Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Ask and discuss policy about game conduct and rules.

Moderators: In-Game Head Admins, In-Game Game Master

Forum rules
Read these board rules before posting or you'll get reprimanded.
Threads without replies for 30 days will be automatically locked.
User avatar
Swagbringer
 
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2016 9:08 pm
Byond Username: Swagbringer

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Swagbringer » Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:58 am #398644

I wasn't in the round so I can't really talk about lubermancers actions.

For your first point see my earlier post. Why play sec when I can get all their toys with no responsibilities in over half the game modes?

Their is quite simply no reason to rush armory first thing during WarOps. You have 15 minutes minimum before they arrive, time better spent fortifying the station rather then grabbing half the armory and waiting in bar before blowing holes in the clown for slipping you with his pda



User avatar
Grazyn
 
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:01 am
Byond Username: Grazyn

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Grazyn » Mon Apr 09, 2018 9:05 am #398645

Swagbringer wrote:I wasn't in the round so I can't really say.

For your first point see my earlier post. Why play sec when I can get all their toys with no responsibilities in over half the game modes?

Their is quite simply no reason to rush armory first thing during WarOps. You have 15 minute minimum before they arrive, time better spent fortifying the station rather then grabbing half the armory and waiting in bar before blowing holes in the clown for slipping you with his pda

I wasn't in the round either but I found the logs https://tgstation13.org/parsed-logs/bas ... /game.html

As I expected, there was no attempt by Lumber/Schlomo to coordinate any defense or fortifications with his officers and he didn't announce his intentions to the crew beyond "I don't care". He did, however, went to get drunk at the bar and tried his best to gulag/execute as many crewmembers as possible. So yeah, I'll take "jaded player tries to ruin round because he doesn't like the mode" over honest attempt at high RP this time.

Eskjjlj
TGMC Administrator
 
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 12:26 am
Byond Username: Eskjjlj

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Eskjjlj » Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:08 am #398660

I am the person who Lumbermancer is talking about in his story so let me clarify my point of view

The HoP and the captain were so slow at handing out all access after war was declared that when I arrived into the armory only scraps were left. Only three crewmembers were in the brig at this moment.
So I was looking inside lockers to find a secHuD and a stunbaton when the HoS/Lumbermancer told me to go away from his brig. I rightly tell him to fuck off and he tases, cuffs me and tries to gulag me.
The officer Butch who was gearing up with me witnessed the scene and saved me from gulag. I then tase, cuff, strip the HoS and put him into the captain room so that he can think about what he did.

The HoS was actively hindering the crew since he tried to gulag me for being in the brig during war ops. There was no real reason to gulag me as I was just gearing up with what was left.
I think Lumbermancer was sick of the war ops gamemode and tried to crackdown on crewmembers who acted accordingly to the meta.
Don't pretend you were RPing. You were trying to find IC justifications to make the round harder for the crew because "I dont care about war ops."

If you don't like this gamemode just ghost or do something else rather than gullaging random crewmembers for playing the game.

User avatar
starmute
 
Joined: Mon Feb 29, 2016 4:48 pm
Byond Username: Starmute

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby starmute » Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:25 am #398662

Ah! Just the person I was going to talk to.

Okay so I was just reading the logs of the next round.

Aside from the situation where Lumbermancer might be a bit salty : don't say stuff like this

"[16:58:20]OOC: Eskjjlj/(Lucie Bellerose) : that's how /tg/ is if you're not happy go play on hrp (129,175,2) "

People are entitled to their opinions. I don't want to discourage people from playing this server.

Not really a big deal but just try to be a bit nicer okay?

Eskjjlj
TGMC Administrator
 
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2014 12:26 am
Byond Username: Eskjjlj

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Eskjjlj » Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:34 am #398664

I said that because Lumbermancer justified him gullaging me as RPing. It was a little jab to annoy him. I wouldn't recommend HRP in true faith to anyone considering how I love playing on tg and I love highpop.

User avatar
Grazyn
 
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:01 am
Byond Username: Grazyn

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Grazyn » Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:42 am #398668

Well I posted the logs, everyone can F3 "lumber" and decide for themselves if there was an attempt at high or even low-med RP

User avatar
Lumbermancer
 
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 3:40 am
Byond Username: Lumbermancer

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Lumbermancer » Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:53 am #398669

Eskjjlj wrote:The HoS was actively hindering the crew since he tried to gulag me for being in the brig during war ops. There was no real reason to gulag me as I was just gearing up with what was left.


Except I wasn't. Our interaction was the only thing that happened in the round on my part, only thing I did beforehand was to go to bar to grab a drink. You already had gear on. I told you to leave the armory. That's all there is to it

Grazyn wrote:Well I posted the logs, everyone can F3 "lumber" and decide for themselves if there was an attempt at high or even low-med RP


I totally forgot Warden got dunked by someone. Well this explains why he wasn't there to control the armory access. Also also, when talking about RP I mean more role playing a job, not necessarily a character.
aka Schlomo Gaskin aka Guru Meditation aka Copyright Alright aka Topkek McHonk aka Le Rouge
Image

User avatar
WarbossLincoln
 
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:14 pm
Byond Username: WarbossLincoln

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby WarbossLincoln » Mon Apr 09, 2018 6:41 pm #398744

cedarbridge wrote:
Kor wrote:
Kor wrote:
cedarbridge wrote:HoPs who hand out all access cards as soon as war is declared or a blob is spotted etc make me really want to spawn traitors instantly.


???

The entire point of war ops is that the crew gets to meta to balance out the ops having an insane pile of gear, why would you punish them for playing the mode as intended?


And old blob, while not so explicitly designed with "meta" in mind, was (ostensibly) balanced around cooperation of the entire crew fighting, so it seems weird to suggest a deficiency in the players for then cooperating.

Because it removes what is essentially the only true distinction between roles and departments we have apart from your roundstart jumpsuit and a title on the ID card. Access is the only thing that sets a chemist apart from an assistant. I know we don't enforce player roles because it would require an entire different playstyle from the way the server here has developed, but throwing what little distinction between roles we DO have out the window and calling it a metabreak (the same reason shit like "Its revs" or "There's a wizard so there can't be traitors") rubs me the wrong way. That's really just going to have to stay a peeve though since there's certainly no policy basis for it.



I don't think that's true. Most of the time I see players go back to their jobs to help fight the ops ,if their job is relevant, once they have a gun. Virologists making healing viruses, chemists making buff chems and healing/murder grenades, RnD making guns or autocloners or whatever they do, cargo ordering weapons and space suits, etc. They just want a gun first, and all access allows them to deliver their toys anywhere on station. "Oh, the ops have taken over cargo and killed everyone. I have a hellfoam grenade or something, better wait for someone with access to come by." An Asimov AI isn't going to let you in there.
--Crocodillo

Image

User avatar
cedarbridge
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby cedarbridge » Mon Apr 09, 2018 7:13 pm #398750

But that seems more to be the case here. The tide gets all access, picks the armory clean (because their jobs have literally no meaning outside of maint memes and valid hunting), ransacks medical storage, and off they go to patrol the external airlocks.

OP is complaining that he's being prevented from stopping said tide from using their magic cards to loot the armory rather than allowing sec to dictate to whom and where the contents of said armory is going. As a med player, I'd see this little differently from refusing to just give the entire contents of med storage to every greyshirt with a spear and an all access card.

Merely having access on a card has never translated to having an actual right to access anything on station and a warops declaration should not change that. Especially when there's an expectation, to a degree, that the heads of staff for those departments will be more open and more likely to distribute the items more freely, they remain the property of the department where they reside. Sec has an interest in knowing that the weapons in the armory are distributed but also that they're distributed in the manner they see most wise. Medbay has an interest in seeing that the kits and gear in medbay storage are distributed or kept in a manner that best allows them to keep the largest amount of the station up and fighting the ops. They also have an interest, as the department in charge of those items, to insure that they are distributed (or not distributed) in the manner most wise to the head of that department.

Yeah, it sucks to have to beg an AI to let you into a place you don't have access so you can dunk on the OPs with your weapon of choice, but frankly, that's your captain or RD letting you down in a warops scenario where the AI wasn't immediately subverted.

User avatar
Grazyn
 
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:01 am
Byond Username: Grazyn

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Grazyn » Mon Apr 09, 2018 8:32 pm #398772

There are 2 issues here

1. There's nothing wrong with sec being cautious about handing out guns/all access, a single greyshirt could enter the armory and take all the guns for himself and this is obviously bad, so it's perfectly acceptable and rational to give out guns in a controlled manner and resist people trying to ransack everything
2. If you do nothing at all to prepare or react against MODE you should expect people to get mad at you, especially when it becomes obvious you're using it to bait and validhunt the crew instead of the antags. If you also try to justify it under RP well yeah this is gonna activate some almonds

Xeroxemnas
 
Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2018 12:52 am
Byond Username: Xeroxemnas

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Xeroxemnas » Mon Apr 09, 2018 9:27 pm #398785

I feel like all access is fine but there definitely should be an equipment priority when arming up the crew in an order similar to this:
Captain (if he dies you are FUCKED)
Head of Security (BOSS OF THIS BRIG, also has a pinpointer to locate the captain)
Warden (Semi-boss of this brig)
Security Officers (It's literally their job)
Heads of Staff (can call the shuttle)
Everyone else

You shouldn't get pissed if a sec officer tases you when you're an assistant with 3 tasers in your bag. They need it more than you do. If you want to be an action hero then play sec.

User avatar
PKPenguin321
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:02 pm
Location: U S A, U S A, U S A
Byond Username: PKPenguin321
Github Username: PKPenguin321

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby PKPenguin321 » Mon Apr 09, 2018 9:40 pm #398789

I think the discussion has moved from "should it be allowed?" to "should it be done?"
As for whether or not it should be allowed, I think it's totally fine to arm up the crew if war is declared. It makes sense IC, even. If we get nuked, we ALL die, so we should all fight, right?
i play Lauser McMauligan. clown name is Cold-Ass Honkey
i have three other top secret characters as well.
tell the best admin how good he is
Spoiler:
Image

User avatar
J_Madison
Rarely plays
 
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 5:39 pm
Byond Username: Akesson

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby J_Madison » Mon Apr 09, 2018 9:54 pm #398797

Xeroxemnas wrote:If you want to be an action hero then play sec.

I think I should address this. There was a unofficial IC rule some of the old veteran sec players enforce.

The rule was called "stolen honour" (named after stolen valour) where anyone that wasn't sec and had weapons or other illegally gotten items could be detained and had items removed regardless of their intent, excuse, or situation.

This didn't settle with a lot of assistant/lawyersec/hopsec players, and there were players that retaliated by attacking brig because they were brigged for having spears/stunprods/syringe guns/traitor items.

It became sort of a pet peeve between a lot of us veteran sec players, because we sacrificed our right to play antag so we can play sec.
But then we have entitled players wanting to roll antag if sec was weak, or get the bragging rights of sec when antags were weak.
And they'd play lawyer or HOP, or god forbid assistant and if they didn't roll antag they'd pretend to be sec.

That's not fair, and we got bwoinked constantly because we had tons of "innocent" vigilantes brigged when we caught them prowling vents "hunting cults" despite the fact that we told people "STAY IN YOUR DEPARTMENT, ASSISTANTS STAY IN BAR, ALERT SEC OF SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY, AVOID MAINT".

But at the end of the day; you aren't sec, stop trying to do their job for them. If you want to play hero and do sec things, play sec. Don't pretend to be sec and steal the honour and job from people.

-

I think that final statement covers it;
You aren't sec, stop pretending to be sec, there's nothing wrong with doing your job and letting us do ours.

User avatar
Luke Cox
 
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:52 am
Location: Prisoner Transfer Room
Byond Username: NocturnalQuill

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Luke Cox » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:02 pm #398799

I don't mind assistants making spears and other makeshift weapons and hunting down cults and the like. As long as they don't tide the brig to get their gear, I don't mind the help. They make useful cannon fodder. I get what you're saying though with the "innocent vigilantes". Act like an antag, get treated like one. Come to the brig during a cult/rev/etc. and volunteer to be implanted, and I'll happily arm you.

War ops is a completely different dynamic though. The big trade off for the ops is that they get a ton of extra points, but they have to wait 20 minutes by which time the entire station will be armed in anticipation. There's really no reason not to arm the station other than pure autism. You're technically within your rights to withhold arms from the crew, you're just a gigantic cunt if you do and you probably deserve what the tide does to you. It's shitcurity by Luke Cox standards.
Image

User avatar
J_Madison
Rarely plays
 
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 5:39 pm
Byond Username: Akesson

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby J_Madison » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:04 pm #398800

go to cargo for guns stop stealing my limited supply.

warops is special case, but I fully understand letting people in.
I wouldn't withhold guns, but I would try to enforce some form of roleplay where civilians were evacuated to bar/medbay/brig/library shelters out of the way and conscripted volunteers got some weapons to hold a line.

User avatar
Luke Cox
 
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:52 am
Location: Prisoner Transfer Room
Byond Username: NocturnalQuill

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Luke Cox » Mon Apr 09, 2018 10:16 pm #398801

I think it goes without saying that the officers get first call. Definitely hand out guns once everyone is armed though.
Image

User avatar
Cobby
 
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Cobby » Mon Apr 09, 2018 11:08 pm #398819

PKPenguin321 wrote:I think the discussion has moved from "should it be allowed?" to "should it be done?"
As for whether or not it should be allowed, I think it's totally fine to arm up the crew if war is declared. It makes sense IC, even. If we get nuked, we ALL die, so we should all fight, right?


The discussion "should it be done" is probably best outside of the section where we discuss "should it be allowed".

I don't think we need to have 2 separate arguments about the same topic within the same thread, as we all know how that goes...
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current

CPTANT
 
Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 1:31 pm
Byond Username: CPTANT

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby CPTANT » Tue Apr 10, 2018 9:43 am #398896

Cobby wrote:
PKPenguin321 wrote:I think the discussion has moved from "should it be allowed?" to "should it be done?"
As for whether or not it should be allowed, I think it's totally fine to arm up the crew if war is declared. It makes sense IC, even. If we get nuked, we ALL die, so we should all fight, right?


The discussion "should it be done" is probably best outside of the section where we discuss "should it be allowed".

I don't think we need to have 2 separate arguments about the same topic within the same thread, as we all know how that goes...


Man you would almost think it was an IC issue.
Screemonster wrote:how the fuck are you supposed to RP with a grille

User avatar
kevinz000
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 8:41 am
Location: Dorm Room 3
Byond Username: Kevinz000
Github Username: kevinz000

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby kevinz000 » Tue Apr 10, 2018 10:59 am #398902

This is better than ban requests

User avatar
Rustledjimm
 
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 9:07 pm
Byond Username: Rustledjimm

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Rustledjimm » Tue Apr 10, 2018 11:17 am #398908

Can I IC issue this thread.
So uhh, I'm an admin. Please leave feedback! Oops took me a while to strike that through.

Will Baker
Suzu Suzaku
TBC
Spoiler:
Image

Personal Ban Length Record: 2.1024e+006 minutes

User avatar
Lumbermancer
 
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 3:40 am
Byond Username: Lumbermancer

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Lumbermancer » Tue Apr 10, 2018 11:24 am #398911

I'll allow it.
aka Schlomo Gaskin aka Guru Meditation aka Copyright Alright aka Topkek McHonk aka Le Rouge
Image

User avatar
Rustledjimm
 
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 9:07 pm
Byond Username: Rustledjimm

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Rustledjimm » Tue Apr 10, 2018 11:32 am #398915

Lumbermancer wrote:I'll allow it.



I mean I'm going to say you aren't wrong. As a person who plays security quite a bit you can quote me when I say fuck the greytide. However this is an IC issue. If you with-hold weapons from people, which you are entirely in your right to do as HoS, during a round where people know folk with machineguns are coming for them then you can expect them to want guns and fast.


Personally I'd also dunk HoPs who release all access as a HoS.

On the flip side if I was playing an assistant I'd probably want a weapon of some sort to defend myself with.

There are IC consequences to your actions and you will have to deal with them IC.
So uhh, I'm an admin. Please leave feedback! Oops took me a while to strike that through.

Will Baker
Suzu Suzaku
TBC
Spoiler:
Image

Personal Ban Length Record: 2.1024e+006 minutes

User avatar
Arianya
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:27 am
Byond Username: Arianya

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Arianya » Tue Apr 10, 2018 1:09 pm #398928

cedarbridge wrote:HoPs who hand out all access cards as soon as war is declared or a blob is spotted etc make me really want to spawn traitors instantly.


Hilariously I had this exact situation occur.

I'm a HoS-less Warden, blob gets called out (without any real confirmation), I ask for confirmation/any idea what type it is from my limited number of officers (as pseudo-acting HoS) and in the meantime the Captain runs in (after shouting at me to unbolt the doors) and loads literally everything into a locker (including the gun from the contraband lockers, natch). He then dumps this outside security (which of course immediately gets grabbed up by greyshirts and the like.

While I'm trying to figure out how best to go around the whole situation, a traitor (non-security, but I'm not going to shout at/shoot someone for being in the brig during blob, right?) runs up to me with a locker in tow, pushes it towards me (presumably an IED inside, as it then explodes) and I'm instantly critted.

Turns out the blob was a TC trade and there was a healthy (now heavily armed) group of traitors going around the station.

I get both sides of the argument regarding war-ops/blob arming, but it does rather feel like security is deprived of a concrete job during these rounds, Warden especially, since the armory is looted and generally speaking the situation is relaxed to the point where actual brigging is unlikely to happen, but I suppose thats more a game design issue then policy.


Imagine the station more like a Ship, everyone is under Nanotrasen. The HOP is above you in the chain of command and has given the orders to open the armory.


Seriously though, I know someone else pointed this out but the HoP never has jurisdiction over Security unless he becomes Acting Captain. A HoP giving out all access on his own initiative/encouraging people to raid the armoury, especially on a hearsay blob, deserves the gulagging and demotion coming to him.
Frequently playing as Aria Bollet on Bagil & Scary Terry

Source of avatar is here: https://i.imgur.com/hEkADo6.jpg

Reece
 
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 7:02 pm
Byond Username: Reece1995

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Reece » Tue Apr 10, 2018 2:00 pm #398931

Just do what I do on bloband war ops.
/Suicide

User avatar
WarbossLincoln
 
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:14 pm
Byond Username: WarbossLincoln

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby WarbossLincoln » Tue Apr 10, 2018 2:46 pm #398933

Honestly even if the blob was from a TC trade it's still a good idea to arm people against it. It's just as meta to say 'it could be a TC trade and I don't want to arm possible traitors' as 'It's Ops, there can't be traitors so it's safe to arm the crew'. In your situation at least it was the Captain who pulled all the guns out. The decision to arm the crew should be made by the Captain/HOS, or the warden if there is neither. But if you decide to withhold weapons during a stationwide crisis like a blob you face the consequences of a pissed off crew.
--Crocodillo

Image

User avatar
Arianya
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:27 am
Byond Username: Arianya

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Arianya » Tue Apr 10, 2018 3:10 pm #398938

cmspano wrote:Honestly even if the blob was from a TC trade it's still a good idea to arm people against it. It's just as meta to say 'it could be a TC trade and I don't want to arm possible traitors' as 'It's Ops, there can't be traitors so it's safe to arm the crew'. In your situation at least it was the Captain who pulled all the guns out. The decision to arm the crew should be made by the Captain/HOS, or the warden if there is neither. But if you decide to withhold weapons during a stationwide crisis like a blob you face the consequences of a pissed off crew.


To say "in spite of this large threat I think we should still be careful about who we arm" isn't really meta considering it is an entirely reasonable thing to say on a pressure cooker station full of insane second class citizens haunting the maintenance tunnels.

To say "I think it is okay to trust the entire station with lethal weaponry because we have observed a blob/been declared war on by nuclear operatives and thus there is no chance that there will be a secondary threat to the station" is extremely meta, albeit the kind of meta that is okay on /tg/

From a gameplay point of view I don't dispute that blob and warops kinda necessitate doing so, hence I say it's more a gameplay design issue then a policy one.

And while I don't know lumbermancer as a player/how they play, to say "But if you decide to withhold weapons during a stationwide crisis like a blob you face the consequences of a pissed off crew." is pretty much exactly confirming what they were asking, which is that during those rounds it is okay for the crew to imprison/dunk security for doing something which in a normal round would get the crew in trouble for greytiding/improper escalation, which the headmins seem to be in agreement with, so jimm is probably right that this can be closed ¯\_(o_o)_/¯
Frequently playing as Aria Bollet on Bagil & Scary Terry

Source of avatar is here: https://i.imgur.com/hEkADo6.jpg

User avatar
Grazyn
 
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:01 am
Byond Username: Grazyn

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Grazyn » Tue Apr 10, 2018 4:36 pm #398964

Arianya wrote:
And while I don't know lumbermancer as a player/how they play, to say "But if you decide to withhold weapons during a stationwide crisis like a blob you face the consequences of a pissed off crew." is pretty much exactly confirming what they were asking, which is that during those rounds it is okay for the crew to imprison/dunk security for doing something which in a normal round would get the crew in trouble for greytiding/improper escalation, which the headmins seem to be in agreement with, so jimm is probably right that this can be closed ¯\_(o_o)_/¯

You can read the logs I posted and see that lumber didn't just "withold weapons" but did fuckall in face of the crisis which usually tends to rustle some jimmies because it stinks of incompetence and this causes mutinies which are usually dealt with IC. A captain/hos who dumps the whole armory outside the brig is as much incompetent as one who purposefully ignores the crisis at hand because he doesn't like the mode and wants to sabotage the round

That said, incompetency is what makes rounds fun and as oranges said, a HoS is not only allowed, he's compelled to execute anyone trying to break into the armory, no matter the crisis. Also it seems there was no admin involvement in the whole issue, lumber wasn't banned/warned/noted, he also wasn't outright killed by the mob so proper escalation was present. I think there is a previous, still not overruled ruling that says that you can resist and defend yourself against security if you believe to be in the right. "Greytiding" isn't a blanket term to describe every instance of the crew going against sec.

User avatar
Lumbermancer
 
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2014 3:40 am
Byond Username: Lumbermancer

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Lumbermancer » Tue Apr 10, 2018 4:40 pm #398965

Grazyn wrote:because he doesn't like the mode and wants to sabotage the round.


Stop lying, it's rude.
aka Schlomo Gaskin aka Guru Meditation aka Copyright Alright aka Topkek McHonk aka Le Rouge
Image

User avatar
The Clowns Pocket
 
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 4:56 am

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby The Clowns Pocket » Wed Apr 11, 2018 7:41 am #399118

Barring a total fucking rewrite of Nuke Ops, yes.
Image
Image

User avatar
bandit
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 7:35 pm
Byond Username: Bgobandit

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby bandit » Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:51 am #399132

cedarbridge wrote:Because it removes what is essentially the only true distinction between roles and departments we have apart from your roundstart jumpsuit and a title on the ID card. Access is the only thing that sets a chemist apart from an assistant. I know we don't enforce player roles because it would require an entire different playstyle from the way the server here has developed, but throwing what little distinction between roles we DO have out the window and calling it a metabreak (the same reason shit like "Its revs" or "There's a wizard so there can't be traitors") rubs me the wrong way. That's really just going to have to stay a peeve though since there's certainly no policy basis for it.


I agree with Cedar on this but it would take a radical change to our RP stance right now. I don't know, am I really the only one who finds it more interesting for there to be leadership roles and different jobs rather than 50 people ransacking the armory and never interacting?

(It also means that if the round mulligans -- obviously less a problem with war ops than with blob -- then it is guaranteed to be shit.)
"I don't see any difference between ERP and rape." -- erro

admin feedback pls

User avatar
captain sawrge
 
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Sawrge

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby captain sawrge » Wed Apr 11, 2018 1:26 pm #399145

bandit wrote:
cedarbridge wrote:Because it removes what is essentially the only true distinction between roles and departments we have apart from your roundstart jumpsuit and a title on the ID card. Access is the only thing that sets a chemist apart from an assistant. I know we don't enforce player roles because it would require an entire different playstyle from the way the server here has developed, but throwing what little distinction between roles we DO have out the window and calling it a metabreak (the same reason shit like "Its revs" or "There's a wizard so there can't be traitors") rubs me the wrong way. That's really just going to have to stay a peeve though since there's certainly no policy basis for it.


I agree with Cedar on this but it would take a radical change to our RP stance right now. I don't know, am I really the only one who finds it more interesting for there to be leadership roles and different jobs rather than 50 people ransacking the armory and never interacting?

(It also means that if the round mulligans -- obviously less a problem with war ops than with blob -- then it is guaranteed to be shit.)

People panic when threatened with imminent total destruction. Heads can try to enforce the power structure and keep things in order but that's part of the game: the confljct that arises is just as much "roleplay" and leads to generally more interesting conflicts and situations than telling people "you're all about to die please stay calm and Listen to command" on an OOC level.

This is a fairly uncommon event that only occasionally happens in one round type out of several. We are not witnessing total collapse of command every round.

I think it's silly to try to force people to act in a certain manner and then call it an improvement on roleplay standards, especially when that manner starts to defy believable behavior.
Image

User avatar
captain sawrge
 
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Sawrge

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby captain sawrge » Wed Apr 11, 2018 1:29 pm #399146

Feels more like the people bemoaning the collapse of the power structure and the raising of a grey militia are the ones thinking too much of this as a game rather than the opposite side.

Demanding people stay in their roles and do what they're told because they didn't sign up to be a head rather than reacting as a person faced with an existential threat might is a lot more hazardous to roleplay and conflict than the alternative, in this gamer's humble opinion.
Image

onleavedontatme
 
Joined: Fri Mar 13, 2015 10:26 pm
Byond Username: KorPhaeron

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby onleavedontatme » Wed Apr 11, 2018 1:33 pm #399148

bandit wrote:
cedarbridge wrote:Because it removes what is essentially the only true distinction between roles and departments we have apart from your roundstart jumpsuit and a title on the ID card. Access is the only thing that sets a chemist apart from an assistant. I know we don't enforce player roles because it would require an entire different playstyle from the way the server here has developed, but throwing what little distinction between roles we DO have out the window and calling it a metabreak (the same reason shit like "Its revs" or "There's a wizard so there can't be traitors") rubs me the wrong way. That's really just going to have to stay a peeve though since there's certainly no policy basis for it.


I agree with Cedar on this but it would take a radical change to our RP stance right now. I don't know, am I really the only one who finds it more interesting for there to be leadership roles and different jobs rather than 50 people ransacking the armory and never interacting?

(It also means that if the round mulligans -- obviously less a problem with war ops than with blob -- then it is guaranteed to be shit.)


I find the complete freedom of "anyone can do anything," a defining philosophy of our rules and code since the founding of the server, to be far more interesting than yet another game in which the two armed deathsquads duke it out with the guns the devs game them.

I think it was Naksu who said SS13 was at its most fun when it's "a mix of Home Alone and Steven Seagal" as the ragtag crew uses insane antics to save the day rather than elite security forces gunning people down.

User avatar
cedarbridge
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby cedarbridge » Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:09 pm #399154

Kor wrote:rather than elite security forces gunning people down.

I'm not seeing how this is at stake here. I don't think its asking too much that what little distinction there is between roles be preserved. Obviously we don't enforce cumbersome rules like character knowledge because frankly I don't think more than 3 people on the server roster are even prepared for the amount of RP work that requires. I don't think its asking too much that players at least pretend that job titles mean more than a roundstart jumpsuit color and a starting location.

User avatar
Lazengann
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:26 pm
Byond Username: Lazengann

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Lazengann » Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:19 pm #399160

An organic solution of Security shutting down the HoP line is way more interesting than administrative hand tying

User avatar
Arianya
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2016 10:27 am
Byond Username: Arianya

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Arianya » Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:21 pm #399161

Kor wrote:I find the complete freedom of "anyone can do anything," a defining philosophy of our rules and code since the founding of the server, to be far more interesting than yet another game in which the two armed deathsquads duke it out with the guns the devs game them.

I think it was Naksu who said SS13 was at its most fun when it's "a mix of Home Alone and Steven Seagal" as the ragtag crew uses insane antics to save the day rather than elite security forces gunning people down.


Surely this situation is as much of a barrier to "anyone can do anything" though? If you balance blob/warops around the entire crew looting the armory/ordering guns enmasse from cargo then that becomes not only the default action, but the only viable one, since there's no point the chemist mixing up deathmix gas grenades or mining gathering gibtonite ore to toss at the syndicate when the mode is balanced around ragtag crew militia?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating "ban captains who give armory access during a crisis" or knowledge systems or w/e, its just that the current warops/blob can feel very much like "no one can do anything [outside of the meta]" because security gets stripped to the bone, and the crew are expected to be an extra gun/cannon fodder rather then cleaning the hallways/cooking food/conducting a legal trial/mining on lavaland/etc etc.

An organic solution of Security shutting down the HoP line is way more interesting than administrative hand tying


Except as made clear, if Security shuts down the HoP line then they can expect the crew to dunk them for suboptimal play, and realistically greytide of 20 vs security crew of 4 is gonna win that fight every time.
Frequently playing as Aria Bollet on Bagil & Scary Terry

Source of avatar is here: https://i.imgur.com/hEkADo6.jpg

User avatar
Lazengann
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2017 2:26 pm
Byond Username: Lazengann

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Lazengann » Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:33 pm #399165

If you can't beat the crew you won't stand a chance against the nukies

User avatar
Grazyn
 
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:01 am
Byond Username: Grazyn

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Grazyn » Wed Apr 11, 2018 2:40 pm #399169

Arianya wrote:
Kor wrote:I find the complete freedom of "anyone can do anything," a defining philosophy of our rules and code since the founding of the server, to be far more interesting than yet another game in which the two armed deathsquads duke it out with the guns the devs game them.

I think it was Naksu who said SS13 was at its most fun when it's "a mix of Home Alone and Steven Seagal" as the ragtag crew uses insane antics to save the day rather than elite security forces gunning people down.



Except as made clear, if Security shuts down the HoP line then they can expect the crew to dunk them for suboptimal play, and realistically greytide of 20 vs security crew of 4 is gonna win that fight every time.

A single flashbang wins against any amount of greyshirts, then you can just mop them up and execute en masse. After that you'll be free to fight the nukies on your terms.

User avatar
WarbossLincoln
 
Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:14 pm
Byond Username: WarbossLincoln

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby WarbossLincoln » Wed Apr 11, 2018 5:10 pm #399194

Arianya wrote:
cmspano wrote:Honestly even if the blob was from a TC trade it's still a good idea to arm people against it. It's just as meta to say 'it could be a TC trade and I don't want to arm possible traitors' as 'It's Ops, there can't be traitors so it's safe to arm the crew'. In your situation at least it was the Captain who pulled all the guns out. The decision to arm the crew should be made by the Captain/HOS, or the warden if there is neither. But if you decide to withhold weapons during a stationwide crisis like a blob you face the consequences of a pissed off crew.


To say "in spite of this large threat I think we should still be careful about who we arm" isn't really meta considering it is an entirely reasonable thing to say on a pressure cooker station full of insane second class citizens haunting the maintenance tunnels.

To say "I think it is okay to trust the entire station with lethal weaponry because we have observed a blob/been declared war on by nuclear operatives and thus there is no chance that there will be a secondary threat to the station" is extremely meta, albeit the kind of meta that is okay on /tg/

From a gameplay point of view I don't dispute that blob and warops kinda necessitate doing so, hence I say it's more a gameplay design issue then a policy one.

And while I don't know lumbermancer as a player/how they play, to say "But if you decide to withhold weapons during a stationwide crisis like a blob you face the consequences of a pissed off crew." is pretty much exactly confirming what they were asking, which is that during those rounds it is okay for the crew to imprison/dunk security for doing something which in a normal round would get the crew in trouble for greytiding/improper escalation, which the headmins seem to be in agreement with, so jimm is probably right that this can be closed ¯\_(o_o)_/¯


It's not a normal situation though. Imagine a traitorling round where the traitors and lings all teamed up with their respective fellow antags and went loud. If 10 antags were stomping the halls with guns, emp screams, arm blades, and stun immunity I bet the admins wouldn't ban the loyal crewmen for smashing open the armory and dunking sec that tried to stop them.
--Crocodillo

Image

User avatar
J_Madison
Rarely plays
 
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 5:39 pm
Byond Username: Akesson

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby J_Madison » Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:31 pm #399229

Yeah well muse all you like about what if.

There's nothing wrong with roleplaying and enforcing job roles. It's the idea of losing that angers so many people. They don't want to lose because they can't accept incompetence that they can solve. It's natural to the mindset of tg players which is why so many of them transition so horribly to other higher roleplay SS13 offbranches.

End of the day if it's war ops and Captain says only security can have guns, it's an IC issue and everyone that isn't security can suck one.
You aren't entitled to anything. You didn't pick the role. You chose to do something else, stay that way, do your job, suffer well.
Because we sure as hell aren't going to get that protection if assistants kill us for stopping them looting the armoury during War Ops.

You aren't entitled to anything. You didn't pick the role. You chose to do something else, stay that way, do your job, and I'll do mine.
Next time, pick a different job.


Everyone's a super hero
Everyone's a captain Kirk
Everyone's a medically, electrically, construction, genetic, virologist, chemically, scientific, xenobiological, robotically, culinary, botanically, IPA, special forces elite combat trained personnel on tg.

User avatar
captain sawrge
 
Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 6:13 pm
Byond Username: Sawrge

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby captain sawrge » Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:42 pm #399232

Its an IC issue and people will react in an IC manner. You're about to have your doors locked down by a bunch of terrorists armed to the teeth so they can turn you to stardust and bossman says shut up and let a bunch of red-suited clowns handle it themselves.

I'll be damned if most people will just take that. If someone wants to try to enforce bureaucracy in the middle of a nuclear emergency they can damn well try but like you say, it's an IC issue and they can deal with the consequences that come from trying to leave the survival of the station into one small fraction of the crew.

It's neither interesting not realistic to expect humans to set aside all their feelings and differences in a stressful situation.

Trying to enforce people stick to their chosen "role" at all times is far more meta and "gamey" than people forming the tide militia when faced with imminent obliteration
Image

User avatar
PKPenguin321
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:02 pm
Location: U S A, U S A, U S A
Byond Username: PKPenguin321
Github Username: PKPenguin321

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby PKPenguin321 » Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:49 pm #399234

J_Madison wrote:End of the day if it's war ops and Captain says only security can have guns, it's an IC issue and everyone that isn't security can suck one.
You aren't entitled to anything. You didn't pick the role. You chose to do something else, stay that way, do your job, suffer well.

To that I would ICly break in and take stuff anyways because that's retarded and I don't want to get nuked.

Fuck your role, I wanna live!
i play Lauser McMauligan. clown name is Cold-Ass Honkey
i have three other top secret characters as well.
tell the best admin how good he is
Spoiler:
Image

User avatar
The Clowns Pocket
 
Joined: Tue May 02, 2017 4:56 am

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby The Clowns Pocket » Wed Apr 11, 2018 6:55 pm #399236

Kor wrote:
I find the complete freedom of "anyone can do anything," a defining philosophy of our rules and code since the founding of the server, to be far more interesting than yet another game in which the two armed deathsquads duke it out with the guns the devs game them.



Why even have War ops then? Hell, why even have Nuke Ops then as anything other then a holdover from porting super old goonstation code?
Image
Image

User avatar
cedarbridge
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 12:24 am
Byond Username: Cedarbridge

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby cedarbridge » Wed Apr 11, 2018 7:22 pm #399252

The Clowns Pocket wrote:
Kor wrote:
I find the complete freedom of "anyone can do anything," a defining philosophy of our rules and code since the founding of the server, to be far more interesting than yet another game in which the two armed deathsquads duke it out with the guns the devs game them.



Why even have War ops then? Hell, why even have Nuke Ops then as anything other then a holdover from porting super old goonstation code?

How does this follow from the post you quoted?

User avatar
J_Madison
Rarely plays
 
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 5:39 pm
Byond Username: Akesson

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby J_Madison » Wed Apr 11, 2018 7:29 pm #399255

PKPenguin321 wrote:
J_Madison wrote:End of the day if it's war ops and Captain says only security can have guns, it's an IC issue and everyone that isn't security can suck one.
You aren't entitled to anything. You didn't pick the role. You chose to do something else, stay that way, do your job, suffer well.

To that I would ICly break in and take stuff anyways because that's retarded and I don't want to get nuked.

Fuck your role, I wanna live!

Orders are orders, only other way you could change this is coup the captain or get the captain coup'd.
otherwise, go get your crofts pikes

User avatar
PKPenguin321
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:02 pm
Location: U S A, U S A, U S A
Byond Username: PKPenguin321
Github Username: PKPenguin321

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby PKPenguin321 » Wed Apr 11, 2018 9:41 pm #399322

J_Madison wrote:
PKPenguin321 wrote:
J_Madison wrote:End of the day if it's war ops and Captain says only security can have guns, it's an IC issue and everyone that isn't security can suck one.
You aren't entitled to anything. You didn't pick the role. You chose to do something else, stay that way, do your job, suffer well.

To that I would ICly break in and take stuff anyways because that's retarded and I don't want to get nuked.

Fuck your role, I wanna live!

Orders are orders

Shut the fuck up and get the fuck out, I'm going to steal your guns now.
i play Lauser McMauligan. clown name is Cold-Ass Honkey
i have three other top secret characters as well.
tell the best admin how good he is
Spoiler:
Image

User avatar
Armhulen
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:30 pm
Byond Username: Armhulenn
Github Username: it's a long story

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Armhulen » Wed Apr 11, 2018 9:55 pm #399326

PKPenguin321 wrote:
J_Madison wrote:
PKPenguin321 wrote:
J_Madison wrote:End of the day if it's war ops and Captain says only security can have guns, it's an IC issue and everyone that isn't security can suck one.
You aren't entitled to anything. You didn't pick the role. You chose to do something else, stay that way, do your job, suffer well.

To that I would ICly break in and take stuff anyways because that's retarded and I don't want to get nuked.

Fuck your role, I wanna live!

Orders are orders

Shut the fuck up and get the fuck out, I'm going to steal your guns now.

See you in deadchat!
Go to bed bro, she's not thinking about you.

User avatar
Luke Cox
 
Joined: Sat Dec 06, 2014 8:52 am
Location: Prisoner Transfer Room
Byond Username: NocturnalQuill

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby Luke Cox » Wed Apr 11, 2018 9:55 pm #399327

>Right to bear arms infringed on

1776 WILL COMMENCE AGAIN
Image

User avatar
J_Madison
Rarely plays
 
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2015 5:39 pm
Byond Username: Akesson

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby J_Madison » Wed Apr 11, 2018 11:41 pm #399363

Armhulen wrote:
PKPenguin321 wrote:
J_Madison wrote:
PKPenguin321 wrote:
J_Madison wrote:End of the day if it's war ops and Captain says only security can have guns, it's an IC issue and everyone that isn't security can suck one.
You aren't entitled to anything. You didn't pick the role. You chose to do something else, stay that way, do your job, suffer well.

To that I would ICly break in and take stuff anyways because that's retarded and I don't want to get nuked.

Fuck your role, I wanna live!

Orders are orders

Shut the fuck up and get the fuck out, I'm going to steal your guns now.

See you in deadchat!

icey issue

User avatar
SpaceInaba
 
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2016 1:03 pm
Location: everyone's favorite sjw
Byond Username: SpaceInaba

Re: Does War Ops abridge the rules and roleplaying?

Postby SpaceInaba » Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:08 pm #399534

policy discussion is like a reality tv show
Spoiler:
ImageImageImage
fuck,

PreviousNext

Return to Policy Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users