gradient in how much you can carry stuff over.
With bowling, you can learn better technique. With Uno, you could perhaps learn better strategy and odds, but it's a party game, so you can't carry as much as with bowling. With tic-tac-toe you can learn the basic rules, but you can't improve past a certain point. So, I don't think it's a useless concept. Like the concept of "mass" or "weight". All matter has these characteristics, but you wouldn't say that it's a useless word to describe something.

With SS13 you can literally copy-paste AI law sets, make notes on chemical recipes, toxin ratios, atmos setups, ect. If you were a traitor and found some crazy way to make a custom grenade, you would write down ingredients for later use. Before the RnD revamp, people made guides like this on the best way to do research. https://pastebin.com/aLQL9fCz https://pastebin.com/AZYDwVMT Most of the jobs in this game is carried over to the next in some form or another.

The integrated circuits system is the only thing that you can't pass on to the next, just because it takes longer than around to even start experimenting with the system. Unlike chemistry, or xenobio, or engineering, or atmos, or toxins, or research, you can't make anything with IC within the allotted time. If it takes 30 minutes to wire a robot manually, the next time you'll be forced to do the same thing again with no improvement. If you want to wire a circuit, the best way that you can do it right now is take a screenshot of your last design, hide in a locker, and hope that nothing will reach you until the bot is finished. We should really think of IC printing as an abstraction from this unfun, brainless manual copying.

Regardless, instead of talking about all this "core of SS13" stuff, we should really look at if IC printing makes the game better. IC Printing doesn't even need to justify its own existence if SS13 is a better game as a result of it being implemented. Why are we looking at some sort of "sanctity of SS13" when we can look at the result I'll have on the game? I've already discussed the benefits of IC Printing on the earlier post. So far, I think the concerns are that we think it's going to "dumb down" the game or that it'll make IC overpowered. These are the issues that should be our focus, not speculation on whether it'll violate some sort of imaginary rule.

[cedarbridge]

Sorry friend. I'm not getting baited into another fwoosh-tier text wall of vague abstract posting.

[KeyboardCreature]

Sorry friend. I'm not getting baited into another fwoosh-tier text wall of vague abstract posting.

Same here, all this arguing about the "fundamentals of SS13 stuff is pretty tiring. Just read point three, four, and five of the counterargument section for the general gist.

Basically, all I just said was that we should discuss whether adding IC Printing will RESULT in a better game rather than dispute on the vague, abstract SS13 identity. Point 3 is support for QoL, point 4 is possible fixes to balance IC correctly, and point 5 is the effects of of IC Printing to the game.

[iamgoofball]

Sorry friend. I'm not getting baited into another fwoosh-tier text wall of vague abstract posting.

fwoosh posts r/the_donald madlibs

this guy actually constructed a post

take your ADHD meds and read for once, dipshit

[cedarbridge]

Sorry friend. I'm not getting baited into another fwoosh-tier text wall of vague abstract posting.

Same here, all this arguing about the "fundamentals of SS13 stuff is pretty tiring. Just read point three, four, and five of the counterargument section for the general gist.

Basically, all I just said was that we should discuss whether adding IC Printing will RESULT in a better game rather than dispute on the vague, abstract SS13 identity. Point 3 is support for QoL, point 4 is possible fixes to balance IC correctly, and point 5 is the effects of of IC Printing to the game.

Like I said, I'm not going to read your novel about how chess is totally a persistent game because knowledge persists but this knowledge is totally different because it takes too long to form and collect or some such vague nonsense.

fwoosh posts r/the_donald madlibs

this guy actually constructed a post

take your ADHD meds and read for once, dipshit

The posts being better structured does not make them better posts. Your bias is pretty obvious though.

[iamgoofball]

Sorry friend. I'm not getting baited into another fwoosh-tier text wall of vague abstract posting.

Same here, all this arguing about the "fundamentals of SS13 stuff is pretty tiring. Just read point three, four, and five of the counterargument section for the general gist.

Basically, all I just said was that we should discuss whether adding IC Printing will RESULT in a better game rather than dispute on the vague, abstract SS13 identity. Point 3 is support for QoL, point 4 is possible fixes to balance IC correctly, and point 5 is the effects of of IC Printing to the game.

Like I said, I'm not going to read your novel about how chess is totally a persistent game because knowledge persists but this knowledge is totally different because it takes too long to form and collect or some such vague nonsense.

fwoosh posts r/the_donald madlibs

this guy actually constructed a post

take your ADHD meds and read for once, dipshit

The posts being better structured does not make them better posts. Your bias is pretty obvious though.

you're a douchebag, you know that?

"your argument is invalid because it uses too may words ;_;"

[cedarbridge]

you're a douchebag, you know that?

"your argument is invalid because it uses too may words ;_;"

No, the argument is invalid because its a pseudo-philosophical novella.
Its also invalid because its a cart-before-the-horse attempt to put a feature the two of you like but can't manage to make fit within the structure of the game before the actual game.

[iamgoofball]

No, the argument is invalid because its a pseudo-philosophical novella.

To be fair, you need to have an extremely high IQ to understand SS13

[Incomptinence]

Printing would be fine if the robots took damage from being attacked and parts were gated behind resource input other than pure iron.

Roundstart materials and you can make some pretty dreadful people seeking pneumatic cannon bots I am fairly sure no nades or guns required.

Some fuck just running around turning everything but the plating into damage immune killbots 10 minutes in if we allow IC printing with things as they are.

[cedarbridge]

Printing would be fine if the robots took damage from being attacked and parts were gated behind resource input other than pure iron.

Roundstart materials and you can make some pretty dreadful people seeking pneumatic cannon bots I am fairly sure no nades or guns required.

Some fuck just running around turning everything but the plating into damage immune killbots 10 minutes in if we allow scripting with things as they are.

IIRC the only thing we allow cross-round storage and printing for is books.

[iamgoofball]

Printing would be fine if the robots took damage from being attacked and parts were gated behind resource input other than pure iron.

Roundstart materials and you can make some pretty dreadful people seeking pneumatic cannon bots I am fairly sure no nades or guns required.

Some fuck just running around turning everything but the plating into damage immune killbots 10 minutes in if we allow IC printing with things as they are.

Good one, when did this happen

Additionally you know you can just pick them up and stuff them in your backpack to disarm them right