ban players for metagaming antagonists via code oversights, ie. ban antag testing entirely

User avatar
iamgoofball
Github User
Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 5:50 pm
Byond Username: Iamgoofball
Github Username: Iamgoofball

ban players for metagaming antagonists via code oversights, ie. ban antag testing entirely

Post by iamgoofball » #669739

Bottom post of the previous page:

currently we have an issue report up on the repo where people are IDing paradox clones by demanding they confirm their bank account ID and then killing them if they can't

this is blatant metagaming by abusing an oversight with how paradox clones copy the target, but admins aren't acting on it and players have had to ask the coders to fix it

we all agreed that changeling MMI testing is bad and an exploit, so why can't we just blanket ban antag testing via shitty exploits/oversights like this?

"just fix it" is not always the solution because often these tests come as a result of fundamental architecture issues that require either hardcoded shitcode or massive refactors of how the game works to fix properly(ie. changeling MMI tests abusing how minds transfer around for changelings)

while we can fix minor issues like paradox clones not having their bank account details, players shouldn't be feeling like it's okay for them to be doing this kind of antag-checking on the regular and the hands-off approach to adminning that the server's taken in the last few years to avoid upsetting people has seriously limited our ability as game designers to not have to baby-proof every single thing against bad faith actors

please enforce the rules as written without us having to prod you guys in policy discussion every time a player behavioral issue happens, or rewrite the rules to allow metagaming like this already so that we can declare the server a lost cause and continue the separation of server and codebase

also, daily reminder for the peanut gallery commenters, metagaming does not exclusively refer to cheating via communicating out of game with people in the same match as you

the rule 2 precedent that you can know how antags work is so that you can know a traitor can buy and use an e-sword, not that you can know that paradox clones don't have bank account PINs so you can metagame them by forcing them to either activate a bank account on an ID card or be shot to death
LeekiLoku
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2023 12:58 am
Byond Username: Lokuthewise

Re: ban players for metagaming antagonists via code oversights, ie. ban antag testing entirely

Post by LeekiLoku » #672226

I am super guilty of antag testing, i didnt know that it wasnt allowed until i read the MMI testing thread. From now on ill reframe from doing antag testing (mostly just proving im not a cultist by using dagger on people).
chocolate_bickie
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:02 pm
Byond Username: Chocolate_bickie

Re: ban players for metagaming antagonists via code oversights, ie. ban antag testing entirely

Post by chocolate_bickie » #672727

CMDR_Gungnir wrote: Wed Mar 15, 2023 12:11 am
Screemonster wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 5:02 pm
BeeSting12 wrote: Tue Mar 14, 2023 8:58 am The issue is reconciling this part of rule 4:

"Characters are otherwise allowed to know everything about ingame mechanics or antagonists"
I'd say antag-tests also fall under "Non-antagonists are not allowed to pre-emptively search for, hinder or otherwise seek conflict with antagonists without reasonable prior cause." - specifically the "search for" part. If someone hasn't already revealed themselves to be an antagonist, you shouldn't go out of your way to mechanically reveal them.

Remember when syndi-cakes healed traitors and sec were using it to antag-test by beating the shit out of people and feeding them cakes?
me on my way to test for revs by beating the shit out of someone and then giving them cuba libre to make up for it
Random person shouts revs over comms.

I now have permission to beat up people and feed them cuba libres for the rest of the round.

Isn't it strange how easy antag testing overlaps with grief?

+1 Goof's right, this is just shitty bug abuse.

TGMC allows 'exploits' and it just results in players rolling high rank staff, ordering buggy gear and getting away with it.
User avatar
datorangebottle
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2019 9:53 am
Byond Username: Datorangebottle

Re: ban players for metagaming antagonists via code oversights, ie. ban antag testing entirely

Post by datorangebottle » #672886

Theoretical and related question:
If a malfunctioning AI buys the camera upgrade ability, which gives their cameras x-ray, it upgrades all the cameras for everyone. This means that if the warden is using the security console, they can see that all the cameras have x-ray and the AI must be malfunctioning.
Would a ruleset banning people from metagaming antagonists via code oversights also bar them from acting on information obtained from this upgrade?
edit: I phrased this weirdly, but basically: would that warden seeing the cameras and seeing the x-ray be allowed to connect the dots and arm up against the AI?
Timberpoes wrote: Sat Jul 29, 2023 10:33 pm ImageAnother satisfied Timberpoes voter.Image
Timberpoes wrote: Fri Jul 07, 2023 9:16 pm I highly doubt any other admin on the team would have given you this chance, except maybe Kieth because his brain worms are almost as bad as mine.
Vekter wrote: Tue May 16, 2023 4:45 pm At what point does someone's refusal or failure to improve become malice in and of itself? If you give someone a year to stop shitting on the carpet and they keep doing it but get slightly closer to the bathroom every time and sometimes they get to the toilet before it happens, at what point does it become acceptable to just ask them to go shit in someone else's house?
Timberpoes wrote: Fri Apr 28, 2023 7:00 pm I'm sorry, can we get a real player to resolve this appeal? I don't like this trial player. They can't even set their own name.
Chadley wrote: Thu Apr 27, 2023 4:00 am WENDEZ, cute, cute. I imagine the sleeper activation code when I hear it. That's pretty cool. qB). But I don't like that it doesn't line up to be anything obsurd like WEWLAD. 6/10

SUGMA, nevermind it makes sense now. fuckyou/10
kieth4 wrote: Sat Apr 15, 2023 2:34 pm If it goes to appeals I will stand as the shield and protect this man's right to shit himself. Heavy is the head that wears the crown.
sinfulbliss wrote: I almost prefer Rave's AI-generated "We cannot accept this appeal at this time. If you would like assistance appealing in the future, please dial 1-800-1984-1488."
Pandarsenic wrote: Mon Dec 12, 2022 2:25 pm I think we can all agree that someone throwing a reverse revolver at Zyb as a secret test of character, and Zyb immediately fucking himself with it, is the best thing we all could have received for Christmas this year
User avatar
vect0r
Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2022 12:37 am
Byond Username: Vect0r
Location: 'Murica 🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥

Re: ban players for metagaming antagonists via code oversights, ie. ban antag testing entirely

Post by vect0r » #672918

datorangebottle wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 8:13 pm Theoretical and related question:
If a malfunctioning AI buys the camera upgrade ability, which gives their cameras x-ray, it upgrades all the cameras for everyone. This means that if the warden is using the security console, they can see that all the cameras have x-ray and the AI must be malfunctioning.
Would a ruleset banning people from metagaming antagonists via code oversights also bar them from acting on information obtained from this upgrade?
edit: I phrased this weirdly, but basically: would that warden seeing the cameras and seeing the x-ray be allowed to connect the dots and arm up against the AI?
https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/pull/73970
VENDETTA+Cecilia Vujic
Image
Image
Image
Image
User avatar
datorangebottle
Joined: Thu Jan 10, 2019 9:53 am
Byond Username: Datorangebottle

Re: ban players for metagaming antagonists via code oversights, ie. ban antag testing entirely

Post by datorangebottle » #672924

vect0r wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 10:35 pm
datorangebottle wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 8:13 pm Theoretical and related question:
If a malfunctioning AI buys the camera upgrade ability, which gives their cameras x-ray, it upgrades all the cameras for everyone. This means that if the warden is using the security console, they can see that all the cameras have x-ray and the AI must be malfunctioning.
Would a ruleset banning people from metagaming antagonists via code oversights also bar them from acting on information obtained from this upgrade?
edit: I phrased this weirdly, but basically: would that warden seeing the cameras and seeing the x-ray be allowed to connect the dots and arm up against the AI?
https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/pull/73970
Good to know.
Timberpoes wrote: Sat Jul 29, 2023 10:33 pm ImageAnother satisfied Timberpoes voter.Image
Timberpoes wrote: Fri Jul 07, 2023 9:16 pm I highly doubt any other admin on the team would have given you this chance, except maybe Kieth because his brain worms are almost as bad as mine.
Vekter wrote: Tue May 16, 2023 4:45 pm At what point does someone's refusal or failure to improve become malice in and of itself? If you give someone a year to stop shitting on the carpet and they keep doing it but get slightly closer to the bathroom every time and sometimes they get to the toilet before it happens, at what point does it become acceptable to just ask them to go shit in someone else's house?
Timberpoes wrote: Fri Apr 28, 2023 7:00 pm I'm sorry, can we get a real player to resolve this appeal? I don't like this trial player. They can't even set their own name.
Chadley wrote: Thu Apr 27, 2023 4:00 am WENDEZ, cute, cute. I imagine the sleeper activation code when I hear it. That's pretty cool. qB). But I don't like that it doesn't line up to be anything obsurd like WEWLAD. 6/10

SUGMA, nevermind it makes sense now. fuckyou/10
kieth4 wrote: Sat Apr 15, 2023 2:34 pm If it goes to appeals I will stand as the shield and protect this man's right to shit himself. Heavy is the head that wears the crown.
sinfulbliss wrote: I almost prefer Rave's AI-generated "We cannot accept this appeal at this time. If you would like assistance appealing in the future, please dial 1-800-1984-1488."
Pandarsenic wrote: Mon Dec 12, 2022 2:25 pm I think we can all agree that someone throwing a reverse revolver at Zyb as a secret test of character, and Zyb immediately fucking himself with it, is the best thing we all could have received for Christmas this year
User avatar
TheLoLSwat
Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2022 9:56 pm
Byond Username: TheLoLSwat
Location: Captain's Office

Re: ban players for metagaming antagonists via code oversights, ie. ban antag testing entirely

Post by TheLoLSwat » #672926

chocolate_bickie wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 11:00 am Random person shouts revs over comms.

I now have permission to beat up people and feed them cuba libres for the rest of the round.
you are playing ss14 because on no planet are you allowed to do this without an admin jumping down your throat for it, especially if you are doing it at random and as non-sec
chocolate_bickie
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:02 pm
Byond Username: Chocolate_bickie

Re: ban players for metagaming antagonists via code oversights, ie. ban antag testing entirely

Post by chocolate_bickie » #672939

TheLoLSwat wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 10:47 pm
chocolate_bickie wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 11:00 am Random person shouts revs over comms.

I now have permission to beat up people and feed them cuba libres for the rest of the round.
you are playing ss14 because on no planet are you allowed to do this without an admin jumping down your throat for it, especially if you are doing it at random and as non-sec
Read who I quoted.

Screenmonster pointed out at one point sec used to beat people and forcefeed them syndiecakes to see who healed.

Sec has previously debrained lings (sometimes killing innocent players).
User avatar
CMDR_Gungnir
Joined: Tue May 04, 2021 11:11 am
Byond Username: CMDR Gungnir

Re: ban players for metagaming antagonists via code oversights, ie. ban antag testing entirely

Post by CMDR_Gungnir » #673364

chocolate_bickie wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 11:33 pm
TheLoLSwat wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 10:47 pm
chocolate_bickie wrote: Fri Mar 24, 2023 11:00 am Random person shouts revs over comms.

I now have permission to beat up people and feed them cuba libres for the rest of the round.
you are playing ss14 because on no planet are you allowed to do this without an admin jumping down your throat for it, especially if you are doing it at random and as non-sec
Read who I quoted.

Screenmonster pointed out at one point sec used to beat people and forcefeed them syndiecakes to see who healed.

Sec has previously debrained lings (sometimes killing innocent players).
I ignored you at the time but I can't actually tell anymore whether you realized I was being sarcastic to make fun of it, because you responded to me instead of scree and then said the exact same thing I did.
User avatar
Cobby
Code Maintainer
Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone

Re: ban players for metagaming antagonists via code oversights, ie. ban antag testing entirely

Post by Cobby » #687604

I agree rule 2 could clarify but im also unsure how its not a rule 1 issue to demand someone to do something speculative or you will GBJ them for an indefinite time because you are unsure they are antags. Rule 4 applies to known antags, not ones you think are antags but dont have proof for yet.

Same as if you debrained a guy and put him in a MMI against his consent, you are killing someone you dont know is an antag. It doesnt become retroactively ok if they happen to be nonresponsive.
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current
User avatar
Timberpoes
In-Game Game Master
Joined: Wed Feb 12, 2020 4:54 pm
Byond Username: Timberpoes

Re: ban players for metagaming antagonists via code oversights, ie. ban antag testing entirely

Post by Timberpoes » #689391

There's a lot of nuance to this. No pithy one-liner ruling can ever really do justice to where antag tests as a concept cross between Rules 0, 1, 2 and 4. So our views on this will have to reflect those same nuances.

So, here it is:

Code-exploit/oversight style antag tests are, have been and always will be against the rules. This includes killing players and putting their brain in an MMI to ling test them or the newer example of Paradox Clones not being given bank account numbers. Antag tests like this which require either killing the player or that are exceptionally metagamey to the point of destroying an antag type are basically never intended by the coding team and are strongly prohibited.

All other antag tests cannot be done to gather proof that a player is an antag. Server Rule 4 is clear on this matter: "... non-antagonists are not allowed to pre-emptively search for, hinder or otherwise seek conflict with antagonists without reasonable prior cause". If you don't have reasonable prior cause, pulling an antag test on a player is against the rules.

The crew is fully entitled to refuse all antags tests by default, whether they are an antag or not. Refusing an antag test is not acting like an antag and is not proof a player is an antag. This is true under all ordinary circumstances.

Exceptions - as always - exist where the antag testing is a mechanic a game mode or antag rulset. For example, mindshields during a revolution. Refusing to be mindshielded during a revolution can be used against you, since mindshielding is a core mechanic of how the ruleset's factions work. Refusing to drink holy water during a confirmed cult outbreak is the same, since holy water is a core deconversion mechanic within the cult ruleset.


And for your reading pleasure, I cooked up a couple of on-the-nose examples that Kieth approved with me.

You walk into a medbay...

Scenario 1: There's a confirmed cult and evidence of cult activity around medbay. You found a cult dagger on a confirmed cultist somewhere else on the station. You can offer players be tested by hitting you with a dagger, but if they refuse you can't use that as proof they're a cultist. You can still use the fact that cult is confirmed plus the evidence of cult activity to search them. You can treat players that take and pass the test as confirmed non-antags.

Scenario 2: You found what you think is a cult dagger in maints. No other evidence of cult activity at all, cult not confirmed yet. Trying to antag test players with the dagger is a breach of Server Rule 4 without reasonable prior cause to believe the player may be a cultist.

You walk into the interrogation room in sec...

Secenario 1: There is someone suspected of having Sleeping Carp. You recall members of the sec team mentioning them deflecting ranged attacks with their hands and kicking a sec officer across the room. You ask them to shoot a gun. If they refuse, you cannot treat them like an antagonist for this. You can still use the reports of them deflecting ranged attacks and kicking sec officers across the room to treat them as if they had Sleeping Carp. You can treat players that take and pass the test as confirmed not having Sleeping Carp.

Scenario 2: There's a random assistant that was caught hacking into the back of science. They were arrested with stun batons, cuffed and brought to the brig for questioning. Trying to antag test the player by making them shoot the gun is a breach of Server Rule 4 without any reasonable prior cause to believe the player may have Sleeping Carp.

Timberpoes: Helped write it^
Kieth4: Initial draft of it, read it, helped write it^
/tg/station Codebase Maintainer
/tg/station Game Master/Discord Jannie: Feed me back in my thread.
/tg/station Admin Trainer: Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
Feb 2022-Sep 2022 Host Vote Headmin
Mar 2023-Sep 2023 Admin Vote Headmin
Locked

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users