/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

Saegrimr wrote:Ah yes the old "I got called out for being a shit with all my ckeys, he's the worst admin ever" routine.
If you have a specific problem come at me bro, but don't even bother trying to pull the grudge card.

i formally challenge you to a roasting contest

make the thread, you pepsilolifag

John_Oxford wrote:

Saegrimr wrote:Ah yes the old "I got called out for being a shit with all my ckeys, he's the worst admin ever" routine.
If you have a specific problem come at me bro, but don't even bother trying to pull the grudge card.

i formally challenge you to a roasting contest

make the thread, you pepsilolifag

Saeg hasn't been an admin for at least a month Oxford, you nerd.

It's finals time, activity is at an all time low! Abort Abort!

Spawning 60 tc worth of eswords in a ferry is not a good event.

D&B wrote:Spawning 60 tc worth of eswords in a ferry is not a good event.

Wait, this happened?

Yes

What's with all the terrible events in recent memory, first the "talk and you get gibbed" and now the "everyone gets deswords"

D&B wrote:Spawning 60 tc worth of eswords in a ferry is not a good event.

do you not know who did this?

D&B wrote:Spawning 60 tc worth of eswords in a ferry is not a good event.

To be fair worse can already happen with the portal storm event

Qbopper wrote:

D&B wrote:Spawning 60 tc worth of eswords in a ferry is not a good event.

do you not know who did this?

It was shadowlight but honestly I don't think it's complaint worthy/I have one open already.

It was actually shadowlight.

PKPenguin321 wrote:

D&B wrote:Spawning 60 tc worth of eswords in a ferry is not a good event.

To be fair worse can already happen with the portal storm event

I am pretty sure it can't. The portal storm enemies don't drop anything at all.

They can drop elite hardsuits but that's it.

If I have to restart my client in the middle of an important game as a team antag, please TAKE OVER my body until I can get back instead of making a vote for 10 seconds whilst my body is beaten to deathand some random is given my body.

Just take over, run away, and get somewhere safe until I return, or hand it over then.

With the return of Kevinz, Sybil has not been a lawless wasteland

Lazengann wrote:With the return of Kevinz, Sybil has not been a lawless wasteland

Sybil consistently has more admins than bagil anyways so I'm not really sure just from active admin tracking that this was ever a super serious issue in the first place

J_Madison wrote:If I have to restart my client in the middle of an important game as a team antag, please TAKE OVER my body until I can get back instead of making a vote for 10 seconds whilst my body is beaten to deathand some random is given my body.

Just take over, run away, and get somewhere safe until I return, or hand it over then.

I don't mind doing this but usually we don't actively check every team antag to know immediately when you drop unless we happen to check antags at the right moment or spectate you directly.

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Lazengann wrote:With the return of Kevinz, Sybil has not been a lawless wasteland

Sybil consistently has more admins than bagil anyways so I'm not really sure just from active admin tracking that this was ever a super serious issue in the first place

yeah since when is "sybil has no admins" been a thing

sybil might have no admins on at odd times (super early/late) but that goes for both servers does it not

prison security administration is currently more lax than ever, and i like that, because it allows me to rape more inmates play the game more freely.

Coiax was tempminned for a round and I'd like to say he did a really good job. Bwoinked me once and was patient when I asked for a minute, dropped the issue after I healed him.

He bwoinked you and then dropped it when you healed him? That sounds like what you're NOT supposed to do.
He was removed sometime in the past for overstepping boundaries or something

>answering his own adminhelps

"Him" as in "the other player who had ahelped."

oh shit yeah, sorry about the misunderstanding. I critted someone who was NOT coiax and coiax bwoinked me about it, I asked for a second to deal with the shitshow currently going on in the gulag area, processed all the prisoners and healed him and he dropped the issue. obviously i would not be leaving good feedback if coiax had done that

I cant fucking stand it when you ahelp something and the admin responding pretty much just says "well your wrong its valid" then closes the ticket so you cant respond or ask why.

Nilons wrote:I cant fucking stand it when you ahelp something and the admin responding pretty much just says "well your wrong its valid" then closes the ticket so you cant respond or ask why.

I can sympathize with your frustration, but rule 6

also I think a lot of the admins may not realize exactly how frustrating it can be to get an IC issue/rejected/etc. message even if they're doing it for good reason (myself included)

Qbopper wrote:

Nilons wrote:I cant fucking stand it when you ahelp something and the admin responding pretty much just says "well your wrong its valid" then closes the ticket so you cant respond or ask why.

I can sympathize with your frustration, but rule 6

also I think a lot of the admins may not realize exactly how frustrating it can be to get an IC issue/rejected/etc. message even if they're doing it for good reason (myself included)

It only frustrates me when they don't say something like "rule 6" or "I cant tell you why but its valid" or "anything except its valid/ic issue"

Nilons wrote:

Qbopper wrote:

Nilons wrote:I cant fucking stand it when you ahelp something and the admin responding pretty much just says "well your wrong its valid" then closes the ticket so you cant respond or ask why.

I can sympathize with your frustration, but rule 6

also I think a lot of the admins may not realize exactly how frustrating it can be to get an IC issue/rejected/etc. message even if they're doing it for good reason (myself included)

It only frustrates me when they don't say something like "rule 6" or "I cant tell you why but its valid" or "anything except its valid/ic issue"

if we can't tell you usually it's becauestelling would be revealing round sensitive info, like if a person in question is/isnt an antagonist. not really any delicate way around it unfortunately.

PKPenguin321 wrote: if we can't tell you usually it's becauestelling would be revealing round sensitive info, like if a person in question is/isnt an antagonist. not really any delicate way around it unfortunately.

Ye like I said, if the admin said "I cant tell you why but its valid" Id be happy with it, its when Im left in the dark wondering if they just misunderstood what I was saying, or if the other side of the conflict said some shit that wasnt true and they got out of it that frustrates me

Nilons wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote: if we can't tell you usually it's becauestelling would be revealing round sensitive info, like if a person in question is/isnt an antagonist. not really any delicate way around it unfortunately.

Ye like I said, if the admin said "I cant tell you why but its valid" Id be happy with it, its when Im left in the dark wondering if they just misunderstood what I was saying, or if the other side of the conflict said some shit that wasnt true and they got out of it that frustrates me

Problem is, players generally read "Valid sorry" to mean "oh so he's an antag so I can do whatever." Like PK said, sometimes there's just no delicate way to do it.

Alternatively, if the admin just kinda brushes things off it might be the issue is being litigated a bit more than they have time or reasonable patience for. We try to make sure that players know what's going on and the rationale going into most rulings, but sometimes chasing a player in circles or arguing about the rules or rulings gets nobody anywhere and the issue just needs to be resolved. Partly in the interest of moving on to other issues and partly in the interest of helping you the player move on from whatever the ruling was or the circumstances that needed it.

cedarbridge wrote:

Nilons wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote: if we can't tell you usually it's becauestelling would be revealing round sensitive info, like if a person in question is/isnt an antagonist. not really any delicate way around it unfortunately.

Ye like I said, if the admin said "I cant tell you why but its valid" Id be happy with it, its when Im left in the dark wondering if they just misunderstood what I was saying, or if the other side of the conflict said some shit that wasnt true and they got out of it that frustrates me

Problem is, players generally read "Valid sorry" to mean "oh so he's an antag so I can do whatever." Like PK said, sometimes there's just no delicate way to do it.

Alternatively, if the admin just kinda brushes things off it might be the issue is being litigated a bit more than they have time or reasonable patience for. We try to make sure that players know what's going on and the rationale going into most rulings, but sometimes chasing a player in circles or arguing about the rules or rulings gets nobody anywhere and the issue just needs to be resolved. Partly in the interest of moving on to other issues and partly in the interest of helping you the player move on from whatever the ruling was or the circumstances that needed it.

I left this in your feedback thread but you specifically are really good about making sure players (or at least me) know whats going on.

It sucks

I've had more than one occasion where someone asked if their death was "valid" and I explained that I can't tell them much about it, and then they unironically reply "oh so its ok to kill him once I get cloned right?"

also everything cedar said

I just tell people straight up if their killer is antag because

A) They are dead

B) If they got revived they'd know that person was a murderer anyway and then act on that. Both from an IC and OOC standpoint their killer is now valid, doesnt matter if they have a red name in the player panel

C) Less frustrating for them

D) Half the modes have hiveminds anyway keeping info from ghosts isnt realistic

Kor wrote:I just tell people straight up if their killer is antag because

A) They are dead

B) If they got revived they'd know that person was a murderer anyway and then act on that. Both from an IC and OOC standpoint their killer is now valid, doesnt matter if they have a red name in the player panel

C) Less frustrating for them

D) Half the modes have hiveminds anyway keeping info from ghosts isnt realistic

Kor is right as fuck once again

Kor wrote:I just tell people straight up if their killer is antag because

A) They are dead

B) If they got revived they'd know that person was a murderer anyway and then act on that. Both from an IC and OOC standpoint their killer is now valid, doesnt matter if they have a red name in the player panel

C) Less frustrating for them

D) Half the modes have hiveminds anyway keeping info from ghosts isnt realistic

Well yeah if they're dead duh but if they're alive then it's weird

If a player wants to litigate forever you can just tell them that its your decision and they can go post on the forums if they want to dispute it and then stop responding to them.

and then they unironically reply "oh so its ok to kill him once I get cloned right?"

What is wrong with this question in your mind?

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Kor wrote:I just tell people straight up if their killer is antag because

A) They are dead

B) If they got revived they'd know that person was a murderer anyway and then act on that. Both from an IC and OOC standpoint their killer is now valid, doesnt matter if they have a red name in the player panel

C) Less frustrating for them

D) Half the modes have hiveminds anyway keeping info from ghosts isnt realistic

Well yeah if they're dead duh but if they're alive then it's weird

If they're alive then I remind them of that fact or tell them to tell security.

Like 90% of actions that can only be excused as "they're a traitor" are also actions that would make it valid and just to kill them anyway. If a traitor is trashing my workplace vs a random person is trashing my workplace is going to get the same violent response.

Ever telling a player that downright someone is an antag, regardless of reason is imo dumb. How do you complain about the game being different from when it used to be when you remove any kind of suspense or uncertainty of anything

The suspense is supposed to be IC, deadchat is OOC.

Adminhelps are also OOC and should be as painless as possible. Transparency usually helps with that.

NikNakFlak wrote:Ever telling a player that downright someone is an antag, regardless of reason is imo dumb. How do you complain about the game being different from when it used to be when you remove any kind of suspense or uncertainty of anything

Niknak proving once again that they are the worst

Kor wrote:The suspense is supposed to be IC, deadchat is OOC.

Adminhelps are also OOC and should be as painless as possible. Transparency usually helps with that.

Death is not always permanent, and there are many cases where it isn't and many cases where it is. Admin judgement should come into effect when telling the player, not just for any reason.

But if someone kills you they are now valid for death both IC (murder is a capital crime) and OOC (you can meet murderous force with murderous force) so even if they come back to life you wont really have given them extra information by saying "they're antagonist." They know a killer is out there and will likely inform whoever it was that revived them.

But they don't know for sure if it's an antag or not, and you are still injecting OOC information into their game by doing so and this influences their in-game actions.

Take for example, a situation where two workers got into a fight and one ended dead.
One is an antag, the other is not.

Person ahelps and is told they were an antag, person then retaliates through potentially lethal means but what it boils down to is now "An antagonist killed me and I'm getting lethal revenge"
instead of "Person A killed me for X reason during a workplace fight and I'm killing them back" and while the end result COULD be the same, depending on what a player says upon being revived or how other players who were either around the fight/were informed after the fact, their response to the murder could be different.

The end point here is, one way or another, you are injecting OOC information that could effect things. While you could say "That will never happen" and I can't provide specific examples what so ever, but enough situations similar to that from my own experiences of fighting with a traitor who nobody knew was a traitor, and just the game in general happening over and over across many months, who knows? In the end, why not just use logic to make estimated judgments situation to situation when that doesn't seem that hard?

I'm sure there are edge cases, which is why I said 90%, but keeping OOC information out of the round is frankly impossible, and making sure people have a good time and feel like they're treated fairly usually outweighs the need to hide things from them.

90% is a statistic you pulled from thin air. You can't back up this number or confirm it in anyway. Keeping OOC information out of the round isn't that hard. Most code related additions adhere to this very well.
There really isn't a reason to do what you say you are doing for the "feeling" of anything. We answered adminhelps vaguely about that stuff for years during that limbo zone when you were gone from the community and everything worked fine. I really don't know why you are arguing so hard to basically pick the lazy way out. This game is about suspense and putting you into situations where you don't know everything, but you take some of that out for basically no reason. Sometimes people aren't going to have a good time when they are killed by a traitor or what not, that's just the way the game goes. Not everyone has a good time each round and there's really no reason to inject this OOC information into the round to make them feel better in anyway really. They should adminhelp of course in case it's not a traitor but then wait to the end of the round like everyone else to see why X did Y.

I try to say something "I'll look into it" - it keeps people satisfied in that I'm not ignoring them, it doesn't give them info on who's an antag in case they get back in the round, and if I know the person in question is an antag then I can just move on

It's not perfect and they can usually find out on their own as a ghost if X is an antag but I've always felt the one word "valid" or "X is a traitor" responses were unnecessary

Qbopper wrote:I try to say something "I'll look into it" - it keeps people satisfied in that I'm not ignoring them, it doesn't give them info on who's an antag in case they get back in the round, and if I know the person in question is an antag then I can just move on

It's not perfect and they can usually find out on their own as a ghost if X is an antag but I've always felt the one word "valid" or "X is a traitor" responses were unnecessary

This

When I send an ahelp into the void its the worst, if an admin confirms they got it and will deal with it as they see fit I'm satiated in my need for justice

Qbopper wrote:I try to say something "I'll look into it" - it keeps people satisfied in that I'm not ignoring them, it doesn't give them info on who's an antag in case they get back in the round, and if I know the person in question is an antag then I can just move on

It's not perfect and they can usually find out on their own as a ghost if X is an antag but I've always felt the one word "valid" or "X is a traitor" responses were unnecessary

This is bad since we ban people for dealing with an issue IC after they had it dealt with OOC, I used to do it but I realized how bad it is. If you say looking into it that person has no idea if they are allowed to retaliate against their murderer without getting banned, but if you tell them its valid or yeah that guy is an antag they know they can go and handle it IC since it wasn't solved OOC.

But if they weren't wrong about retaliating, then it was never an OOC issue to begin with.

belatedly

Kor wrote:What is wrong with this question in your mind?

Because 99% of the time when people say "OH WELL IN THAT CASE CAN I KILL SOMEONE WHO DOES THIS?" they leave out all the context of the situation and reduce it to a blanket "can I jump straight to murder please please plz" whine. Context matters, just because a particular fight was escalated enough that killing is on the table doesn't mean you can kill someone who toolboxes you once.

Reread qboppers question. It is "so its okay to kill him once I get cloned" not "so I can kill anyone ever in future rounds"

There isnt context missing if you are asking whether you can retaliate against a specific person who just killed you.