Updating the maxcapping antags policy for perma Dynamic

[spookuni]

We've been looking over old headmin and policy rulings recently, and while many of them are simply obsolete or a simple change to the current defacto standard, some of the old rulings will need proper rewrites.

As a start to that, I'm opening this thread as a discussion ground for finding out what people think of the outdated policy of using explosives and other tools of mass destruction to kill antagonists, and how people think this policy should be amended for dynamic going forward.

The current policy on the use of WMDs to counter antagonists, for those not aware is : (If use of the weapon does not win the round for your side immediately after, then it is grief and will be treated as such by admins.)

I have no particularly strong opinion on this general policy, given that my primary focus area Manuel generally holds to a slightly different WMD policy as an MRP server anyway, but this thread should hopefully serve as a place to get some opinions and discussion out while we continue cataloguing and working through old policy rulings.

[GamerAndYeahMick]

It's hard to put a solid idea into words, generally speaking maxcapping things that are about to literally end the round such as narsie runes and things of that nature seems fine to me, but whenever someone is just maxcapping an antagonist because they are strong they are literally removing all the excitement from the round in my eyes.

Gearing up and fighting antagonists is fun, chasing them with other crewmates is fun, fighting against the crew is fun, and having someone in the round who you have to watch out for is fun but one guy simply dropping a fuck you bomb in your general proximity and ruining the ability for all of that to happen in seconds is not fun, it also can kill innocents with the breach and I don't like it at all

[SkeletalElite]

I think maxcaps should situationally be okay depending on the circumstance.

Bombing a traitor in the middle of bar? No, that's not good.

Bombing a cult base that is decently far from a main hall and the collateral damage will likely be limited to a room or two? Seems okay.

[bobbahbrown]

I think maxcaps should situationally be okay depending on the circumstance.

Bombing a traitor in the middle of bar? No, that's not good.

Bombing a cult base that is decently far from a main hall and the collateral damage will likely be limited to a room or two? Seems okay.

from my experience, if you are dealing with an administrator who enforces the spirit of the rules and not the word of them (which is, in many peoples' opinion, the ideal admin) then unless you were doing something obviously malicious or terribly round destroying i am suspect to believe you would be okay.

admins are there to ensure the game remains fun and fair, i think those who seem themselves in that role instead of something else would merely use this rule as a backing for deserved punishments rather than anyone who has the possibility of being banned for this

to this extent i think maybe you could change the wording of this rule to reduce the power of those would 'rule by the book' rather than by the spirit of the rules, but i think you run the risk of encouraging players to get themselves into trouble more often than is worth the hassle.

i think the existing wording of the rule makes players who are aware of it think hard about what they are doing rather than just hoping for the best.

with some thought,
bobbah 'bee' brown

[Pandarsenic]

As much as I do love a maxcap or two, I think it's pretty clear that generally with even just a syndicate bomb, to say nothing of a maxed tank transfer bomb...

The hull breach probably doesn't get fixed

If the hull breach is fixed, piping and wiring rarely get fixed, resulting in broken disposals routes, areas not reaching equilibrium pressure & temperature properly

Even if they are repaired (or somehow weren't broken in the first place), atmospherics & pipes being there won't actually fix Firelock Hell, since a bomb isn't even necessary for the station to become basically unplayable.

Once a bomb goes off, the chance of a shuttle call starts to rise rapidly. If it's already en route, it might not be so bad, though.

The main issue with the rule is, presently, it refers to a situation that has been coded out (killing a Wizard to cause an immediate round end)

[Cobby]

As a hater of bombs I think max caps are ok to use if the station is gonna be owned from the thing you’re bombing so things like nuke ops if it appears they’re winning, cult is fine, anything where it looks like the station is going to be btfo’d if the thing is allowed to live (I’d even consider murderboners fair game if they’ve proven too much for security). As long as you can justify with your imperfect information I can’t really fault you for it.

Blob being immune to bombs would be harder to justify but those can usually be communicated between everyone easier.

[Thunder11]

As a hater of bombs I think max caps are ok to use if the station is gonna be owned from the thing you’re bombing so things like nuke ops if it appears they’re winning, cult is fine, anything where it looks like the station is going to be btfo’d if the thing is allowed to live (I’d even consider murderboners fair game if they’ve proven too much for security). As long as you can justify with your imperfect information I can’t really fault you for it.

Blob being immune to bombs would be harder to justify but those can usually be communicated between everyone easier.

Basically this IMO, it should be handled on a case by case basis by way of something like "If you choose to use a bomb against an antagonist or antagonists, be sure you can justify its use after the fact."

[Jimmius]

As a hater of bombs I think max caps are ok to use if the station is gonna be owned from the thing you’re bombing so things like nuke ops if it appears they’re winning, cult is fine, anything where it looks like the station is going to be btfo’d if the thing is allowed to live (I’d even consider murderboners fair game if they’ve proven too much for security). As long as you can justify with your imperfect information I can’t really fault you for it.

Blob being immune to bombs would be harder to justify but those can usually be communicated between everyone easier.

This pretty much covers everything we'd want for the new policy to be.

Headmin Votes:
Coconutwarrior97: Yes
Jimmius: Yes
Naloac: Yes