Should conversion antags be req. to attempt their objective?

[Oldman Robustin]

I've run into this issue a few times.

A certain botanist gang leader making kudzu all shift and then releasing a sing and tesla, a gang boss pulling out a gun a roundstart and rushing the brig, a gang boss deciding to sell switchblades but gets bored and suicides.

A cultist who ignores cult chat and make grenades all shift, then runs to arrivals and starts murderboning. A cultist who tosses on robes+sword ASAP and starts randomly stabbing people.

A sling who just murderbones.


All of these have different implications, and I don't think all of these should be bannable, but we don't really have any stated policy on what conversion "leader" are expected to do. Can they flat out ignore their objective and help the crew? Can do "attempt" their objective in a way that they know is 99.99% unlikely to succeed (rushing the brig with a single pistol at roundstart)? Do we soften our stance in modes where other "leaders" can pick up the slack if you decide to wildly murderbone, or do we come down harder because the wildcard revealed the antag's presence and jumpstarted security's reaction?

[TechnoAlchemist]

I think if roll gang leader and want to do a gang specific gimmick that should be allowed. But if it's nuke ops/cult/sling where you have other leaders/roundstart teammates you really shouldn't be allowed to fuck them over.

I must admit that in some cult rounds I have for the most part ignored my teammates except when they expressly asked for help for a conversion/sacrifice.

[ShadowDimentio]

No.

[Tornadium]

Yes they should, They are there to drive the round and make the round interesting/provide content.

Shit like this causes rounds like that rev round where a rev did nothing the entire fucking round and the crew ended up murdering the fuck out of the AI because they thought it was a malf round when the shuttle wouldn't leave.

Edit : was thinking of the wrong round.

[ThanatosRa]

I would say that as long as the gimmick or unique approach is geared towards the objective, it's alright.

Certain Circumstances, are bullshit though. Admins should judge those on an individual basis though. I mean no offense when I say this, but I feel that the overpolicying tendency the server likes to learn towards sometimes could make you and everyone else lazy. Kinda like the apocryphal unwritten "if it was funny let it pass" rule.

[Steelpoint]

They should make an reasonable attempt to accomplish their objectives.

A round start antagonist leader, or round start team antag in general, can really screw up the game for the rest of their fellow antags if they do something stupid in the early game and get outed to the station well before the rest of them are even reasonable ready.

[oranges]

nearly impossible to enforce adn will just cause drama

[PKPenguin321]

i think if you start off solo (shadowling, ganghead, revhead) it is okay as long as you're actually doing something to drive the round like a gimmick. like a ganghead making a switchblade shop is cool, but a revhead geneticist that just does normal genetics and never speaks at all for 80 minutes while everybody's going crazy wanting the round to end should be banned from revhead.

if you start with other people and they directly rely on you (cult, nuke ops) then it ain't kosher, yo. do your mission

[Zilenan91]

That gives me an idea for a gimmick, TC trade to be a gang boss so I can set up a gun black market

[Jacough]

A certain botanist gang leader making kudzu all shift and then releasing a sing and tesla

Isn't it already against the rules to deliberately do things in team antag modes that will fuck over your side like this?

[TankNut]

A certain botanist gang leader making kudzu all shift and then releasing a sing and tesla

Isn't it already against the rules to deliberately do things in team antag modes that will fuck over your side like this?

4. Lone antagonists can do whatever they want.
Short of metagaming/comms, bug/exploit abuse, erotic/creepy stuff, OOC in IC or IC in OOC, and spawn-camping arrivals. Team antagonists can do whatever they want as per lone antagonists, as long as it doesn’t harm their team. Non-antagonists can do whatever they want to antagonists as per lone antagonists, but non-antagonists are not allowed to pre-emptively search for, hinder or otherwise seek conflict with antagonists without reasonable prior cause. Non-antags acting like an antag can be treated as an antag.

Pretty much

[yackemflam]

Prettysure if that the batonist is the only one in his team he can fuck up the station all he wants.

[Oldman Robustin]

Slings aren't solo antags, there are a minimum of 3. Gang bosses don't really screw their own "team" if they're the only ones on it.

It's not even about making creating new rules Oranges, its that we don't really have policy for enforcing the existing ones.

I see 2 main views here:

1) As long as you don't actively and intentionally screw over your teammates, you're fine. If there was even a 1% chance of your actions helping the team, then its not rule-breaking.

2) When you roll a team antag, you're getting a rare and coveted role and you're taking that role from many other people who wanted it. You are also the driving force of the round's conflict. It's your responsibility to either make an effort to achieve your objective, or at least do something interesting with the role.

I mean we antag ban for #1 and it's a pretty established rule. But do we set the bar too low for this? Is it really good policy that we will permanent gang-ban a boss who /suicides at roundstart but we will give them a completely free pass with no notes when they pull out a Stetchkin at roundstart and start shooting anything that moves?

The dude selling gang weapons drew mixed reactions from me. One one hand it's hilarious, this is what makes SS13 so unique, it's player-driven content that creates all sorts of funny RP interactions! On the other hand it immediately screws up the round for 1-2 other gang leaders, creates a high probability of security steamrolling the remaining gangs, and in all likelihood will require admins to intervene to keep the round on life support if the other gangs get crushed early and nobody wants to call the shuttle.

My own personal policy is that I'll tolerate almost any level of shittiness from a team antag (aside from the established "dont fuck up your team"), but if its particularly bad I'll PM you about it and ask you not to repeat it. If turn the antag into a gimmick, I'll let it slide once, but if I see you doing it over and over I'll ask you to make an effort to do the objective. Gimmicks are good when they're not the norm, but if someone starts making it their default antag behavior, they probably need to stop or I'll let someone else take a crack at the role.

But its definitely one area I don't feel confident contacting people about since there's almost no precedent or authority for intervening on these issue.

[TechnoAlchemist]

Bwoinking people for doing a gimmick with the only drawbacks being letting people know the round type and perhaps draining from round momentum is over moderation.

Especially with the fact that gang has such mixed opinions, I regularly just gang all of mining and just hang out and chill there, not spraying on station or anything, just seceding.

[onleavedontatme]

nearly impossible to enforce adn will just cause drama

[Super Aggro Crag]

sometimes i get converted by someone who is an absolute shitter and i just go off and continue doing my job and not going out of my way to murderbone and i'd prefer it if i did not get banned for not instantly becoming a suicide bomber because a guy who has been a total cock all round decided to jab me with a pen

[Luke Cox]

Gimmicks are perfectly acceptable, but they should be required to do something that vaguely resembles their objective. Only blatant fucking off should be punished.

[iamgoofball]

nearly impossible to enforce adn will just cause drama

[Amelius]

I'm of the opinion that gang bosses are not obligated to do anything, since they are essentially, independent antagonists.

Starting cultists should be obligated to achieve objectives. If you don't want to play as a cultist, have it deactivated. Playing -1, or having someone reveal the cult early can easily ruin an entire round.

Converted cultists should be obligated to not hinder the cult. On one hand, I feel like they should be obligated to help the cult as a whole given the difficulty involved, but, some people really don't want to play the role of a cultist, or were working on a project etc. etc. At the same time, early conversions are precious, yet the number of aggressive/butthurt constructs/conversions who promptly go braindead/break walls/ignore commands etc. etc. are obscene. I feel the safe bet here would be to adminhelp it and get the role shifted to someone else if you don't want it.

Revheads would be obligated to attempt to achieve their objective, since they are a team, and ignoring revhead status means a 33%-50% weaker/slower revolution. Have it deactivated if you don't want it.

Revs should just be obligated not to hinder the revolution and accept implants. Low-risk, low investment conversions, contrast to cultists.

Slings should be obligated to complete objectives, as they are a team and there are a paltry few in a given roundtype. Deactivate the role or adminhelp it. Optionally, some admins may permit an antag swap to tator while adding another sling. Conversions are as investment-heavy as a cult conversion, yet much more visible (a simple examine can spill the beans). As such, I'd obligate people to participate.

[Cheimon]

I'm of the opinion that gang bosses are not obligated to do anything, since they are essentially, independent antagonists.

They're independent, but it's never more fun for a gang boss to do nothing than it is for them to do something. At the very least, someone with a major role like that who doesn't want to play it should have the courtesy of adminhelping, so that it can be given to someone else. Otherwise they just single handedly make the round less interesting for everyone else.

[Oldman Robustin]

Just realized that the bolded statement in my post above said #2 instead of #1. Pretty big distinction there.

[imblyings]

nearly impossible to enforce adn will just cause drama

[iamgoofball]

nearly impossible to enforce adn will just cause drama

[Not-Dorsidarf]

>Goober quoting his own quote pyramid

[iamgoofball]

nearly impossible to enforce adn will just cause drama

[Not-Dorsidarf]

Dear god. They're a maniac!

[CPTANT]

We just had a rev round in which the only thing that the rev head did was release the tesla and singularity without converting anyone.

[Oldman Robustin]

Making a comprehensive policy for every situation in my OP would cause drama and be hard to enforce, but I think we can draw a harder line than just "DONT MURDER UR TEAMMATES INTENTIONALLY BRO".

A simple policy like:

Do not utilize weapons of mass destruction (Engine release, kudzu spam, gold core spam, plasma flood) without making an effort to consult and warn your team.

or

Being selected as gang leader is not free antag status. Gang necessarily implies more than a single individual. Make a good faith effort to engage in some level of recruitment before carrying out random acts of violence.

[iamgoofball]

nearly impossible to enforce adn will just cause drama

[Cheimon]

Enforcing rules can cause drama, absolutely. But it's not exactly "nearly impossible". "Don't be a dick" is a very vague rule, and people disagree on it all the time. Discussions over it can get heated, but it's still a rule worth having. It gives a clearer idea of the spirit of the rules and the way players are expected to act.

It's the same with this. Such a rule wouldn't be for incompetence, but for people that go against the entire spirit of the round in an un-fun way. Here are some really easy examples where it would be fine to enforce.

1. Jimmy gets spawned as a gang leader. After Brian tries to convert him with a pen, he runs to security, saying "Brian is a gang leader! He tried to convert me! I know this is true, because I'm a gang leader too! Here's my kit as proof! Arrest him!". Jimmy isn't even trying to play the game. He's just trying to make sure Brian can't.

2. Jimmy gets spawned as a revolution leader. He immediately grabs a fire extinguisher and beats Brian to death, then proceeds to try and kill his entire department, none of whom are on his team. He's not even trying to single out the Heads of Staff. He just wants to be as violent as possible.

3. Jimmy is a shadowling. He immediately finds a safe place to hatch, then wanders around maintenance, jaunting every time someone sees him, until he is eventually killed. It wasn't that fun for Jimmy, and it definitely wasn't interesting for anyone else.

[Zilenan91]

nearly impossible to enforce adn will just cause drama

[yackemflam]

Making a comprehensive policy for every situation in my OP would cause drama and be hard to enforce, but I think we can draw a harder line than just "DONT MURDER UR TEAMMATES INTENTIONALLY BRO".

A simple policy like:

Do not utilize weapons of mass destruction (Engine release, kudzu spam, gold core spam, plasma flood) without making an effort to consult and warn your team.

or

Being selected as gang leader is not free antag status. Gang necessarily implies more than a single individual. Make a good faith effort to engage in some level of recruitment before carrying out random acts of violence.

The first policy is already basically a thing. You can't release the engine if you're in a team antag without the majority + leaders approval.

Second one I can disagree with. There are plenty of people who can solo gangs well enough. Hell, I was a last living gang member once and I took over a station ALONE since all of my other gang members died without getting weapons. And I'm unrobust as hell

Edit:My point is that this game is a story game. If you can make a well written story based off the round, it's a good round.

[Oldman Robustin]

Making a comprehensive policy for every situation in my OP would cause drama and be hard to enforce, but I think we can draw a harder line than just "DONT MURDER UR TEAMMATES INTENTIONALLY BRO".

A simple policy like:

Do not utilize weapons of mass destruction (Engine release, kudzu spam, gold core spam, plasma flood) without making an effort to consult and warn your team.

or

Being selected as gang leader is not free antag status. Gang necessarily implies more than a single individual. Make a good faith effort to engage in some level of recruitment before carrying out random acts of violence.

The first policy is already basically a thing. You can't release the engine if you're in a team antag without the majority + leaders approval.

Second one I can disagree with. There are plenty of people who can solo gangs well enough. Hell, I was a last living gang member once and I took over a station ALONE since all of my other gang members died without getting weapons. And I'm unrobust as hell

Edit:My point is that this game is a story game. If you can make a well written story based off the round, it's a good round.

The twist on the first one is that its a Gang Leader who has no team because they never bothered recruiting. So technically he had approval "of the majority" but he just played Gang Lead like he was a really shitty traitor instead of, you know, a gang leader.

What if every leader started doing that? Just using gang lead as a free antag to murder with and ignore recruiting? We'd absolutely have to step in and start warning/banning players who didn't even try to recruit. But since its a small problem we're just kind of like "Meh, 2hard2enforce".

In your second example, and its certainly an exceptional story, you still only won because youre entire gang died to get you there. "I won as a solo gang after my entire gang died to get us to victory" is not the same as "Solo gang leaders who never recruit are a viable way to try and win".

[yackemflam]

Making a comprehensive policy for every situation in my OP would cause drama and be hard to enforce, but I think we can draw a harder line than just "DONT MURDER UR TEAMMATES INTENTIONALLY BRO".

A simple policy like:

Do not utilize weapons of mass destruction (Engine release, kudzu spam, gold core spam, plasma flood) without making an effort to consult and warn your team.

or

Being selected as gang leader is not free antag status. Gang necessarily implies more than a single individual. Make a good faith effort to engage in some level of recruitment before carrying out random acts of violence.

The first policy is already basically a thing. You can't release the engine if you're in a team antag without the majority + leaders approval.

Second one I can disagree with. There are plenty of people who can solo gangs well enough. Hell, I was a last living gang member once and I took over a station ALONE since all of my other gang members died without getting weapons. And I'm unrobust as hell

Edit:My point is that this game is a story game. If you can make a well written story based off the round, it's a good round.

The twist on the first one is that its a Gang Leader who has no team because they never bothered recruiting. So technically he had approval "of the majority" but he just played Gang Lead like he was a really shitty traitor instead of, you know, a gang leader.

What if every leader started doing that? Just using gang lead as a free antag to murder with and ignore recruiting? We'd absolutely have to step in and start warning/banning players who didn't even try to recruit. But since its a small problem we're just kind of like "Meh, 2hard2enforce".

In your second example, and its certainly an exceptional story, you still only won because youre entire gang died to get you there. "I won as a solo gang after my entire gang died to get us to victory" is not the same as "Solo gang leaders who never recruit are a viable way to try and win".

For the first one, there are people who will always try to play to win. They will 'metagame' very hard to grab the robust, arm everyone, take science, and try to win from there. We don't have a policy on this because it isn't a big problem in the first place. For the second one, I did my best to recruit and get more lieutenants, EVERYONE in my gang died without making a major impact. I probably would've done better if I didn't get people at all.

My point is that too many policy can start railroading the game into a boring and linear game.

>Inb4 Muh slippery slope meme

[bandit]

3. Jimmy is a shadowling. He immediately finds a safe place to hatch, then wanders around maintenance, jaunting every time someone sees him, until he is eventually killed. It wasn't that fun for Jimmy, and it definitely wasn't interesting for anyone else.

The problem with this is that it is impossible to tell from garden-variety incompetence.

[NikNakFlak]

nearly impossible to enforce adn will just cause drama

[yackemflam]

nearly impossible to enforce adn will just cause drama

[Kelenius]

It's not hard to enforce. You just need to drop the "antagonists can do anything" mindset and accept the fact that they can also be a subject to rules.

[NikNakFlak]

You don't even play here. Ever.

[Hibbles]

I'll tell Revheads specifically to at least convert a few other dudes even if they don't feel like it. That's one where it's super clear, and super easy to see whether it's being done. And super easy to see what should be done about it. Heck, if they even convert one person who's hype for revs, I could just make that person the head instead and off we go.

This literally was never a problem, not even once, before Solo Revhead Lol became the new way of things. When it was three, well. Even if two were total louts, at least one wanted to make some noise so things happened.

When it's just one, then he's gotta do something. Or not sign up to be Rev if he doesn't.

[iamgoofball]

who in their right mind plays rev and doesnt convert everyone lol

[Malkevin]

Anyone thats got rev ticked and isn't willing to do their job as an antag should be antag banned.

[Zilenan91]

Especially as a rev like for real all you gotta do is tide people and flash them

[paprika]

If people don't want to play an antag they get converted into, the role is probably unfun and shit.

You can't force people to play the game, but while recognizing there will always be 'those people' who don't want to play cult/etc: It should probably be standard procedure to ahelp and ask for a ghost to replace them so:

1) person in question can sit out the round
2) a ghost might be available that wants to play
3) the antag didn't waste their conversion

Just my thoughts, this worked in the past

[Zilenan91]

I have that problem with Gangs, I just can't stand the mode after playing it for so long, it's always the same.

Rev on the other hand I can't get enough of. It's just a bunch of dudes versus another bunch of dudes but the more numerous dudes can McGyver up a bunch of improvised weapons and it allows a sort of creativity and spontaneity that's missing from Gangs.