Wasting points during Nuke Ops = Immediate Kill?

[Archie700]

Bottom post of the previous page:

See title. An incident where a Robo killed an RD over wasting research points for clown modsuits modules over Durands, resulting in a disagreement between admins on how to deal with it.

Should this (and other stupid behaviours like spacing a gun given to you, which was also argued) be punished with immediate killing?

More specifically are they considered self-antagonistism?

[Kendrickorium]

The adnins should not enforce optimal play, and should be hesitant to allow players to enforce optimal play via a pass to bending or breaking the rules.

It is not against the rules to not contribute to the war effort. It is not acting like an antagonist to carry on business as usual around war ops and not act like winning winning winning is all that matters.

War ops is not and should not be the death of any fun or joy in the shift. It should not be the mandatory player enforcement of winning at all cost. An RD shouldn't be afraid of researching Durands because a robo wanted Gygaxes and Gygaxes are better than Durands so they RD is acting like an antag and can now be valided.

It feel like some admins would like to allow rule breaks against players that break the imaginary script that admin has for how to most optimally game war ops as the crew. No deviations allowed. All must know the meta. All must power the game.

No, stop killing the biggest SS13 moments that make for the best SS13 stories. Encourage players to use all IC means at their disposal that are firmly within the rules. Use their words. Call sec or a superior to the RD. Just play the hand you're deal and change your plans because your boss doesn't want to win win win hard hard hard must win cannot have fun cannot roleplay cannot do anything but be optimal.

Timber when i am being repeatedly slipped by a clown when i'm trying to get into the AI upload to give it a law that allows it to help the station against nuke ops my rage CAN and WILL facilitate the removal of that clowns head.

[Kendrickorium]

I think DEATH is a bit extreme, grab some cuffs throw the point waster in a cell.
Specifically in the context of nuke-ops a simple death may just become a round removal with how busy medical will soon become, and a round removal seems awfully unfair for wasting some points.

that sir is a cozy as fuck pfp/forum sig

[TheLoLSwat]

There is a point where you can kill someone for hindering the fight against a round-ending threat but I dont think trolling research points is there yet, especially if its the RD or captain doing the spending. Doing things that you know are hurting the effort OOCly because of an IC decision your character really wants to make is based

[Timberpoes]

The adnins should not enforce optimal play, and should be hesitant to allow players to enforce optimal play via a pass to bending or breaking the rules.

It is not against the rules to not contribute to the war effort. It is not acting like an antagonist to carry on business as usual around war ops and not act like winning winning winning is all that matters.

War ops is not and should not be the death of any fun or joy in the shift. It should not be the mandatory player enforcement of winning at all cost. An RD shouldn't be afraid of researching Durands because a robo wanted Gygaxes and Gygaxes are better than Durands so they RD is acting like an antag and can now be valided.

It feel like some admins would like to allow rule breaks against players that break the imaginary script that admin has for how to most optimally game war ops as the crew. No deviations allowed. All must know the meta. All must power the game.

No, stop killing the biggest SS13 moments that make for the best SS13 stories. Encourage players to use all IC means at their disposal that are firmly within the rules. Use their words. Call sec or a superior to the RD. Just play the hand you're deal and change your plans because your boss doesn't want to win win win hard hard hard must win cannot have fun cannot roleplay cannot do anything but be optimal.

Timber when i am being repeatedly slipped by a clown when i'm trying to get into the AI upload to give it a law that allows it to help the station against nuke ops my rage CAN and WILL facilitate the removal of that clowns head.

Could we actually both be correct at the same time?

I agree that clown griff when trying to prep for nukies can be a good reason to separate clown head from clown body. Especially if the clown isn't actually being funny or creative in their griffing of you. Being an unfunny clown basically Rule 4 valid because only the Syndicate would be so bereft of good pranks, honk!

At the same time, the RD spending research points on whatever the RD wants is kiiiiinda the point of the job and if youuuuuu don't like it you kiiiiiinda got three options.

1. Get the captain to """replace""" the RD.
2. Get sec to declare martial law and """replace""" the RD.
3. Roll RD yourself so you always make sure research points are used in precisely and exactly the way you desire, demote anyone who disagrees, try not to get """replaced""" by the cap or sec.

[MooCow12]

Mechs are not a vital part of the war infrastructure without which everyone's going to die. They are a novelty predicated on both mining and research collabing on achieving them.

I wouldnt call this a novelty in the land of IC, they are very close to the peak of military equipment that the station is capable of producing

Plus mech weapons are reliant on the same techs that are also necessary for producing weapons in general. (military and adv military)

The sci department is just as capable of producing weapons as cargo is, its just that the sci point economy doesnt grant people an individual ability to earn sci points while the cargo economy allows people to individually earn cash and get what they want.

[datorangebottle]

This could have been a funny story in the player's club about how the RD researched clown tech during war ops, so the crew built HONK mechs and used them to fuck up some nukies and/or die.
Instead, it's a thread in policy discussion about some whiny dipshit killing their boss over a tiny amount of points being spent suboptimally.
I think SS13 should move towards the former instead of the latter.

[vect0r]

This could have been a funny story in the player's club about how the RD researched clown tech during war ops, so the crew built HONK mechs and used them to fuck up some nukies and/or die.
Instead, it's a thread in policy discussion about some whiny dipshit killing their boss over a tiny amount of points being spent suboptimally.
I think SS13 should move towards the former instead of the latter.

I actually did that before. The clown honk fist had no cooldown so it just deleted nukies (I thought it was a feature) and I got two until an admin deleted me and the mech.

[Longestarmlonglaw]

where's the appeal and respective peanut thread in question again? i cant find it

[ekaterina]

where's the appeal and respective peanut thread in question again? i cant find it

As far as I know, there was no ban, the admin greenlit the kill, hence the thread.

[kieth4]

I think that there isn't an easy answer to this, ultimately we are a roleplaying game so as with a lot of things there is no clear-cut answer here. It's a situation-to-situation issue. Here are some thoughts.

-Red alert- nuclear ops, station ending threats means that there is a lowered line for escalation.

-I think it's fair to say that you should have a reason for your actions. If there is going to be a lynching there should maybe be some communication beforehand so you can gage what is going on.

-Your life depends not on optimal play, but good faith play. For example, if you have NO justification for doing something other than to troll you can probably expect yourself beaten up.

So the answer to the question is that it depends. Some situations can be justified, others cannot. No clear cut answer sadly.