Approve removal of secborgs from the code

[iamgoofball]

since secborg is a config headmins have to approve removal of the config so can we remove the secborg config so we can delete secborgs?

pros of removing secborgs:
1. people who don't know the past won't turn them on by mistake, such as future headmins and/or downstreams
cons of removing secborgs:
1. absolutely none, no cons, secborgs need to go

[Longestarmlonglaw]

WTf so bad about secborgs? Please tell me

[Googles_Hands]

They are sometimes fun in admin events, I doubt that this one config line is such a detriment that all downstreams struggle with having to turn off. And I doubt that future headmins would them on by mistake, and even if, they can just as easily be turned off, I think you will manage to play one round with secborgs in the one in ten thousand chance a headmin turns them on by mistake.

[iamgoofball]

I think you will manage to play one round with secborgs in the one in ten thousand chance a headmin turns them on by mistake.

those rounds fucking suck dude, actually the worst fucking rounds in the entire history of ss13

[YBS]

While I remember secborgs, there are a ton of new players who do not. Obviously 'security robot' sounds cool on paper, but the problem was that one secborg on site suddenly invalidated all other security staff.

Imagine if sec could open every door and be notified by AI instantly on a (mostly) private channel where anyone was.The validhunting was spectacularly shit.

That being said, I think they should stay in code for events, because more toys in toybox = more better.

They should just never be turned on and we should have some faith in the headmin teams that we have/will be elected.

[CDranzer]

Although I have no real objection to it, this also feels like a non-issue
Are there really hordes of trialmins accidentally activating secborgs? Is the secborg code really this enormous wart in the codebase?
Are there various changes that people want to make to borgs but people keep going "shit we can't do that because secborgs"?
Is this change practical, or ideological?

[sinfulbliss]

In what world would a future headmin “accidentally” enable the secborg config? This seems like a pointless thread.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

Obviously 'security robot' sounds cool on paper, but the problem was that one secborg on site suddenly invalidated all other security staff.

No it really wasn't, the problem wasnt "better sec officer" or it would have been code-nerfed like every other borg module in that position, the problem was that its mere existence encouraged antagonistic law-breaking sec-sided behaviour from borgs, even going against the rules and direct orders in order to Get All Crime, so the cop robot was delet

[MrStonedOne]

Because of this thread i will be enabling secborgs on campbell, whos config the headmins can't touch (because i haven't yet coded a way for them to touch it)

due to campbell round lengths, the config will be active in 3 to 5 business days

[Farquaar]

Because of this thread i will be enabling secborgs on campbell, whos config the headmins can't touch (because i haven't yet coded a way for them to touch it)

[Shellton(Mario)]

Next term I will be running as head admin just to turn on sec borgs then retire from ss13 forever.

[PKPenguin321]

cons of removing secborgs:
1. absolutely none, no cons, secborgs need to go

wrong, con is you cant use them in events
dont ever reenable em in regular gameplay tho

[Pandarsenic]

Because of this thread i will be enabling secborgs on campbell, whos config the headmins can't touch (because i haven't yet coded a way for them to touch it)

due to campbell round lengths, the config will be active in 3 to 5 business days

I desperately hope this is true

[Vekter]

Nah, this seems like a non-issue. I agree that secborgs fucking suck but they don't exactly take up a lot of room in the code. Might as well leave them there so we can use them in events.

[Cobby]

im still mad some of the CC stuff was removed, particularly the effects, cuz I could use them for non-admin stuff like events and its hard to replicate that easily.

[cacogen]

Because of this thread i will be enabling secborgs on campbell, whos config the headmins can't touch (because i haven't yet coded a way for them to touch it)

due to campbell round lengths, the config will be active in 3 to 5 business days

based

sec borgs are bad but with nerfs they could be good ( :

[Yulice]

Literally all sec borgs have at the moment is a baton, a disabler, a sec hailer, cuffs, and a pocket fire extinguisher, and I think the baton is inheriting the cost from the malf engiborg stun prod because a single baton swing takes a THOUSAND units of power, and a bluespace cell has 40k units. Meanwhile it isn't even the old baton, it's a REGULAR sec baton. They currently have no upgrades available either, at the moment, besides the universal ion thruster/self repair modules

[NecromancerAnne]

cons of removing secborgs:
1. absolutely none, no cons, secborgs need to go

wrong, con is you cant use them in events
dont ever reenable em in regular gameplay tho

I usually don't like your boomer takes, but in this one instance I think we can agree that secborgs are a mistake in normal play.

[Vekter]

Someone had the idea of basically merging them with peacekeeper bots and making them more about stopping harm and less about stopping crime. I like this idea.

[TheFinalPotato]

separation is absolute

[Indie-ana Jones]

I want them back if only for their sprite. It's one of if not the best borg sprite in the game. Personally, I'm going to go to Campbell to play around with it if they are enabled just to experience it again, but I play borgs in the way where I will always try to pick up downed humans (even if they're nukies, wizards, etc...) and pull a fast one on the crew to save their lives, its very fun to get in the way of what would be a clean cut kill. I'll do it with any borg class but Secborg would probably work the best for it.

Also, more on-topic to the thread title, I don't think we should remove Secborgs, and even more ideally I'd like to see them changed and reintroduced some day. I know Goofball ate a ban for his irrational hatred of secborgs, so I'm not inclined to believe he gives a fuck about removing them other than that. Quite frankly, I think he should take a chill pill.

[Mothblocks]

We're not interested in this. The code of secborgs spans little more than a datum and some sprites, and there's active interest and experimentation from the host in security borgs on MRP.

Furthermore, even in the event that the secborg config is removed, we still would not want to see the secborg code removed, as it's not uncommon for admins to have interest in playing around with them.