/tg/Station 13

viewtopic.php?t=34848

This obsession with admin playtime has gotta stop; admins can understand the rules without needing to play a set number of rounds every week or two.

Also another case of players not understanding why they were banned. That or they know and is just trying to loophole it so they get unbanned.

>making your own peanut thread

ZERO OUT OF TEN POINTS VEKTER

the ban was probably fair due to past noting

>This obsession with admin playtime has gotta stop; admins can understand the rules without needing to play a set number of rounds every week or two.
a king must walk among his people, vekter

Kendrickorium wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:37 pm >making your own peanut thread

ZERO OUT OF TEN POINTS VEKTER

IT'S NOT MY BAN YOU FUCK

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:38 pm

Kendrickorium wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:37 pm >making your own peanut thread

ZERO OUT OF TEN POINTS VEKTER

IT'S NOT MY BAN YOU FUCK

kendrick's slipping, very sad

Turbonerd wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:49 pm I hate it when people prepare obnoxious things "just in case". This player should rethink how they've been playing and consider a better path for their future.

Wait, shit, we have gay text now? Let's go.

I think there's an argument to be made that it's not against the rules on LRP to make bombs, but there's some concern that it's shit to make stuff explicitly to fuck with antags before you even know there is one. The main concern though is that he blew up a sec officer as a non-antag which is a pretty easy slam dunk.

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:51 pm The main concern though is that he blew up a sec officer as a non-antag which is a pretty easy slam dunk.

he said he had thrown 3 or 4 bombs onto the pirate shuttle already, and that the officer got hit by the blast radius on one of the last ones(?) when he walked towards the pirate shuttle. idk seems like a ss13 moment to me

doing this as a one-off thing is fine but if this guy is making bombs round after round then he definitely should be ass whooped. but i see no evidence that he makes bombs round after round other than the fact he bombed a Wizard and killed other people in the ‘splosion at one point.

iwishforducks wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:59 pm

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:51 pm The main concern though is that he blew up a sec officer as a non-antag which is a pretty easy slam dunk.

he said he had thrown 3 or 4 bombs onto the pirate shuttle already, and that the officer got hit by the blast radius on one of the last ones(?) when he walked towards the pirate shuttle. idk seems like a ss13 moment to me

doing this as a one-off thing is fine but if this guy is making bombs round after round then he definitely should be ass whooped. but i see no evidence that he makes bombs round after round other than the fact he bombed a Wizard and killed other people in the ‘splosion at one point.

Apparently this isn't the only time he's fucked around with bombs as a non-antag, so there's that. I think if this had been his first time a day might've been an acceptable duration, but given he has past history, that gets escalated.

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 5:03 pm

iwishforducks wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:59 pm

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:51 pm The main concern though is that he blew up a sec officer as a non-antag which is a pretty easy slam dunk.

he said he had thrown 3 or 4 bombs onto the pirate shuttle already, and that the officer got hit by the blast radius on one of the last ones(?) when he walked towards the pirate shuttle. idk seems like a ss13 moment to me

doing this as a one-off thing is fine but if this guy is making bombs round after round then he definitely should be ass whooped. but i see no evidence that he makes bombs round after round other than the fact he bombed a Wizard and killed other people in the ‘splosion at one point.

Apparently this isn't the only time he's fucked around with bombs as a non-antag, so there's that. I think if this had been his first time a day might've been an acceptable duration, but given he has past history, that gets escalated.

well how long ago was this? is it more than just the wizard ‘sploding?

the subject of the ban note seems to be focused on pre-emptively preparing and valid-hunting. dont disagree on the pre-emptive part but it’s perfectly fine to Valid Hunt space pirates like that. er, the point being that the ban note doesn’t lead me to believe that he’s actually been making roundstart maxcaps that much

The reading comprehension is phenomenal i see.Those are NOT maxcaps, those are singletank assemblies that do 2 4 6 at most.

LEDDDriver wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 5:51 pm The reading comprehension is phenomenal i see.Those are NOT maxcaps, those are singletank assemblies that do 2 4 6 at most.

And he still managed to commit some friendly fire, skill issue ban.

LEDDDriver wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 5:51 pm The reading comprehension is phenomenal i see.Those are NOT maxcaps, those are singletank assemblies that do 2 4 6 at most.

I know they're not but it sounds better than "is it 1984 to ask me to not 2/4/6 as a non-antag?".

GUYS GUYS GUYS GUYS, AM GOING TO MAKE BOMBS AROUND START FOR NO REASON THEN BLOW UP ANTAGS. HE HE HE I LOVE MAKING BOMBS FOR NO REASON

Jacquerel wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:00 pm

LEDDDriver wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 5:51 pm The reading comprehension is phenomenal i see.Those are NOT maxcaps, those are singletank assemblies that do 2 4 6 at most.

And he still managed to commit some friendly fire, skill issue ban.

Code issue disable friendly fire

The obsession with being the one to frag every antag is so unbelievably cringe in a roleplaying game. Rule 4 should really empower people to create fun combat experiences or interesting scenarios while fighting antags, not just deleting every antag every round. We should never have our less restrictive LRP servers end up being more restrictive.

Cheshify wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:15 pm The obsession with being the one to frag every antag is so unbelievably cringe in a roleplaying game. Rule 4 should really empower people to create fun combat experiences or interesting scenarios while fighting antags, not just deleting every antag every round. We should never have our less restrictive LRP servers end up being more restrictive.

I feel like it's more an issue with a general mentality of "needing to win" than anything. We see the same thing happen with antags and murderboning on LRP.

I think the concern is with how Arianya worded it, I think this is a pretty open-and-shut bomb fuckup case, but when valid hunting and preparation is thrown around in the ban reason it reads more like they're getting dunked for MRP reasons on Terry.

I think all that needs to be clarified is that this is about the bombing mishap, not for valid hunting.

EDIT: Right on cue misdoubtful!!

bombing pirates sounds unique. that sounds like a lot of fun to be a part of. not sure if i would want to be on the receiving end but… y’know, sometimes you just die. as long as it’s not an every round issue, i truly fail to see the reason why making bombs and using them on antags (responsibly) is an issue. let alone a ROLEPLAY issue.

I'm not an admin but I thought the precedent of "you can always use bombs if you think it is appropriate but you'll take some time off if you miss" was pretty well established

Not to mention grabbing the body of the friendly you fragged away from rescue and throwing it as a weapon (extremely funny scenario)

Jacquerel wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:37 pm I'm not an admin but I thought the precedent of "you can always use bombs if you think it is appropriate but you'll take some time off if you miss" was pretty well established

Not to mention grabbing the body of the friendly you fragged away from rescue and throwing it as a weapon (extremely funny scenario)

Its always really funny. This makes it doubly funny.

So I think the security officer was hit by the fourth explosion. Here's a side-by-side of the combat logs + explosions. (BTW, WHY DO WE NOT LOG EXPLOSION DAMAGE????)
anyways, if you're worried about the ethics of him throwing the security officer:

Seems like only the HoS and him were at the pirate ship, and the dastardly pirate was blocking arrivals, their only exit. The pirate was taking some good shots at them, with the HoS almost dying and the Appealer under heavy fire as well. he threw the sec officer's body as a last resort towards arrivals to try to hit the pirate.
of course, the pirate immediately grabs the sec officer and drags him off and kills him brutally, which buys the two time to collect themselves.

imo, this is a true ss13 moment.

iwishforducks wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:30 pm bombing pirates sounds unique. that sounds like a lot of fun to be a part of. not sure if i would want to be on the receiving end but… y’know, sometimes you just die. as long as it’s not an every round issue, i truly fail to see the reason why making bombs and using them on antags (responsibly) is an issue. let alone a ROLEPLAY issue.

The issue isn’t that he made and used a bomb on an anragonist, it’s that he made them seemingly at the start of the round.

There’s a difference between gearing up when the station is going to hell vs. gearing up right at the start of the round with no justification. I’m admittedly surprised because I thought this kind of rule only existed for the MRP servers and not the LRP ones.

RedBaronFlyer wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 7:27 pm

iwishforducks wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:30 pm bombing pirates sounds unique. that sounds like a lot of fun to be a part of. not sure if i would want to be on the receiving end but… y’know, sometimes you just die. as long as it’s not an every round issue, i truly fail to see the reason why making bombs and using them on antags (responsibly) is an issue. let alone a ROLEPLAY issue.

The issue isn’t that he made and used a bomb on an anragonist, it’s that he made them seemingly at the start of the round.

There’s a difference between gearing up when the station is going to hell vs. gearing up right at the start of the round with no justification. I’m admittedly surprised because I thought this kind of rule only existed for the MRP servers and not the LRP ones.

i agree that it's dumb that he made bombs roundstart. i was replying to chesh specifically about it being "a RolePlay Issue" but forgot to quote em whoops

admins can ask you not to gear up so heavily right off the bat. though it's not necessarily written in stone: it's just one of those things.

admins should be empowered to tell people to not make bombs roundstart. but what irks me is that it was a ban, and that it was mainly for "valid hunting"

When the bomb went off, the atmos tech immediately realized he fucked up and grabbed the secoff. Amaze threw the critted mothofficer directly at the departures airlock - the pirate was standing in between where he was throwing his body and the airlock. The /only/ reason he died was because the pirate pulled his corpse away from salvation and finished him off in space. (Rex immediately ragelogged). I don't know why this guy is getting banned because the multiple crew who were standing in departures lounge watching this unfold failed to act to save the officer.

I don't like how this is being framed as the atmos tech recklessly using someone he critted in the crossfire as a weapon to try and kill the pirate. That is just factually wrong. I watched this whole thing unfold myself and I am flabbergasted that it resulted in a ban. As for his commends about Arianya's playtime, they may be uncouth but the circumstances here are bullshit. I would be pissed as well.

Pepper wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 7:54 pm When the bomb went off, the atmos tech immediately realized he fucked up and grabbed the secoff. Amaze threw the critted mothofficer directly at the departures airlock - the pirate was standing in between where he was throwing his body and the airlock. The /only/ reason he died was because the pirate pulled his corpse away from salvation and finished him off in space. (Rex immediately ragelogged). I don't know why this guy is getting banned because the multiple crew who were standing in departures lounge watching this unfold failed to act to save the officer.

They were clearly aiming the body throw at the pirate and missed BUT they also dragged me away from the hos who was trying to save me using epi pens (which would have worked had I not been thrown), the crew could have gone out the airlock to save me true but at the same time I was being dragged away and weldered by the pirate who proceeded to toss my corpse into space at my point of death I believe I was at south western solars on Deltastation. Basically, the guy is the reason I died but I don't really blame them for it, I mean they didnt know if I was alive or dead so they just took and tossed me at the pirate despite the hos trying to first drag me away as they said it was a hectic situation with a bunch of single caps (of which I came into one close by and got critted). The reason for the "ragelog" was that I was basically RR and there is more fun stuff to do than just observe without adminning.

RedBaronFlyer wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 7:27 pm The issue isn’t that he made and used a bomb on an anragonist, it’s that he made them seemingly at the start of the round.

There’s a difference between gearing up when the station is going to hell vs. gearing up right at the start of the round with no justification. I’m admittedly surprised because I thought this kind of rule only existed for the MRP servers and not the LRP ones.

I don't think this kind of pre-prepping is against the rules on the LRP servers. When this is enforced on the MRP servers, the RP rules are cited and not the core server rules. On LRP, it almost always has to accompany something else, like:
"Repeatedly causes too much collateral damage using bombs as a non-antag. Has been asked to stop making and using bombs as a non-antag."
"Repeatedly spends their shift start making bombs then prowling around the station looking for any sign of antagonism, blowing people up for smashing windows or breaking into places."

Rather than a "can't do X from shift start" ban. Like, all our LRP players know there's gonna be antags and everyone's constently prepping for the inevitable confrontation(s). It's not what you got, it's what you do with it.

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:32 pm This obsession with admin playtime has gotta stop; admins can understand the rules without needing to play a set number of rounds every week or two.

Similarly, where we play. I’m still cheesed about the title of the Thranos/Archie peanut thread.

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:32 pm viewtopic.php?t=34848

This obsession with admin playtime has gotta stop; admins can understand the rules without needing to play a set number of rounds every week or two.

Not defending the banie but ss13 being an open source game, things can rapidly change and outpace a less than active admin.

Take Shaps ban on me for example, he kept telling me to do things that just arn`t viable non lethal ways to solve a situation as a clown (he thought clown`s pda slip was a 10 second stun, clowns could cuff seccies without rolling the dice to instantly cuff themselves, etc)

As the game changes the amount of options a player has available to a threat also changes, knowing the current state of the game is just as important as the greater context of a given round that happens around an interaction/event.

This is why complaints about playtime will always be tangible and hold value


Hell even if the prs stop the game is so large that new metas can form from existing content (like when i got in twouble for "faking" revs by making a passive flasher)

Oh and regarding this ban specifically, I have a really big gripe about how different pirate types are an entirely different threat level so it is relevant to know what type they are, some variants are very powerful ontop of their ticket to murderbone on lrp, basically a tier lower than wiz/nukies but still comparable to such an extent that robust strong pirates can and will outperform an unrobust wizard/nukie team.


Also bombing an enemy ship is leaps and bounds different than bombing your own station, there is an expectation to not cause collatoral with your explosives, but using that explosive inside of enemy territory just to accidently bomb your own teammate who is in the wrong place at the wrong time due to poor situational awareness and get in trouble for it is silly.


Thats like banning a flukie for bombing the station and accidently killing one of their own teammates. Team antags have way more responsibility to not harm eachother since they do not have to deal with deception (almost never), yet we dont see these type of bans EVER so why should nonantag crew get in trouble for this?

The point of the "if you fuck up your bombing you'll get dunked on for it" clause is to have a compromise on the fact that LRP is meant to be more freeform while also acknowledging that countering every potential threat with bombs is boring and a play to win mentality. It's a high risk, high reward best of both worlds approach to things.

I was the pirate here. Could the crew have stopped me and saved the guy? Sure. Should the bomber/body thrower get a pass because he assumed other unrelated players would jump into space to stop me? Erm, definitely not? That's not even a remotely feasible excuse. He's responsible for his own actions, not the lack of actions from randoms. Come on lads, what kind of logic is that?

He made his choice to bomb, fucked up, didn't stop the threat, and also hurt others unrelated to it. That's his bed, he made it, and now he's reaping the consequences. That's how it goes. That being said, him weaponizing the person he critted was hilarious even though it was fullblown shitter behaviour. I definitely had a giggle over it.

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:19 pm

Cheshify wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:15 pm The obsession with being the one to frag every antag is so unbelievably cringe in a roleplaying game. Rule 4 should really empower people to create fun combat experiences or interesting scenarios while fighting antags, not just deleting every antag every round. We should never have our less restrictive LRP servers end up being more restrictive.

I feel like it's more an issue with a general mentality of "needing to win" than anything. We see the same thing happen with antags and murderboning on LRP.

I've long been a firm believer in the idea that we should remove the Greentext. Seeing the funny Green Text that says "THE TRAITOR WINS" activates the Competitive part of peoples' brains, because nobody wants to FAIL, they want to SUCCEED. Without the text saying "SUCCEEDED" "FAILED" "THE TRAITOR WINS" "THE TRAITOR LOSES" people would be more inclined to do what they want, instead of tryharding their objectives.

It'd also PROBABLY help with that from the Crew vs Antag side, too. If the traitor loses, you win. But if you can't make them lose so that you win, then people might be less obsessed with "I HAVE TO KILL THEM" because now you're just kinda being a dick by maxcapping that dude who accidentally said "T I'm gonna try and kill the Captain" on Common.

CMDR_Gungnir wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 10:51 pm

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:19 pm

Cheshify wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:15 pm The obsession with being the one to frag every antag is so unbelievably cringe in a roleplaying game. Rule 4 should really empower people to create fun combat experiences or interesting scenarios while fighting antags, not just deleting every antag every round. We should never have our less restrictive LRP servers end up being more restrictive.

I feel like it's more an issue with a general mentality of "needing to win" than anything. We see the same thing happen with antags and murderboning on LRP.

I've long been a firm believer in the idea that we should remove the Greentext. Seeing the funny Green Text that says "THE TRAITOR WINS" activates the Competitive part of peoples' brains, because nobody wants to FAIL, they want to SUCCEED. Without the text saying "SUCCEEDED" "FAILED" "THE TRAITOR WINS" "THE TRAITOR LOSES" people would be more inclined to do what they want, instead of tryharding their objectives.

It'd also PROBABLY help with that from the Crew vs Antag side, too. If the traitor loses, you win. But if you can't make them lose so that you win, then people might be less obsessed with "I HAVE TO KILL THEM" because now you're just kinda being a dick by maxcapping that dude who accidentally said "T I'm gonna try and kill the Captain" on Common.

back when it was removed we had certain sec mains literally CRYING because they couldn't deny people greentext. it was funny as hell

TypicalRig wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 10:25 pm snip

I was gonna call you a hypocrit only to realize your not Kendrick.

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:38 pm

Kendrickorium wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 4:37 pm >making your own peanut thread

ZERO OUT OF TEN POINTS VEKTER

IT'S NOT MY BAN YOU FUCK

STILL ZERO OUT OF TEN FOR USING GAY TEXT

IT HURTS MY EYES

NOT BECAUSE ITS GAY BECAUSE THE SHIFTING OF BRIGHT COLORS HURTS MY FUCKING EYES

ALSO YOU CALLED IT GAY TEXT FIRST ADMINS DO NOT WARN ME

TypicalRig wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 10:55 pm

CMDR_Gungnir wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 10:51 pm

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:19 pm

Cheshify wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 6:15 pm The obsession with being the one to frag every antag is so unbelievably cringe in a roleplaying game. Rule 4 should really empower people to create fun combat experiences or interesting scenarios while fighting antags, not just deleting every antag every round. We should never have our less restrictive LRP servers end up being more restrictive.

I feel like it's more an issue with a general mentality of "needing to win" than anything. We see the same thing happen with antags and murderboning on LRP.

I've long been a firm believer in the idea that we should remove the Greentext. Seeing the funny Green Text that says "THE TRAITOR WINS" activates the Competitive part of peoples' brains, because nobody wants to FAIL, they want to SUCCEED. Without the text saying "SUCCEEDED" "FAILED" "THE TRAITOR WINS" "THE TRAITOR LOSES" people would be more inclined to do what they want, instead of tryharding their objectives.

It'd also PROBABLY help with that from the Crew vs Antag side, too. If the traitor loses, you win. But if you can't make them lose so that you win, then people might be less obsessed with "I HAVE TO KILL THEM" because now you're just kinda being a dick by maxcapping that dude who accidentally said "T I'm gonna try and kill the Captain" on Common.

back when it was removed we had certain sec mains literally CRYING because they couldn't deny people greentext. it was funny as hell

And thus they'd also quit playing Sec (probably) leading to a general improvement in Sec Player Quality.

I see no downsides here.

CMDR_Gungnir wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 10:51 pm I've long been a firm believer in the idea that we should remove the Greentext. Seeing the funny Green Text that says "THE TRAITOR WINS" activates the Competitive part of peoples' brains, because nobody wants to FAIL, they want to SUCCEED. Without the text saying "SUCCEEDED" "FAILED" "THE TRAITOR WINS" "THE TRAITOR LOSES" people would be more inclined to do what they want, instead of tryharding their objectives.

It'd also PROBABLY help with that from the Crew vs Antag side, too. If the traitor loses, you win. But if you can't make them lose so that you win, then people might be less obsessed with "I HAVE TO KILL THEM" because now you're just kinda being a dick by maxcapping that dude who accidentally said "T I'm gonna try and kill the Captain" on Common.

I mean, if you're going to remove greentext you might as well just remove antags? I would rather we have what we have now than have a situation where players have no incentive to do anything antagonistic.

Vekter wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 11:40 pm

CMDR_Gungnir wrote: ↑Thu Aug 31, 2023 10:51 pm I've long been a firm believer in the idea that we should remove the Greentext. Seeing the funny Green Text that says "THE TRAITOR WINS" activates the Competitive part of peoples' brains, because nobody wants to FAIL, they want to SUCCEED. Without the text saying "SUCCEEDED" "FAILED" "THE TRAITOR WINS" "THE TRAITOR LOSES" people would be more inclined to do what they want, instead of tryharding their objectives.

It'd also PROBABLY help with that from the Crew vs Antag side, too. If the traitor loses, you win. But if you can't make them lose so that you win, then people might be less obsessed with "I HAVE TO KILL THEM" because now you're just kinda being a dick by maxcapping that dude who accidentally said "T I'm gonna try and kill the Captain" on Common.

I mean, if you're going to remove greentext you might as well just remove antags? I would rather we have what we have now than have a situation where players have no incentive to do anything antagonistic.

If you need to be incentivized by the words "YOU WIN" in order to do anything antagonistic, you probably shouldn't be playing an antag. You can still follow your objectives. Or you can choose to ignore them completely, as a lot of people already do, and to do something else.

It genuinely changes nothing except filtering the people we don't want (Antags who are obsessively driven by Winning in a Roleplaying game, and Security who are obsessively driven by Making Someone Else Lose in a Roleplaying game)

Antag quality would generally either increase or stay unchanged. There are no cons.

I keep saying it but one day I am going to code the "write in your own objective here" box for solo antags.

Jacquerel wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 12:56 am I keep saying it but one day I am going to code the "write in your own objective here" box for solo antags.

Do it.

Respect to ari for deviating from the status quo on a server like terry, that sort of thing can be really intimidating. Glad to see admins taking advantage of the play to win rule or whichever one they chose to invoke. Looking forward to their response, have fun headmins!

Jacquerel wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 12:56 am I keep saying it but one day I am going to code the "write in your own objective here" box for solo antags.

Unironically, this would be fantastic.

Antags being able to declare their own objectives / Casus belli would be nice, even if its used to meme.

I'm for removing greentexts

Obscuring whether or not someone completed their objectives because a select amount of players have an unhealthy playstyle surrounding it seems a bit silly.

You can just ask someone to chill, liiiiike not make bombs roundstart to preemptively btfo antags. You can ban these people if they can’t catch on.

Removing greentext will not stop antags who wants to make it their job to replicate the next mass shooting and security who makes it their job to kill any antag that so much has a syndicate balloon

MooCow12 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 4:05 am Antags being able to declare their own objectives / Casus belli would be nice, even if its used to meme.

Cheshify wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 2:35 am

Jacquerel wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 12:56 am I keep saying it but one day I am going to code the "write in your own objective here" box for solo antags.

Unironically, this would be fantastic.

Misdoubtful wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 1:17 am

Jacquerel wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 12:56 am I keep saying it but one day I am going to code the "write in your own objective here" box for solo antags.

Do it.

ok i did
https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/pull/78118

removing greentexts...

wait i forgot malf ai

Jacquerel wrote: ↑Tue Sep 05, 2023 9:26 am

MooCow12 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 4:05 am Antags being able to declare their own objectives / Casus belli would be nice, even if its used to meme.

Cheshify wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 2:35 am

Jacquerel wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 12:56 am I keep saying it but one day I am going to code the "write in your own objective here" box for solo antags.

Unironically, this would be fantastic.

Misdoubtful wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 1:17 am

Jacquerel wrote: ↑Fri Sep 01, 2023 12:56 am I keep saying it but one day I am going to code the "write in your own objective here" box for solo antags.

Do it.

ok i did
https://github.com/tgstation/tgstation/pull/78118

Where are objectives logged :3

Game logs and also printed in asay in case someone is being cheeky
unless you mean current ones in which case idk