/tg/Station 13

One of the most hotly debated aspects of Planet Station has been how it's going to be implemented if/when it is completed. Alienating large chunks of the playerbase is a serious concern regardless of how well received the finished product is. If we are serious about implementing what is arguably a whole new game, we need to figure out how we're going to do it. I can think of three ways:

• Make Planetary Station the only mode on both Bagil and Sybil. Remove the base game entirely.
• Have one server run Planetary Station, and one run Space Station 13.
• Put Planetary Station into map rotation as a map.

If anyone has any other ideas, feel free to post them.

make this a poll and i will vote for map

PKPenguin321 wrote:make this a poll and i will vote for map

Done

Players will almost always vote for as much content as possible whether that is a good thing or not, or even feasible in terms of code workload/quality/etc

Kor wrote:Players will almost always vote for as much content as possible whether that is a good thing or not, or even feasible in terms of code workload/quality/etc

Of course, which is why we need to keep in mind that players are not going to want to give up old content.

Luke Cox wrote:

Kor wrote:Players will almost always vote for as much content as possible whether that is a good thing or not, or even feasible in terms of code workload/quality/etc

Of course, which is why we need to keep in mind that players are not going to want to give up old content.

ok but nothing is being removed with this

captain sawrge wrote:

Luke Cox wrote:

Kor wrote:Players will almost always vote for as much content as possible whether that is a good thing or not, or even feasible in terms of code workload/quality/etc

Of course, which is why we need to keep in mind that players are not going to want to give up old content.

ok but nothing is being removed with this

Option 1 effectively removes the entire base game

Luke Cox wrote:

captain sawrge wrote:

Luke Cox wrote:

Kor wrote:Players will almost always vote for as much content as possible whether that is a good thing or not, or even feasible in terms of code workload/quality/etc

Of course, which is why we need to keep in mind that players are not going to want to give up old content.

ok but nothing is being removed with this

Option 1 effectively removes the entire base game

this is still almost the exact same game

captain sawrge wrote:

Luke Cox wrote:

captain sawrge wrote:

Luke Cox wrote:

Kor wrote:Players will almost always vote for as much content as possible whether that is a good thing or not, or even feasible in terms of code workload/quality/etc

Of course, which is why we need to keep in mind that players are not going to want to give up old content.

ok but nothing is being removed with this

Option 1 effectively removes the entire base game

this is still almost the exact same game

>Different scenario
>Different map(s)
>Different jobs
>Different objectives
>Wave of death slowly encroaching on the station
>Different endgame
>Increased PvE elements
>"Same game"


Planetary Station is going to play quite differently than regular SS13, and that's a fact we need to account for if we want the playerbase to accept it.

It has to be option one though, we can't support two versions of the game at once

Armhulen wrote:It has to be option one though, we can't support two versions of the game at once

If i recall, Kor said that he wanted to start this off as a map in rotation. But yes, that will be a major problem and one of the primary reasons I am against this whole project. I've said this until I was blue in the face in the original thread and I'd rather not start another argument about it here. If half the community is hell-bent on trying it I might as well try to be constructive.

*blocks your path*

Armhulen wrote:It has to be option one though, we can't support two versions of the game at once

Why

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Armhulen wrote:It has to be option one though, we can't support two versions of the game at once

Why

Not feasible to split up the codebase if you ever want to see any meaningful progress on this

the entire purpose of this experiment is to put the project in the hands of a single person with a single vision

there is no democracy

danno wrote:the entire purpose of this experiment is to put the project in the hands of a single person with a single vision

there is no democracy

That might work for something like Colonial Marines, but /tg/ would never accept it. The project is not dictated by a single person, nor should it be.

captain sawrge wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:

Armhulen wrote:It has to be option one though, we can't support two versions of the game at once

Why

Not feasible to split up the codebase if you ever want to see any meaningful progress on this

Why not

Think, McFly.

If Kor is serious about the scale and ambition that he's proposing, Swarge is right. That's another huge issue I take with this. It will completely suffocate the base game. If both gamemodes are to coexist, which is what half of us want based on the poll so far, things are going to have to be scaled back

can i please post separation memes in here and yell about how you're implying soft power ?

I'm not interested in discussing the (alleged) separation between admins/coders and such, I'm trying to brainstorm how we can implement this without gutting the playerbase

I don't care which you pick just keep it contained to this thread please

There is an additional option which is putting this on the rarely used third server. I've only seen it used for gooncode and test, and there's usually not anybody online testing anything when I'm looking. You could add that to the poll but I'm choosing other for now

We're going to lose players either way.
Stick it on sybil, call it a day.

I don't think it will be that bad maintaining both. The only real major difference is cargo in terms of game balance as far as I can tell, and since most systems are unchanged they'll be able to coexist. Not to mention that while we'll have plenty of planet devs, we'll also always have space devs (we already have hundreds!), not to mention there's no reason devs can't work on both at their own discretion. I think you guys are over hyping this whole separation thing

Luke Cox wrote:

danno wrote:the entire purpose of this experiment is to put the project in the hands of a single person with a single vision

there is no democracy

That might work for something like Colonial Marines, but /tg/ would never accept it. The project is not dictated by a single person, nor should it be.

Hey remember how hornygranny's iron fist used to rule the entire project and how people joked about it for years even after the drama was over?

The idea that we'd lose The Playerbase is laughable when

1) We didn't die when goof chem happened, and people fucking hated that

2) We didn't die when runspeed happened, and people fucking hated that

3) Every previous time we've added PVE elements to /tg/ it's been immensely popular

4) Players love new things above all else. The SS13 variants set on planets are very popular

5) I have a pretty long history of understanding what The Playerbase wants

I'm sure some people would quit, but it'd probably raise our population overall if anything.

PKPenguin321 wrote:I don't think it will be that bad maintaining both. The only real major difference is cargo in terms of game balance as far as I can tell, and since most systems are unchanged they'll be able to coexist. Not to mention that while we'll have plenty of planet devs, we'll also always have space devs (we already have hundreds!), not to mention there's no reason devs can't work on both at their own discretion. I think you guys are over hyping this whole separation thing

We can barley support multiple "box but the rooms are scrambled" maps. It will be able to coexist initially, but it will be incredibly limiting long term to have to balance around.

Anyway a poll that you have no power to enforce, of a very small sample of people who might not even play, to gauge their reaction to something that doesn't even exist, with an option promising that you'll get unpaid strangers to double their workload, is kind of silly.

Kor, for the reasons that I've highlighted a billion times, Planetary Station is fundamentally different. If you think that it's superior to the base game, that's fine. The examples you gave were balance tweaks and new features to the base game. What you're proposing is an overhaul of the core structure of the game.You are delusional if you think that is the same thing. Players aren't going to see it as the same thing. You can scoff at the poll all you want, but the more people vote, the wider the gap grows in favor of not forcing it on both servers.

PKPenguin321 wrote:I don't think it will be that bad maintaining both. The only real major difference is cargo in terms of game balance as far as I can tell, and since most systems are unchanged they'll be able to coexist. Not to mention that while we'll have plenty of planet devs, we'll also always have space devs (we already have hundreds!), not to mention there's no reason devs can't work on both at their own discretion. I think you guys are over hyping this whole separation thing

Kor has made it clear that he wants to axe the base game in favor of this, regardless of how feasible maintaining both is. This is a replacement, not an addition. Are you starting to see why I'm against it?

Not-Dorsidarf wrote:

Luke Cox wrote:

danno wrote:the entire purpose of this experiment is to put the project in the hands of a single person with a single vision

there is no democracy

That might work for something like Colonial Marines, but /tg/ would never accept it. The project is not dictated by a single person, nor should it be.

Hey remember how hornygranny's iron fist used to rule the entire project and how people joked about it for years even after the drama was over?

There's a reason that everyone hated him. He really doesn't help your case.

I just don't think that the game as it is now is worth preserving. Kor's vision will move the server forward.

The game as it is has its faults, but we really shouldn't throw the baby out with the bathwater. In the last year alone, we've made substantial progress on the base game.

InsaneHyena wrote:I just don't think that the game as it is now is worth preserving. Kor's vision will move the server forward.

where is the idea that /tg/ as is will die coming from

like, backups are a thing, you could just download the /tg/ code pre planetstation and run your own server if you want it that badly

maybe I'm misunderstanding the situation but moving the game in a new direction doesn't mean any and all past versions will be erased from history

It's not your project
You didn't make it
You don't contribute to it
It doesn't matter how fair you think it is. You don't speak on behalf of the playerbase. You are a forum minority.

A singular vision is what we need.

Kor wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:I don't think it will be that bad maintaining both. The only real major difference is cargo in terms of game balance as far as I can tell, and since most systems are unchanged they'll be able to coexist. Not to mention that while we'll have plenty of planet devs, we'll also always have space devs (we already have hundreds!), not to mention there's no reason devs can't work on both at their own discretion. I think you guys are over hyping this whole separation thing

We can barley support multiple "box but the rooms are scrambled" maps. It will be able to coexist initially, but it will be incredibly limiting long term to have to balance around.

...no? The map system works fine
If a map goes unmaintained we remove it
???

If a map goes unmaintained we remove it

Yeah exactly. People already can't be bothered to maintain a series of maps that are almost identical gameplay wise and we end up removing tons of them.

Then we keep Box and Meta, since those seem pretty well maintained.

Kor wrote:

If a map goes unmaintained we remove it

Yeah exactly. People already can't be bothered to maintain a series of maps that are almost identical gameplay wise and we end up removing tons of them.

Define tons
We removed like what, asteroid and mini and dream?
which were replaced by omega and delta?

Which ever maps were removed ended up with replacements one way or another, is that not working as intended?
The reason they are similar in some aspects is because of "gameplay balance" like how one armoury can't have more stuff than another stations. (yet minor discrepancies get through anyway)
How are you going to buy a house one day kor? All of them are almost identical with the rooms just shifted around, what the fuck kor

Asteroid, Asteroid a second time, Disc, Bird, Mini, Dream, probably more I'm forgetting

The reason they are similar in some aspects is because of "gameplay balance"

Yes exactly. So how are we going to handle SS13 vs SS13+jungle long term balance wise?

And my point wasn't that they're bad for being similar, my point was that they are significantly easier to maintain because they're so similar,and yet we still don't do it.

Nobody bothered to maintain dream/asteroid/etc because nobody fucking likes them. People actually like Box, Meta, and Delta. People actually like the core game too, even with its flaws.

This is the same core gameplay.

Why are we all falling for the bait?

captain sawrge wrote:This is the same core gameplay.

so why cant we support both maps at once ?!?!?!?

i really doubt that just because one person is changing the planet map, another can't just change boxstation

If you want to supplant the base game completely fork the code and do it somewhere else. This is space station 13.

just run it as a third server, then ramp up incentive for people to donate.

it'll inspire mso to host even more /tg/ branches. like aqua and fallout.

My original suggestion was for Kor to make his own fork of the code, make antags and jobs tailored to the new map, market it as a spin-off game, and host it on the third server.

Kor wrote:Anyway a poll that you have no power to enforce, of a very small sample of people who might not even play, to gauge their reaction to something that doesn't even exist, with an option promising that you'll get unpaid strangers to double their workload, is kind of silly.

danno wrote:It's not your project
You didn't make it
You don't contribute to it
It doesn't matter how fair you think it is. You don't speak on behalf of the playerbase. You are a forum minority.

A singular vision is what we need.

This poll is a terrible idea of which literally noone is obligated to listen to.
Your posts are oft terrible ideas which again, noone is obligated to listen to.

Luke, this is happening, and making passive aggressive threads isn't helping, like you said you were going to try and do.

Luke Cox wrote:I might as well try to be constructive.

If you have any skills aside from a remarkable ability to attempt to control what you have no power over, put them to actual use.

But then again, this is just one most post, which you have no obligation to listen to.

I'm more on board with adding this to rotation but I could see tg being "guys look its ss13 except its not space so its cool" kinda thing setting us apart from the others.

Wait why should I care I don't play?

PKPenguin321 wrote:

captain sawrge wrote:This is the same core gameplay.

so why cant we support both maps at once ?!?!?!?

i really doubt that just because one person is changing the planet map, another can't just change boxstation

Because splitting development will just create two inconsistent, poorly organized projects instead of one. One project allows for greater focus, consistency, balance, organization and a smaller, more feasible and manageable workload for maintainers.

This project already has clear design goals and objectives in place and several people that expressed an interest in contributing. It proposes a solution to several current problems with the game itself while keeping largely the same gameplay with some additions to keep things more interesting throughout a round.

Personally I'm willing to sacrifice the empty void outside the station if it means round progression gets meaning, the station starts to actually have value to it, early shuttle calls are no longer the solution to every problem, maintenance jobs have actual work to do and the million or so stupid weapons people have added finally gain a use beyond "hold this in your bag until you see antag then let it blast everything in sight"

captain sawrge wrote:

PKPenguin321 wrote:

captain sawrge wrote:This is the same core gameplay.

so why cant we support both maps at once ?!?!?!?

i really doubt that just because one person is changing the planet map, another can't just change boxstation

Because splitting development will just create two inconsistent, poorly organized projects instead of one. One project allows for greater focus, consistency, balance, organization and a smaller, more feasible and manageable workload for maintainers.

this hasn't happened with other maps and if this is the same core gameplay i dont see why it would happen with this one

Are you being intentionally obtuse right now

it is possible for a project to have additional mechanics and elements to it while keeping core gameplay. There are several things that need to be implemented for this to work properly. At its core, it is still SS13: employees on a station going about their business until antags come fuck stuff up, but it's incredibly disengenous to just call it a new map