Page 1 of 2

Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Sun Aug 05, 2018 11:48 pm
by wesoda25
Lately I've seen a rise of golem related posts, from ban appeals to policy questions. This is not to be confused with Shezzas golem retaliation post.

I want a new precedent set to banish golems to lavaland short of some form of retaliation.


Free Golems are the most annoying (and abusable) ghost role in my opinion. I've had too many rounds ruined because some dumbass golems come aboard in decked out mechs and start validing/became valid themselves. Player incompetence and attitude has made them have a negative impact on the round 9 times out of 10, and they are a nightmare to deal with as sec.

Looking at the wiki, we get the description: These golems, should they wake up from hibernation, will be effectively free of any master, and will usually mine and eventually build their own R&D department; they are peaceful unless disturbed. Sure you can reason that the golems want to get to the station for salvation, but I have a counter argument. Just because they were set free doesn't mean they are care free. They lived in a life of subjugation until being set free by the liberator. Wouldn't they have an inherent disdain and fear for the human race? If this is true making a teleporter ASAP is not the logical conclusion they would make. They would use the endless materials on lavaland to rebuild their ship and go on their way.

Another issue I have with golems is their tendency to make 8 AI's with the only law of: "yeah go do whatever" but that's for another day.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 12:05 am
by Anonmare
It's very annoying tbh

Especially when they involve themselves in station conflicts that hold no relevance to them or make AIs that fuck shit up for no reason

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 12:08 am
by Bluespace
Would we really lose much if free golems just vanished? They VERY rarely bring any positive benefits. The seed vault is fantastic for learning botany, just tear out the free golem ship and i'll get my new megafauna coded and we'll stick it there instead.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 12:09 am
by Cobby
Do you really need a rnd tutorial when it’s braindead simple now?

Just set it to a golem kingdom or something and make it a miner/trader faction

Update: lol^

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 12:12 am
by Nilons
Golem built AIs fucking with the station have led to at least 5 BoH bombings by the golems in my experience

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 12:54 am
by Anuv
Nilons wrote:Golem built AIs fucking with the station have led to at least 5 BoH bombings by the golems in my experience


This is definitely one of the biggest issues. Golem AIs fucking with stuff on the station is so ridiculous. I think you shouldn't be able to control anything on the station while on lavaland. This also addresses balance issues with war ops and moving the AI to lavaland (especially since you can't modify an AI's laws on-station while they're on lavaland, but they can operate as normal).

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 2:22 am
by Ayy Lemoh
If we remove free golems then we better get lavaland dwarves back.

It's been too long, man.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 6:51 am
by Dr_bee
If you become a big enough threat that the golems take notice of you then you are the one who fucked up, cults for example are a threat to both the golems and the station.

If they are on the station and dunk you after you attack them or they witness you attacking someone else, you lost fair and square, next time play better, thats normal escalation rules.

If they attack the station with no provocation then it falls under normal escalation rules and they are in the wrong. no need for new policy.

Golem AI's being shitlords falls under normal escalation policy, if they are starting shit for no reason adminhelp it, even with "yeah go do whatever" meme laws they are technically purged and shouldnt be starting shit for no reason.

Ghost roles exist, that means they can effect the round, play around them and stop trying to neuter them with policy threads because you are salty you got dunked, your antag round isnt fucking sacred.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 7:59 am
by wesoda25
Dr_bee wrote:If you become a big enough threat that the golems take notice of you then you are the one who fucked up, cults for example are a threat to both the golems and the station.


Its a fair point and maybe an exception but I don’t like the idea of golem vigilantes, it never ends well.

Dr_bee wrote:If they are on the station and dunk you after you attack them or they witness you attacking someone else, you lost fair and square, next time play better, thats normal escalation rules.


Golems in mechs are literal fucking valid baters and valid hunters. If you’ve ever played a round with them you know exactly what I’m talking about.

Dr_bee wrote:If they attack the station with no provocation then it falls under normal escalation rules and they are in the wrong. no need for new policy.


Fascinating because despite admin intervention scenarios with golems happen routinely.

Dr_bee wrote:Golem AI's being shitlords falls under normal escalation policy, if they are starting shit for no reason adminhelp it, even with "yeah go do whatever" meme laws they are technically purged and shouldnt be starting shit for no reason.


Again not my argument but still happens far too often.

Dr_bee wrote:Ghost roles exist, that means they can effect the round, play around them and stop trying to neuter them with policy threads because you are salty you got dunked, your antag round isnt fucking sacred.


I think for every 15 sec rounds golem ruin for me, only one antag round is affected by them. This isn’t a salt post its a serious issue that needs to be addressed. If you would like to bother ready the statements above you would see that popular opinion is for removing/neutering them.

Banishing golems to strictly lavaland perfectly solves all these issues aside from AIs.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 8:04 am
by Denton
Just make golems qdel if they move off the lavaland z-level or change their flavor text to never leave, similar to the lavaland syndie base.

(Probably) solves the issue of shitters invading the station, but keeps them as a ghost role than can be plenty of fun.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 9:54 am
by Grazyn
Just make them exempted from escalation laws like they used to be. Golem used to be free game, a miner could walk in and slaughter them all for sport, and they were not allowed to retaliate. I think the second part still stands, sort of: a recent headmin ruling states that ghost roles can't respawn to fight a threat after dying because it falls under metagaming.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 12:27 pm
by RogueSteampunker
Oh for the love of

Here's the thing. Golems are bound simply by the idea of doing whatever, and generally just do their own thing. This usually ends up turning for the worse when some dumbfuck decides to attack one, and gives them the right to start mass invading. If they just start coming on to dunk for no reason, literally just end them, or ahelp since they're basically antagging as a nonantag ghost role, golem AIs applying doubly so, since purged AIs and their actions fall onto the creator's shoulders.

Case in point, please stop trying to make the fucking squishy rockmen wait like loot piñatas for the miners, just cause you don't know what an ion gun and escalation policy is. Seriously, we've neutered ghost roles so that you could retaliate the second they start shit if necessary, so don't complain when you wait til they've already flooded the station.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 1:24 pm
by Arianya
I think the issue is less them having escalation/retaliation, and more that Golems tend to get into a shitty position where they're going on to the station for little to no reason and so stop being "chill lavaland miner race" and end up being "second life on the station", something which ghost roles aren't really meant to be.

Unfortunately it's a messy one to fix. Ideally I'd like to forbid them teleporters and AIs so that they have to go via mining to assault/board the station (and generally speaking will limit retaliatory damage to the miners who initiated on them) but I think this is a nightmare to implement and a code solution rather then a policy one.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 1:31 pm
by Grazyn
Code solutions are generally more reliable than policies, the only problem is getting maintainers on board with the idea

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 4:03 pm
by Cobby
golems should only be invading if the station makes it clear they want to destroy the golems.

It’s not “okay rockies I got attacked by a single guy rev up the battle ais”.

We had this discussion in the slig appeal/policy thread.

Either players are dumb and are constantly putting themselves into a position to get invaded or the situation isn’t being handled properly admin-wise.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 6:06 pm
by Tlaltecuhtli
give them a modified miner lathe

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 8:45 pm
by Anuv
Arianya wrote:"second life on the station"


Exactly. Pretty much all ghost roles are meant to have fun on various ways without too much bleeding with IC fuckups. Golems can get insanely OP guns and mechs and shit and return to enact revenge. Hell, even now they're debating a metagrudge kill via golem in ban appeals.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:05 pm
by Floiven
Cobby wrote:Just set it to a golem kingdom or something and make it a miner/trader faction


Do this. Lavaland kingdom opening trade relations with the station/cargo sounds fun, provides benefits to the station while encouraging RP as well

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Mon Aug 06, 2018 11:47 pm
by wesoda25
Floiven wrote:
Cobby wrote:Just set it to a golem kingdom or something and make it a miner/trader faction


Do this. Lavaland kingdom opening trade relations with the station/cargo sounds fun, provides benefits to the station while encouraging RP as well

^^^^^^^^^^^
Better than a policy

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 9:14 am
by Dr_bee
Arianya wrote:I think the issue is less them having escalation/retaliation, and more that Golems tend to get into a shitty position where they're going on to the station for little to no reason and so stop being "chill lavaland miner race" and end up being "second life on the station", something which ghost roles aren't really meant to be.

Unfortunately it's a messy one to fix. Ideally I'd like to forbid them teleporters and AIs so that they have to go via mining to assault/board the station (and generally speaking will limit retaliatory damage to the miners who initiated on them) but I think this is a nightmare to implement and a code solution rather then a policy one.


Teleporters are fine, if the golems are really becoming a problem with teleporters just toss a fucking maxcap into the station teleporter set to the golem ship and the problem is solved.

If you want to make sure it happens, I would have it be that teleporters automatically have a teleporter beacon that cant be turned off if they dont have that ability already, it would be a nice in built downside to them anyway.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 9:46 am
by subject217
Dr_bee wrote:Teleporters are fine, if the golems are really becoming a problem with teleporters just toss a fucking maxcap into the station teleporter set to the golem ship and the problem is solved.


how to get your escape shuttle boh bombed in one easy step featuring self antagging free golems

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 10:02 am
by Grazyn
I tossed my fair share of maxcaps into teleporters set to golem ship (back when lavaland had no bombcap and you could delete the entire z-level) and I'd never have them retaliate, either because they all died or because they understood they did something to deserve that. On the other hand, I recall many golem-crew joint endeavours fucked up by the one golem going ballistic and boh-bombing the aux base/luring megafauna and so on with no provocation.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 10:02 am
by Dr_bee
subject217 wrote:
Dr_bee wrote:Teleporters are fine, if the golems are really becoming a problem with teleporters just toss a fucking maxcap into the station teleporter set to the golem ship and the problem is solved.


how to get your escape shuttle boh bombed in one easy step featuring self antagging free golems


Fun fact, there is an increased bomb cap on lavaland, so if you somehow toss and bomb and DONT end up leaving the entire golem ship a smoking crater, you fucked up.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 10:04 am
by Dr_bee
Grazyn wrote:I tossed my fair share of maxcaps into teleporters set to golem ship (back when lavaland had no bombcap and you could delete the entire z-level) and I'd never have them retaliate, either because they all died or because they understood they did something to deserve that. On the other hand, I recall many golem-crew joint endeavours fucked up by the one golem going ballistic and boh-bombing the aux base/luring megafauna and so on with no provocation.


This all sounds like a similar problem to the drone issue, admins arent willing to hand out long term ghost role bans for griefing. Ghost roles should be a privilege not a right, if you fuck around by griffing the station or your fellow ghost roles you really should have the privilege revoked for a long time, even if it is a first offense.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 11:13 am
by Arianya
Every other lavaland role's interaction with the main station is limited by their access to the mining shuttle, and can be outright denied by the station if they choose to destroy the mining shuttle/the consoles.

My point is less "invading/retaliating/selfantag" golems and more that golems shouldn't be coming to the station "just because", and the easiest way to make this require actual effort is to forbid them teleporters that let them bypass the majority of barriers to them getting on station. Making AIs is a secondary concern but realistically an AI on lavaland having full administrator access to the station systems is more an oversight in how AIs work then intended :V

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 11:34 am
by subject217
Dr_bee wrote:This all sounds like a similar problem to the drone issue, admins arent willing to hand out long term ghost role bans for griefing. Ghost roles should be a privilege not a right, if you fuck around by griffing the station or your fellow ghost roles you really should have the privilege revoked for a long time, even if it is a first offense.

that's not the *drone issue* though and there were several very good posts explaining this quite concisely in that thread. here, i'll quote one.
Arianya wrote:Drones weren't removed because the users were constant rule breakers. If that were the case it would have been relatively easy to droneban the worst of them and drones would still be in.

The issue is that what was meant to be a fairly straightforward ruleset, aimed at making a low investment, low impact ghost role that was as much set dressing as anything, was anything but.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 11:54 am
by Dr_bee
subject217 wrote:
Dr_bee wrote:This all sounds like a similar problem to the drone issue, admins arent willing to hand out long term ghost role bans for griefing. Ghost roles should be a privilege not a right, if you fuck around by griffing the station or your fellow ghost roles you really should have the privilege revoked for a long time, even if it is a first offense.

that's not the *drone issue* though and there were several very good posts explaining this quite concisely in that thread. here, i'll quote one.
Arianya wrote:Drones weren't removed because the users were constant rule breakers. If that were the case it would have been relatively easy to droneban the worst of them and drones would still be in.

The issue is that what was meant to be a fairly straightforward ruleset, aimed at making a low investment, low impact ghost role that was as much set dressing as anything, was anything but.


My point still stands, none of the issues brought up for golems are because of bad policy, just lax enforcment of current policy. This is just a thread about ideas on how to nerf golems in the code hiding as a policy thread, like pretty much every policy thread seems to be now.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 12:49 pm
by Stickymayhem
Refraining golems into miner/trader focused roles desiring peacefully acquired valuables seems like the perfect solution.

The conflict possibilities are there because cunts will try to steal their hoard, interaction with the station is provided without needless validhunting, and it enables interesting gimmicks.

It also doesn't remove a ghost role that can be fun if it isn't abused.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:45 pm
by Dr_bee
Stickymayhem wrote:Refraining golems into miner/trader focused roles desiring peacefully acquired valuables seems like the perfect solution.

The conflict possibilities are there because cunts will try to steal their hoard, interaction with the station is provided without needless validhunting, and it enables interesting gimmicks.

It also doesn't remove a ghost role that can be fun if it isn't abused.


I like this, it can be done with some flavor-text changes. Add some lines about since being granted life by humans they became peaceful explorers and traders, and maybe some roleplay hook job ideas as examples, such as trading minerals for cargo crates, or trading fully built mechs for slime cores.

More roleplay guidance is good, adding more complex policy that will only confuse people is unhelpful.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 1:59 pm
by wesoda25
Dr_bee wrote:I like this, it can be done with some flavor-text changes. Add some lines about since being granted life by humans they became peaceful explorers and traders, and maybe some roleplay hook job ideas as examples, such as trading minerals for cargo crates, or trading fully built mechs for slime cores.

More roleplay guidance is good, adding more complex policy that will only confuse people is unhelpful.


You really trying to push that a high rp role is less confusing than stripping golems of their teleporter rights?

Idea of a trade faction is pretty cool but honestly seems just as abusable.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 2:11 pm
by Cobby
Dr_bee wrote:
Grazyn wrote:I tossed my fair share of maxcaps into teleporters set to golem ship (back when lavaland had no bombcap and you could delete the entire z-level) and I'd never have them retaliate, either because they all died or because they understood they did something to deserve that. On the other hand, I recall many golem-crew joint endeavours fucked up by the one golem going ballistic and boh-bombing the aux base/luring megafauna and so on with no provocation.


This all sounds like a similar problem to the drone issue, admins arent willing to hand out long term ghost role bans for griefing. Ghost roles should be a privilege not a right, if you fuck around by griffing the station or your fellow ghost roles you really should have the privilege revoked for a long time, even if it is a first offense.


We literally have a perma ghost role ban being appealed right now.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 5:48 pm
by Dr_bee
Cobby wrote:
Dr_bee wrote:
Grazyn wrote:I tossed my fair share of maxcaps into teleporters set to golem ship (back when lavaland had no bombcap and you could delete the entire z-level) and I'd never have them retaliate, either because they all died or because they understood they did something to deserve that. On the other hand, I recall many golem-crew joint endeavours fucked up by the one golem going ballistic and boh-bombing the aux base/luring megafauna and so on with no provocation.


This all sounds like a similar problem to the drone issue, admins arent willing to hand out long term ghost role bans for griefing. Ghost roles should be a privilege not a right, if you fuck around by griffing the station or your fellow ghost roles you really should have the privilege revoked for a long time, even if it is a first offense.


We literally have a perma ghost role ban being appealed right now.


Good, if the current rules are being enforced, and some added goals and RP prompts are added, validhunty golems should remain a rare issue.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 6:24 pm
by Cobby
Feature-wise, Admins should be the (temporary) last line of defense, not the catch-all net.

I’ll play around with it this week when I return home.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 7:34 pm
by Dr_bee
Cobby wrote:Feature-wise, Admins should be the (temporary) last line of defense, not the catch-all net.

I’ll play around with it this week when I return home.


The point of lavaland ghost roles in particular was emergent gameplay and roleplaying, so in this case admins were supposed to define what is and is not acceptable. If you start adding code barriers you might as well redesign the entire role.

also this is a policy thread, not a coding feedback thread, this point is to discuss if admin enforcement should change. Seriously can we stop with the stealth coding feedback threads in the policy forum?

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:19 pm
by Cobby
The point of free golems was a science tutorial, you’re welcome to pull up the GitHub pr if you’d like.

The issue here is that science changed to not require a tutorial, but the ruin remained as is. That is not an admin issue, that is a code one. I’m not looking to bandaid secondary issues (people’s ability to exploit the as-is ruin) caused by this one.

There is nothing wrong with a code solution to admin problems. I’d rather bar things we ban for outright before people “emergent gaming” themselves to not be able to play at all. Don’t take it as we’re trying to suck the fun out of ghost roles.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:22 pm
by wesoda25
Dr_bee wrote:The point of lavaland ghost roles in particular was emergent gameplay and roleplaying, so in this case admins were supposed to define what is and is not acceptable. If you start adding code barriers you might as well redesign the entire role.

also this is a policy thread, not a coding feedback thread, this point is to discuss if admin enforcement should change. Seriously can we stop with the stealth coding feedback threads in the policy forum?


Began as a policy change and turned into coding, so its not incorrect.

Also, how does removing teleporters from golem RnD require an entire rework of the ghost role. This whole thread your counter has been its up to admins to stop them, but it happens far too often.

If you continually give people the choice not to fuck things over and they routinely fuck things over, its time to remove the choice.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:29 pm
by Dr_bee
Cobby wrote:The point of free golems was a science tutorial, you’re welcome to pull up the GitHub pr if you’d like.

The issue here is that science changed to not require a tutorial, but the ruin remained as is. That is not an admin issue, that is a code one. I’m not looking to bandaid secondary issues (people’s ability to exploit the as-is ruin) caused by this one.

There is nothing wrong with a code solution to admin problems. I’d rather bar things we ban for outright before people “emergent gaming” themselves to not be able to play at all. Don’t take it as we’re trying to suck the fun out of ghost roles.


This is counter to what has been stated in the forums by Kor, the role itself may be a tutorial but lavaland ghost roles in general were about roleplay and interesting stories.

I also fail to see how this is exclusively a code issue, this has to do with people abusing the ghost role's freedom to be shitlords, If you restrict the ability for golems to have shitty interactions with the crew you are also restricting the ability for golems to have fun and interesting interactions with the crew.

You may say that you dont intend to gut the fun of the ghost role by making code changes to solve a policy enforcement issue but the results are still the removal of a large part of the fun of the lavaland ghost role, so your intent doesnt mean anything.

People seem to create policy threads almost entirely to get code changes now with how often people try to solve enforcement issues with code.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:37 pm
by Arianya
Taking away your ability to make an item is not a "restriction" in the same way that "banning them from leaving the z-level" would be.

By that logic not allowing R&D on station to make eswords is restricting them from fun and interesting interactions with the game, and that we should just policy enforce science's use of them.

As I'm sure oranges would be quick to note, administrators and even headmins only have a very tangential say over the average user on code changes, and those mostly focused on admin-specific features. A code suggestion that emanates from policy discussion is no more likely to be accepted by maintainers then if it had emerged from Ideas or not been discussed at all and simply PR'd to the repo.

Ultimately, lavaland golems as a role need to change to fit the new landscape of nuR&D, and that may include restricting them from certain items that are not well suited to their role as a lavaland ghost role.

That said, bee is correct that this now mostly a code discussion rather then being a policy discussion, so it can probable be locked and further discussion moved to the Coding side of the forum.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:41 pm
by Lazengann
does anyone object to "don't attack unless attacked"

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:42 pm
by Dr_bee
Arianya wrote:Taking away your ability to make an item is not a "restriction" in the same way that "banning them from leaving the z-level" would be.

By that logic not allowing R&D on station to make eswords is restricting them from fun and interesting interactions with the game, and that we should just policy enforce science's use of them.


Big difference being one leads to interaction between players and one is a weapon. Teleporter is a reward for a job well done by golems, and actually allows the roleplay to happen, same cant be said for an e-sword.

Lazengann wrote:does anyone object to "don't attack unless attacked"


isnt that already part of the ghost role?

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:59 pm
by WarbossLincoln
I think the idea of doing both a code and policy change to golems to change their purpose is a good idea. If they aren't needed as an RnD tutorial anymore and their raids on the station are getting to be too much then let's change their purpose and limits completely.

I think a policy change that could help the golem problem is to not allow their escalation to bring violence to the station, ever. They can come peacefully to the station, and maybe a golem can defend itself against an attacker on station but only against that specific individual. If the golems and station become hostile to each other as a whole, the golems are not allowed to attack the station. They're allowed to slaughter anyone who sets foot on lavaland after hostilities start, but don't attack the station.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Tue Aug 07, 2018 11:18 pm
by Cobby
Policy is already that

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Wed Aug 08, 2018 1:52 am
by Nabski
Cobby wrote:Policy is already that


Good job everyone pack it up, it's time to go home.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Wed Aug 08, 2018 6:14 am
by Cobby
Yes we can pack up after I drive to the proper solution which isn’t doing exactly the same as before. I’ve made that clear several posts in.

If you thought my comment was pointless then pass—agg commentary about it is doubly so.

Sorry if it was suppose to be funny Sgt. Hardass Cobby is still in the calming stage of his vaycay

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Wed Aug 08, 2018 6:10 pm
by Nabski
I haven't really been following this thread, the initial post was bad and I figured nothing good would follow.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Wed Aug 08, 2018 8:14 pm
by WarbossLincoln
That's definitely not the policy that's enforced. Golems definitely raid the station if the crew does anything to them. Golem AIs routinely fuck with stuff on station. Crewmen often lockdown golem borgs with or without cause and then the golems seek retaliation.

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Wed Aug 08, 2018 10:24 pm
by Cobby
I'll consider that feedback then, just ahelp when it happens in case we're tabbed out ;)

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2018 4:48 pm
by Mickyan
We had another accident yesterday where one greytider with all access made an announcement that the station was going to war with the golems and the golems took that as permission to indiscriminately kill everyone, despite the fact most people were clearly not fighting back. Admins ruled that the fault was with the guy who made the announcement, I don't blame them for it because the whole debacle was a whole new level of stupid but consider the following:
If the captain makes an announcement to kill the clown, the clown doesn't automatically gain the privilege of freely bombing the station and going on a killing spree. Why is a ghost role, the one and only that has access to all the tools to fuck up the station no less, given less restrictions than a regular crewmember?

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Sat Aug 18, 2018 9:50 pm
by wesoda25
Mickyan wrote:If the captain makes an announcement to kill the clown, the clown doesn't automatically gain the privilege of freely bombing the station and going on a killing spree. Why is a ghost role, the one and only that has access to all the tools to fuck up the station no less, given less restrictions than a regular crewmember?

This

Also golems idea to go to war that round was shitty and I honestly cannot believe admins let it slide. That being said, round was a blast and the leader golem actually tried to do some roleplay as opposed to hopping in a mech and killing everything that moved.

Due to the potential of fun, I think golems going to war should be admin event only.

Anyways, I believe verdict was a code change so should I create a post there linked to this?

Re: Setting New Free Golem Policies

PostPosted: Sun Aug 19, 2018 4:37 am
by RogueSteampunker
There's a quite literal difference between the clown being called on to war and the golems, that being the fact that a clown's life is not forefit the moment they're noticed. A golem's however, is once again up to kill the moment someone decides that they don't wanna stare at the rockman anymore.

So as you could imagine, having a role whose escalation policy ensures that people can, without worry, murder everything about you and those around you, get called against for war, you can kinda see why they'd jump to the act of launching against the crew