Do you need Admins for rule 0 to apply? The thwarted attack on the Russian Mafia.

[Sightld2]

Bottom post of the previous page:

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=35001

Invoking rule 0 in your defense is a bold strategy cotton, lets see if it pays off.

[conrad]

We all know he wanted to take matters into his own hands.

Idk shit man, vibe checks are worse than ouija boards.

[Turbonerd]

We all know he wanted to take matters into his own hands.

Idk shit man, vibe checks are worse than ouija boards.

Just like how you can smell a ban evader, you can smell a griefer through the internet. He reeks of it. Crashing the mafia game to "surprise" people doesn't sound like something anyone would actually do.

[conrad]

We all know he wanted to take matters into his own hands.

Idk shit man, vibe checks are worse than ouija boards.

Just like how you can smell a ban evader, you can smell a griefer through the internet. He reeks of it. Crashing the mafia game to "surprise" people doesn't sound like something anyone would actually do.

ngl I got threads confused when I responded to you and though we were in this one.

[Vekter]

So don't ban people over it..... People acting here like he broke into some federal bank reserve or something with this "exploit". Centcom is basically an OOC area, if people want to have their dumb moment of glory there let them.

No.

It's an exploit. There are things there that players aren't supposed to be able to access that would, if introduced into the round, be completely unbalanced and cause issues. Players can get there and they won't be punished as long as they report to us how they did it and don't bring pulse rifles/Centcom IDs/any number of the other hilariously broken shit back to the station.

The only reasons they would be banned is if they failed to report the exploit and refused to tell us how they did it or if they abused it to get the aforementioned gamer loot.

[CPTANT]

So don't ban people over it..... People acting here like he broke into some federal bank reserve or something with this "exploit". Centcom is basically an OOC area, if people want to have their dumb moment of glory there let them.

No.

It's an exploit. There are things there that players aren't supposed to be able to access that would, if introduced into the round, be completely unbalanced and cause issues. Players can get there and they won't be punished as long as they report to us how they did it and don't bring pulse rifles/Centcom IDs/any number of the other hilariously broken shit back to the station.

The only reasons they would be banned is if they failed to report the exploit and refused to tell us how they did it or if they abused it to get the aforementioned gamer loot.

Which they did neither heeeey.

Perhaps you should get less hung up over the word "exploit" and look more at what was actually achieved, no one was hurt, no one was griefed. Literally the only thing he did wrong was use it one more time after reporting it and publicly stating his intent to admins to do so. Permanent ban is a complete overreaction.

[Vekter]

Which they did neither heeeey.

Did you miss the part where they actively refused to tell thunder how to do the exploit? We have to ban people who do that. It's not an option. Calling it an exploit isn't some semantical bullshit we do to justify banning people, it's literally an exploit. You aren't supposed to be there. Any method of getting there that doesn't involve admin intervention is an exploit.

This is policy, this is how we have always handled it. If you want it changed, post a policy thread.

[CPTANT]

Which they did neither heeeey.

Did you miss the part where they actively refused to tell thunder how to do the exploit? We have to ban people who do that. It's not an option. Calling it an exploit isn't some semantical bullshit we do to justify banning people, it's literally an exploit. You aren't supposed to be there. Any method of getting there that doesn't involve admin intervention is an exploit.

This is policy, this is how we have always handled it. If you want it changed, post a policy thread.

That is what you are hung up about? That he told it before in Discord and not during the ahelp? That is what warrants a permanent ban after all information is on the table?

[Vekter]

That is what you are hung up about? That he told it before in Discord and not during the ahelp? That is what warrants a permanent ban after all information is on the table?

I mean, if that's the case, then he used an exploit that he'd already reported to us, which is a paddlin' anyway.

[Archie700]

So don't ban people over it..... People acting here like he broke into some federal bank reserve or something with this "exploit". Centcom is basically an OOC area, if people want to have their dumb moment of glory there let them.

No.

It's an exploit. There are things there that players aren't supposed to be able to access that would, if introduced into the round, be completely unbalanced and cause issues. Players can get there and they won't be punished as long as they report to us how they did it and don't bring pulse rifles/Centcom IDs/any number of the other hilariously broken shit back to the station.

The only reasons they would be banned is if they failed to report the exploit and refused to tell us how they did it or if they abused it to get the aforementioned gamer loot.

Which they did neither heeeey.

Perhaps you should get less hung up over the word "exploit" and look more at what was actually achieved, no one was hurt, no one was griefed. Literally the only thing he did wrong was use it one more time after reporting it and publicly stating his intent to admins to do so. Permanent ban is a complete overreaction.

The only reason why "no one was hurt, no one was griefed" was because they were caught before something could happen. This was not some whimsical fun time, this was an attempt to interrupt a mafia round that could have gone very badly.

Also he did not "publicly" state his intent, he stated it in a discord help ticket that no admin had reason besides curiosity to look and was inaccessible to most people.

[CPTANT]

The only reason why "no one was hurt, no one was griefed" was because they were caught before something could happen. This was not some whimsical fun time, this was an attempt to interrupt a mafia round that could have gone very badly.

Also he did not "publicly" state his intent, he stated it in a discord help ticket that no admin had reason besides curiosity to look and was inaccessible to most people.

You want to punish people for what you think might have happened?

I mean, if that's the case, then he used an exploit that he'd already reported to us, which is a paddlin' anyway.

1. He literally told you he wanted to do this again, you failed to comment anything about this whatsoever, which I get but is not something he should eat a permanent ban for.

2. Once again, literally nobody got harmed or otherwise gained an unfair advantage from this "exploit".


I am rather disappointed you do not seem to see whatsoever that you can still punish someone without permanently banning them for dumb shit like this.

[Vekter]

I mean, if that's the case, then he used an exploit that he'd already reported to us, which is a paddlin' anyway.

1. He literally told you he wanted to do this again, you failed to comment anything about this whatsoever, which I get but is not something he should eat a permanent ban for.

2. Once again, literally nobody got harmed or otherwise gained an unfair advantage from this "exploit".


I am rather disappointed you do not seem to see whatsoever that you can still punish someone without permanently banning them for dumb shit like this.

1) I can't be held responsible for Discord being held together with duct tape and dreams.
2) Go make a policy thread if this pisses you off so much. Literally ALL HE HAD TO DO was go "yeah okay, here's how you do it" and he wouldn't have been banned.

Also every take I've ever seen you have about admins is "admin bad" so I frankly don't care if you're disappointed.

[CPTANT]

1) I can't be held responsible for Discord being held together with duct tape and dreams.
2) Go make a policy thread if this pisses you off so much. Literally ALL HE HAD TO DO was go "yeah okay, here's how you do it" and he wouldn't have been banned.

Also every take I've ever seen you have about admins is "admin bad" so I frankly don't give a shit if you're disappointed.

Trying to reduce my takes on this case and others to "admin bad" is extremely insulting and bad faith participation. You truly believe you can only reach the conclusion that a permanent ban is an overreaction to an "exploit" that harmed no one and yielded no benefit is "admin bad"?

[Vekter]

1) I can't be held responsible for Discord being held together with duct tape and dreams.
2) Go make a policy thread if this pisses you off so much. Literally ALL HE HAD TO DO was go "yeah okay, here's how you do it" and he wouldn't have been banned.

Also every take I've ever seen you have about admins is "admin bad" so I frankly don't give a shit if you're disappointed.

Trying to reduce my takes on this case and others to "admin bad" is extremely insulting and bad faith participation. You truly believe you can only reach the conclusion that a permanent ban is an overreaction to an "exploit" that harmed no one and yielded no benefit is "admin bad"?

Okay, this is annoying me enough that I'm going to try and explain this as best I can so hopefully you can understand this, assuming that you're arguing in good faith and this isn't just being mad at admins because they're admins.

In /tg/ policy, any instance of a player getting to Centcom is considered an exploit. Players are not meant to be there, there is stuff that could seriously break the balance of a round if it got back to the station, you're not supposed to do it. The act of doing it in and of itself is not why ShadowedEnvy was banned. Doing it by itself isn't bannable, but there are expectations that come with it that could result in you being punished.

If you manage to get to Centcom and an admin finds you there, you are expected to explain to that admin in accurate, understandable terms how you did it so we can have it fixed. This is true of any exploit, not just getting to Centcom, but shuttle code is a fucking nightmare and people are inherently going to want to get to places they shouldn't be, so it comes up in this context more often than any other.

Yes, ShadowedEnvy explained to me on Discord how to do it about a week before. There's some confusion involved in exactly what happened, mainly because I found out about them doing it via Discord and their Discord name does not match their BYOND username, so neither Thunder nor myself were aware they were the same person. At the end of the day, it's not entirely relevant because that requirement of explaining how you performed an exploit still exists.

Regardless of whether or not he had told me how to do it, he went back and used the same exploit again, an admin caught him doing it, and that admin asked him how to do it. He actively refused to explain how multiple times.

Whether or not the specific issue harmed anyone else is irrelevant. We have to apply a permanent ban if someone refuses to explain an exploit because there has to be a recourse for refusing to cooperate or there's no reason for anyone to ever report exploits to us. The bar is exceedingly low - literally all ShadowedEnvy had to do was go "Yeah, I already told Vekter how to do it, but here" and copy paste what they said to me before. Problem solved, issue over, we're good. They refused to do that because they're angry that we won't let them break the rules on Campbell because they think the rules don't apply to them. That's literally the situation, you can read the appeal again if you want to.

The only way to change our policy of "If you exploit the game and get caught, you have to tell us how you did it or you will be permanently banned" is to make a policy thread. Otherwise, it's not going to change and we're going to keep doing it.

Probably the only thing I really did wrong here was not address him saying he'd do it again, but as I said above, I don't think I can be held liable for Discord just deciding to not notify me that someone had replied to what I said in a thread.

[CPTANT]

Okay, this is annoying me enough that I'm going to try and explain this as best I can so hopefully you can understand this, assuming that you're arguing in good faith and this isn't just being mad at admins because they're admins.

In /tg/ policy, any instance of a player getting to Centcom is considered an exploit. Players are not meant to be there, there is stuff that could seriously break the balance of a round if it got back to the station, you're not supposed to do it. The act of doing it in and of itself is not why ShadowedEnvy was banned. Doing it by itself isn't bannable, but there are expectations that come with it that could result in you being punished.

If you manage to get to Centcom and an admin finds you there, you are expected to explain to that admin in accurate, understandable terms how you did it so we can have it fixed. This is true of any exploit, not just getting to Centcom, but shuttle code is a fucking nightmare and people are inherently going to want to get to places they shouldn't be, so it comes up in this context more often than any other.

Yes, ShadowedEnvy explained to me on Discord how to do it about a week before. There's some confusion involved in exactly what happened, mainly because I found out about them doing it via Discord and their Discord name does not match their BYOND username, so neither Thunder nor myself were aware they were the same person. At the end of the day, it's not entirely relevant because that requirement of explaining how you performed an exploit still exists.

Regardless of whether or not he had told me how to do it, he went back and used the same exploit again, an admin caught him doing it, and that admin asked him how to do it. He actively refused to explain how multiple times.

Whether or not the specific issue harmed anyone else is irrelevant. We have to apply a permanent ban if someone refuses to explain an exploit because there has to be a recourse for refusing to cooperate or there's no reason for anyone to ever report exploits to us. The bar is exceedingly low - literally all ShadowedEnvy had to do was go "Yeah, I already told Vekter how to do it, but here" and copy paste what they said to me before. Problem solved, issue over, we're good. They refused to do that because they're angry that we won't let them break the rules on Campbell because they think the rules don't apply to them. That's literally the situation, you can read the appeal again if you want to.

The only way to change our policy of "If you exploit the game and get caught, you have to tell us how you did it or you will be permanently banned" is to make a policy thread. Otherwise, it's not going to change and we're going to keep doing it.

Probably the only thing I really did wrong here was not address him saying he'd do it again, but as I said above, I don't think I can be held liable for Discord just deciding to not notify me that someone had replied to what I said in a thread.

The issue WAS reported. Literally to you, this makes all the arguments about people having no reason to report exploits moot. Placing the ban from Thunders perspective is fine, but in the appeal it becomes clear they did report it and the punishment should reflect that. And of course whether or not someone got harmed is relevant, it's always relevant, we are all here to have a good time.

[Vekter]

The issue WAS reported. Literally to you, this makes all the arguments about people having no reason to report exploits moot. Placing the ban from Thunders perspective is fine, but in the appeal it becomes clear they did report it and the punishment should reflect that. And of course whether or not someone got harmed is relevant, it's always relevant, we are all here to have a good time.

Okay, well, I tried to explain why it being reported to me doesn't matter in the context of Thunder's ban. I'm sorry if you're having difficulty understanding that.

[iwishforducks]

The issue WAS reported. Literally to you, this makes all the arguments about people having no reason to report exploits moot. Placing the ban from Thunders perspective is fine, but in the appeal it becomes clear they did report it and the punishment should reflect that. And of course whether or not someone got harmed is relevant, it's always relevant, we are all here to have a good time.

Okay, well, I tried to explain why it being reported to me doesn't matter in the context of Thunder's ban. I'm sorry if you're having difficulty understanding that.

they are saying that thunder is fine in banning them for being a dipfuck in the ticket, but that their good faith reporting a week ago should have been taken into account in the ban appeal itself, which never was addressed by thunder.

[CPTANT]

The issue WAS reported. Literally to you, this makes all the arguments about people having no reason to report exploits moot. Placing the ban from Thunders perspective is fine, but in the appeal it becomes clear they did report it and the punishment should reflect that. And of course whether or not someone got harmed is relevant, it's always relevant, we are all here to have a good time.

Okay, well, I tried to explain why it being reported to me doesn't matter in the context of Thunder's ban. I'm sorry if you're having difficulty understanding that.

Stop being passive aggressive ffs. Your reasoning for why reporting it to you wasn't enough really isn't strong. The process of documenting and fixing the exploit can be started just fine with the information he told you. That he told you before became apparent during the ban appeal and really should weight in rather than seeing this as some blanket refusal.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

The issue WAS reported. Literally to you, this makes all the arguments about people having no reason to report exploits moot. Placing the ban from Thunders perspective is fine, but in the appeal it becomes clear they did report it and the punishment should reflect that. And of course whether or not someone got harmed is relevant, it's always relevant, we are all here to have a good time.

Okay, well, I tried to explain why it being reported to me doesn't matter in the context of Thunder's ban. I'm sorry if you're having difficulty understanding that.

they are saying that thunder is fine in banning them for being a dipfuck in the ticket, but that their good faith reporting a week ago should have been taken into account in the ban appeal itself, which never was addressed by thunder.

After making a bug exploit report you are not supposed to then go and use the bug some more. Like, wouldnt Thunder taking the prior report into account hurt their case because, since the russian mafia incident is then just them exploiting an already reported bug, which isn't allowed, they're just in even more trouble.

[CPTANT]

The issue WAS reported. Literally to you, this makes all the arguments about people having no reason to report exploits moot. Placing the ban from Thunders perspective is fine, but in the appeal it becomes clear they did report it and the punishment should reflect that. And of course whether or not someone got harmed is relevant, it's always relevant, we are all here to have a good time.

Okay, well, I tried to explain why it being reported to me doesn't matter in the context of Thunder's ban. I'm sorry if you're having difficulty understanding that.

they are saying that thunder is fine in banning them for being a dipfuck in the ticket, but that their good faith reporting a week ago should have been taken into account in the ban appeal itself, which never was addressed by thunder.

After making a bug exploit report you are not supposed to then go and use the bug some more. Like, wouldnt Thunder taking the prior report into account hurt their case because, since the russian mafia incident is then just them exploiting an already reported bug, which isn't allowed, they're just in even more trouble.

We have been over this. It hurt literally nobody and he stated openly to admins he planned to do this and got no response. What's the point of giving a permaban for that.

I would also like to point out that policy regarding exploits doesn't actually appear to be documented.

[iwishforducks]

yeah it actually seems like there’s nothing on exploiting or using bugs in the rules, except for rule 4 which states antagonists cannot abuse exploits/bugs. obviously there’s an unwritten rule about cheating and abusing exploits for an advantage, but does this specific use of the bug/exploit count as abuse?

they said they had every intention of simply being deleted alongside the mafia game ending. i don’t see how this ends up as a mechanical advantage for them, so i wouldn’t count this as “abuse” or “cheating”. they’re certainly exploiting a bug what even is the harm here? it just seems like a fun ss13 interaction.

[ShadowedEnvy]

i mean the man was mad about them speaking russian, exploited, and metagamed. I wouldnt be surprised if he just started killing them because theyre not crewmembers and OOC.

This is fanfiction. In the appeal itself, I say that them speaking russian wasn't hurting anyone's enjoyment of the round. I'm more annoyed by the people claiming I'm a fun-hating griefer than by the ban itself, honestly.

[Dax Dupont]

yeah it actually seems like there’s nothing on exploiting or using bugs in the rules, except for rule 4 which states antagonists cannot abuse exploits/bugs. obviously there’s an unwritten rule about cheating and abusing exploits for an advantage, but does this specific use of the bug/exploit count as abuse?

they said they had every intention of simply being deleted alongside the mafia game ending. i don’t see how this ends up as a mechanical advantage for them, so i wouldn’t count this as “abuse” or “cheating”. they’re certainly exploiting a bug what even is the harm here? it just seems like a fun ss13 interaction.

Anything that breaches safeguards is an exploit by default. It is well known that players shouldn't get to centcom, hence the elaborate workaround.

Exploits and cheating mostly have been covered under rule 1 I guess, it's one of those common sense ones that aren't codified.

Maybe we should codify it and make the severe repercussions that may happen very clear as some players clearly don't understand whats acceptable.

[CPTANT]

yeah it actually seems like there’s nothing on exploiting or using bugs in the rules, except for rule 4 which states antagonists cannot abuse exploits/bugs. obviously there’s an unwritten rule about cheating and abusing exploits for an advantage, but does this specific use of the bug/exploit count as abuse?

they said they had every intention of simply being deleted alongside the mafia game ending. i don’t see how this ends up as a mechanical advantage for them, so i wouldn’t count this as “abuse” or “cheating”. they’re certainly exploiting a bug what even is the harm here? it just seems like a fun ss13 interaction.

Anything that breaches safeguards is an exploit by default. It is well known that players shouldn't get to centcom, hence the elaborate workaround.

Exploits and cheating mostly have been covered under rule 1 I guess, it's one of those common sense ones that aren't codified.

Maybe we should codify it and make the severe repercussions that may happen very clear as some players clearly don't understand whats acceptable.

And what is the point of these severe repercussions for cases like this that don't harm anyone? What is it you are trying to achieve? What is the benefit of codifying some draconian measures instead of looking at it from a case by case basis of what was actually done?

[ShadowedEnvy]

And what is the point of these severe repercussions for cases like this that don't harm anyone? What is it you are trying to achieve? What is the benefit of codifying some draconian measures instead of looking at it from a case by case basis of what was actually done?

To be honest, I understand their point of view. There are lots of people who WILL use exploits like this to ruin other people's fun, and there's no way to tell if they will until they've already done it. The issue I have is that on Campbell, the type of fun is very different from the other servers'.

Although honestly, getting to Centcom really isn't worth it without a significant amount of prep work to do things properly anyways. I don't think it'd actually give any advantage to someone who broke into it on, say, Sybil.

[Cobby]

i mean the man was mad about them speaking russian, exploited, and metagamed. I wouldnt be surprised if he just started killing them because theyre not crewmembers and OOC.

This is fanfiction. In the appeal itself, I say that them speaking russian wasn't hurting anyone's enjoyment of the round. I'm more annoyed by the people claiming I'm a fun-hating griefer than by the ban itself, honestly.

I mean exploiting and metagaming but claiming something akin to "only doing it ethically" is a bit of a stretch moreso than me thinking if you felt like you are allowed to be the arbiter of the rules then youd probably also sub to some vigilantism by "correcting" the russians. My personal metagaming rope ends at teaching people how to play the game, I dont believe the idea that your personal morals on what you think is an acceptable form of breaking rules only happened in this specific incident when you were caught doing 2 of the biggest no-nos in the game. Looking at how you conducted yourself in the ahelp and the appeal, I personally wouldnt want you on this server in particular not because you explicitly broke the metagaming rule or the dont exploit rule, but because of your general outlook on other individuals and the game*.

The only saving grace you have is that its on campbell and admins care much less about that server. Had you admitted to metagaming and exploiting on the other servers, I refuse to believe youd be leaving with simply a 2 month ban reappeal.

*which may be different to your character outside of ss13.

The fanfiction comment was funny and I will be stealing it.

[Striders13]

even if there was an intention to actually grief (again, crashing into their game to say hi is just silly and funny) them, all active players in mafia have god mode and would've just kicked their ass, so I can't think of many malicious things they could've possibly done.

[Cobby]

What is silly and funny about it? Its like "heh hes in centcomm somehow ok" and then they continue playing town of salem.

I can understand some personal allure into getting into centcom since its generally an admin zone, but framing it like its a public service or helps the narrative in the context of rule 0/secret rule is silly.

The behavior presented is more of the problem than the strict actions performed here, why keep someone around who thinks they know best when the rules should apply to them then proceed to excuse their behavior at seemingly every turn. I guess you havent by banning them, but I just think that type of behavior needs to be nipped at the bud with a bigger bite ig.

[iwishforducks]

What is silly and funny about it? Its like "heh hes in centcomm somehow ok" and then they continue playing town of salem.

You lack vision.

[WineAllWine]

In Germany it's legal to escape prison as it's considered human nature.
Here, it's ss13 player nature to want to get to CentCom so I don't punish it OOC. (I'll just pulse rifle you to death and send your body back on the ferry)

[kayozz]

Unrelated but a buddy and I once made it all the way to an admin island in World of Warcraft. The admins were genuinely shocked to see us both there, laughed about it a bit, then teleported us back to the mainland and told us never to do it again.
No bans, just a slap on the wrist.

[Dax Dupont]

yeah it actually seems like there’s nothing on exploiting or using bugs in the rules, except for rule 4 which states antagonists cannot abuse exploits/bugs. obviously there’s an unwritten rule about cheating and abusing exploits for an advantage, but does this specific use of the bug/exploit count as abuse?

they said they had every intention of simply being deleted alongside the mafia game ending. i don’t see how this ends up as a mechanical advantage for them, so i wouldn’t count this as “abuse” or “cheating”. they’re certainly exploiting a bug what even is the harm here? it just seems like a fun ss13 interaction.

Anything that breaches safeguards is an exploit by default. It is well known that players shouldn't get to centcom, hence the elaborate workaround.

Exploits and cheating mostly have been covered under rule 1 I guess, it's one of those common sense ones that aren't codified.

Maybe we should codify it and make the severe repercussions that may happen very clear as some players clearly don't understand whats acceptable.

And what is the point of these severe repercussions for cases like this that don't harm anyone? What is it you are trying to achieve? What is the benefit of codifying some draconian measures instead of looking at it from a case by case basis of what was actually done?

With codify I mean make it clear it's not allowed in the rules and what is expected of users.
If they do an exploit that doesn't harm and just reports it and doesn't use it again there's no punishment.
If there's harm there's punishment relative to the harm done.
If they refuse to explain the exploit they should be removed since actively exploiting something without reporting it is just bad regardless of what they may or may not have gained.

[Fikou]

Unrelated but a buddy and I once made it all the way to an admin island in World of Warcraft. The admins were genuinely shocked to see us both there, laughed about it a bit, then teleported us back to the mainland and told us never to do it again.
No bans, just a slap on the wrist.

howd you do it

[EmpressMaia]

Fikou

[kayozz]

Unrelated but a buddy and I once made it all the way to an admin island in World of Warcraft. The admins were genuinely shocked to see us both there, laughed about it a bit, then teleported us back to the mainland and told us never to do it again.
No bans, just a slap on the wrist.

howd you do it

Long time ago. I've not played personally since I got my account hacked in like ... 2013 and this was earlier than that... maybe 2010? from what i remember it was an exploit that worked alongside walking on water and casting/potions dealing with fatigue. I just checked and it seems like it got patched out aeons ago. So whatever worked i.e 1.5 hours of water-walking will not work now. /shrug.

[Timberpoes]

Long time ago. I've not played personally since I got my account hacked in like ... 2013 and this was earlier than that... maybe 2010? from what i remember it was an exploit that worked alongside walking on water and casting/potions dealing with fatigue. I just checked and it seems like it got patched out aeons ago. So whatever worked i.e 1.5 hours of water-walking will not work now. /shrug.

Probably logging out resetting the fatigue timer. I did a lot of wallwalking back in that era to visit unfinished content and areas and I think I remember relogging to visit places I shouldn't due to the fatigue timer.

[TypicalRig]

The reason admins freak out over Centcom is because back in the olden days it used to have every dangerous weapon available in a small armory room next to where the escape shuttle docks. This would include pulse rifles, gyrojets, guns that gib, and other crazy admin only guns, and a few other cool items that would cause chaos in normal hands. This was obviously removed ages ago, but because the rule stuck around with the same level of urgency now you have a ton of admins on the team that throw hissy fits over getting there when they themselves don't know why.

It kind of reminds me of the Five Monkey's Experiment meme, only the admins are the monkeys that are beating the shit out of other monkeys, the players, for reasons they don't really comprehend.

[WineAllWine]

The reason admins freak out over Centcom is because back in the olden days it used to have every dangerous weapon available in a small armory room next to where the escape shuttle docks. This would include pulse rifles, gyrojets, guns that gib, and other crazy admin only guns, and a few other cool items that would cause chaos in normal hands. This was obviously removed ages ago, but because the rule stuck around with the same level of urgency now you have a ton of admins on the team that throw hissy fits over getting there when they themselves don't know why.

It kind of reminds me of the Five Monkey's Experiment meme, only the admins are the monkeys that are beating the shit out of other monkeys, the players, for reasons they don't really comprehend.

I think this might be true, there's really not much there, especially if you don't have CentCom access on your ID. Again why I don't punish it OOC, I will just stand at the entrance in deathsquad gear saying "Can I help you? No? Then go away."

[dendydoom]

i'm not going to punish it oocly if it's clear that 1) the exploit is explained so we can fix it and they don't make a habit of using it whenever they feel like it and 2) they didn't metagame to find out that players are there and are only doing it to reach them to fuck with what they're doing.

if it was a one-off story in and of itself that created a cool thing for players to get involved in and everyone was having a good time just trying to reach and explore an otherwise empty and boring part of the map with no nefarious intentions then i would feel bad just shutting that down in an entirely OOC way. i would do what wine suggested and respond ICly but the odds would be so massively stacked against the players that they wouldn't win. the house always wins.

[WineAllWine]

i'm not going to punish it oocly if it's clear that 1) the exploit is explained so we can fix it and they don't make a habit of using it whenever they feel like it and 2) they didn't metagame to find out that players are there and are only doing it to reach them to fuck with what they're doing.

if it was a one-off story in and of itself that created a cool thing for players to get involved in and everyone was having a good time just trying to reach and explore an otherwise empty and boring part of the map with no nefarious intentions then i would feel bad just shutting that down in an entirely OOC way. i would do what wine suggested and respond ICly but the odds would be so massively stacked against the players that they wouldn't win. the house always wins.

I've had this where I was trying to spawn a syndicate prisoner in CC so we could have an event where the station had to imprison them even though they had super powers. They tried to escape from me, the briefing officer.

I had to explain to them "you have no chance of winning, you are fighting against the universe itself."

[ShadowedEnvy]

...only doing it to reach them to fuck with what they're doing [...] nefarious intentions...

Why are you casting me as some sort of evil cartoon villain? The "good riddance", the "impressive level of cope", and now this - why are you like this? I used to like you.

There's no point in swearing up and down that my intentions were pure, so I'll just go with the hard facts:
First, players in mafia are in godmode, so I couldn't hurt them even if I wanted to.
And second, mafia's actual gameplay is conducted entirely in the interface, so I couldn't interfere with that at all if I wanted to.

I literally could not actually damage their gameplay apart from distracting them with my presence, which is admittedly what I planned to do... But it would hopefully be fun enough to excuse that.


Also, since you implicitly accused me of exploiting all for myself, here's some additional context: Centcom was accessible by a quantum pad sitting outside cargo in the main hall of the station for 20 hours (Yes, TWENTY HOURS. I know, inconceivable for some of you people) in this round before this all happened, for another project of mine that I did for reports-from-campbell. So it most certainly was for everyone involved, and the project I did was publicly accessible in the chapel as well.

[dendydoom]

...only doing it to reach them to fuck with what they're doing [...] nefarious intentions...

Why are you casting me as some sort of evil cartoon villain? The "good riddance", the "impressive level of cope", and now this - why are you like this? I used to like you.

There's no point in swearing up and down that my intentions were pure, so I'll just go with the hard facts:
First, players in mafia are in godmode, so I couldn't hurt them even if I wanted to.
And second, mafia's actual gameplay is conducted entirely in the interface, so I couldn't interfere with that at all if I wanted to.

I literally could not actually damage their gameplay apart from distracting them with my presence, which is admittedly what I planned to do... But it would hopefully be fun enough to excuse that.


Also, since you implicitly accused me of exploiting all for myself, here's some additional context: Centcom was accessible by a quantum pad sitting outside cargo in the main hall of the station for 20 hours (Yes, TWENTY HOURS. I know, inconceivable for some of you people) in this round before this all happened, for another project of mine that I did for reports-from-campbell. So it most certainly was for everyone involved, and the project I did was publicly accessible in the chapel as well.

my last post wasn't aimed at you, it was addressing what i would do in a hypothetical scenario about players trying to reach centcom.

but the other two were, so i will address this and i'll be completely honest with you: i care much, much less about the exploiting and way more about the metagaming. in my hypothetical post i explained that there are circumstances where using mechanics in unintended ways could be acceptable. but i will not budge on things like metagaming and metacomming.

i personally find it extremely disrespectful and damaging to the game to set any sort of acceptable level of metagaming. it should not be allowed at all. it's cheating and goes against the point of the game which relies entirely on an agreement of all participants to not do precisely that. if you are trying to argue a position where there are situations where metagaming is acceptable, then i will always disagree with you, oftentimes snidely so. sorry if that's a hard pill to swallow, but that's how strongly i feel about it. nothing personal to you, but in the context of me arguing my position of how unacceptable i find it to be, then i will probably speak out of turn and be a bit of an asshole about it.