local terrynut upset because fruitmin

[BonChoi]

viewtopic.php?f=33&t=35894

I think that people should take at least an hour to themselves before posting threads like this.

[Donglesplonge]

"Admins consider asking the antags if they want zombie bullshit. you ruined the round for me a blood brother and other antags. antag is a rare role don't cuck us out of our antag rolls with some adminbus stupidity. this zombie shit should have been done 40 mins into the round not 10" - quoted from Dchat this exact round

[ekaterina]

I can feel the heat radiating from this guy's rage all the way in my office.

maps which admins force upon players like Birdshot/Northstar

lmao

"B-but nukies and cult also end the round" Yeah but those are purely random, not admin forced.

Why does that matter? Some antagonist rounds will be ended early by circumstance. It happens.
Sometimes your cult flukes because some bozo gets you discovered early. Not every round in which you roll antag ends up creating the circumstances for you to be antagonistic.

I wouldn't be opposed to giving this guy, and those in similar situations, antag tokens, but I ultimately don't care that much.

[BonChoi]

Also this guy is the author of threads such as:

"Why is antag rolling against the rules? How is it bad?" made one day before an appeal for antag rolling. (viewtopic.php?p=647723)

"Permanently hub ALL servers FOREVER" (viewtopic.php?f=2&t=35392&p=713781)

"Make Terry officially NRP, like Goon 1" (viewtopic.php?p=715346)

and lastly, my favorite: "MRP-ification of the LRP servers: A Dangerous Path" (viewtopic.php?p=719543)

E: From "Make Terry officially NRP, like Goon 1" a good piece of advice to this player:

[Featherfield]

Actually getting zombies and being converted is fun what is this guy on about

"This was a highpop round on Metastation, players' favorite map -- Do not run roundending events like forcing zombies 10 mins in on maps the playerbase actually likes. If you must, force it on maps which admins force upon players like Birdshot/Northstar, since those are maps where players call shuttle ASAP anyway. Players have jobs and lives outside of SS13, when we log on we want to play SS13 not a cheap knockoff of Left 4 Dead."
huutista :DDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

[Cheshify]

I wouldn't be opposed to giving this guy, and those in similar situations, antag tokens, but I ultimately don't care that much.

Why would you want to encourage getting really upset at an event that doesn't work out

[Constellado]

He lost an antag round didn't he? Isn't that where tokens come into play?

Eh, I didn't read the whole thing so if he didn't lose an antag round then ehh.

Can we move some Terry eventmins to Manuel I want more

[Blacklist897]

roundstart zombies was on manny a few days ago it was great

[ekaterina]

I wouldn't be opposed to giving this guy, and those in similar situations, antag tokens, but I ultimately don't care that much.

Why would you want to encourage getting really upset at an event that doesn't work out

Because, ultimately, the admins did do this player, and other antagonists, dirty, by arbitrarily depriving them of their opportunity to be in the spotlight. Good admins know to wait until antagonists have had time to cook before pressing the big round-altering buttons. That said, if the admin had just disabled antagonists from spawning before the round started so only event antagonists would exist, the players would've still been deprived of what would've been an antag round, they just wouldn't have known it, which is why I'm not particularly invested either way.

[DrAmazing343]

Actually getting zombies and being converted is fun what is this guy on about

"This was a highpop round on Metastation, players' favorite map -- Do not run roundending events like forcing zombies 10 mins in on maps the playerbase actually likes. If you must, force it on maps which admins force upon players like Birdshot/Northstar, since those are maps where players call shuttle ASAP anyway. Players have jobs and lives outside of SS13, when we log on we want to play SS13 not a cheap knockoff of Left 4 Dead."
huutista :DDDDDDDDDDDDDDD

Zombies fucking rule, aside from my thoughts on the policy thread. I enjoy every conversion antag in the game— certainly, in moderation, I enjoy zombies more than just getting RR'd by nukies because I unga'd with everyone else and got owned. Nukies is still great fun, but surprise zombie round sounds fucking awesome.

[Higgin]

one thing about "losing" an antag round is that it's often easier to say you could have kept it and done so much cool shit and been the main character if not for that darned event and buttonpressing than to cop to there having been other things you could have done in the face of the situation you were presented.

it's fairer to be upset when that situation isn't telegraphed in some way - having agency and making meaningful choices means knowing there are choices to be made.

sometimes you will die like a dog for no good reason, though, and the introduction of a threat leaves a few bodies. if you weren't specifically targeted for it because of something (edit: irrelevant and unwitting*) you did or what you are, though, i.e. an admin saying "go fuck this guy in particular up" or "attack here here and here," it's not unfair. it's just as much a bad break as if nukies happened across you in the hall on their way to the disk.

zombies also rock because holy shit, you can get killed by zombies and keep playing? zombies don't have a dedicated endpoint so there's more room for shit like ERTs, squids, and other roundenders to dive back in? they give a real relative advantage to staying alive where you can get cured as a human, use tools, and have a desperate defense?

zombies and romerol, hell, progtot final objectives in general have felt vanishingly rare to me lately - not all a bad thing given their effects and that we got spies running around rn, but it seems to me like a fun event. maybe it'd go better without antags in the round in the future - maybe that's a perfect opportunity to whip out the DEsword and fucking dazzle as you go around fighting the hordes.

also ngl I'm starting to think map rotation should be pure random besides excluding the last-picked map, it feels like people are looking at them like fucking CoD4 and MW2 lobbies.

[Timonk]

[RedBaronFlyer]

He lost an antag round didn't he? Isn't that where tokens come into play?

IIRC antag tokens are typically only handed out if admin shenanigans completely ruined the round beyond repair or crashed the server

basically:

ided because the admins spawned 500 zombies, it killed 90% of the crew, and called it an event: No antag token (Funnily enough, a similar event happened a few days ago on Manuel)

admin added some fog and then later wanted to remove the fog and it ended up deleting most of the station and most of the crew: Yes antag token (never forget the Manuel fog incident)

zombies and romerol, hell, progtot final objectives in general have felt vanishingly rare to me lately - not all a bad thing given their effects and that we got spies running around rn, but it seems to me like a fun event. maybe it'd go better without antags in the round in the future - maybe that's a perfect opportunity to whip out the DEsword and fucking dazzle as you go around fighting the hordes.

That's because 80% of antag players are the most boring shits imaginable and will do the most effective (if boring) method to kill people. To be fair 80% of sec are the most boring shits imaginable and will do the most effective (if boring) method to kill/capture antags.

also ngl I'm starting to think map rotation should be pure random besides excluding the last-picked map, it feels like people are looking at them like fucking CoD4 and MW2 lobbies.

At this point yeah, just get rid of voting at this point. They already hid seeing how many people are voting for what, and what the percentages were at the end of the vote because people were calling it out that it's bullshit that it's picking (INSERT YOUR LEAST FAVORITE MAP HERE) or whatever a third time in a row because 5% of the playerbase voted for it due to weighted random.

BUT THEY KEPT BEING ABLE TO DO MAP VOTES 5 SECONDS AFTER THE SERVER REBOOTED, WHY?

No seriously why did they remove the thing preventing the same map from being played too soon? We had three birdshot rounds back to back and three Icebox rounds back to back at one point. I love Metastation and I'd hate to play it back to back like that

[mrmelbert]

This was a highpop round on Metastation, players' favorite map -- Do not run roundending events like forcing zombies 10 mins in on maps the playerbase actually likes

RULE 1: NO EVENTS ON METASTATION

There should be a BIG announcement header in OOC before running these kind of events

RULE 2: SPOIL THE ENTIRE THING FOR US

ASK THE ANTAGS before spawning roundending crap like zombies

RULE 3: ISN'T THERE SOMEONE YOU FORGOT TO ASK?

Please be a bit more creative

RULE 4: FIRE UNORIGINAL ADMINS

[Jacquerel]

No seriously why did they remove the thing preventing the same map from being played too soon? We had three birdshot rounds back to back and three Icebox rounds back to back at one point. I love Metastation and I'd hate to play it back to back like that

I don't think we removed it, I think the system is just more like "if you appeared x times in the last y rounds you become invalid", so it doesn't automatically disqualify the same map appearing three times in a row (but then it probably won't be valid to vote for the next three? pulling numbers out of my ass here because im too lazy to search for the actual configuration)

[Constellado]

When are we making it so map votes happen after the round each and every time? Why can people do map votes before and during a round? Can we just make it so a map vote shows up after a round ends every time?

I would HEAVILY prefer map votes happening over it being random. PLEASE DO NOT GET RID OF MAP VOTES FOR THE LOVE OF GOD I WILL NOT BE HAPPY I DONT CARE WHAT YOU GUYS THINK LET US DO A MAP VOTE. JUST MAKE IT HAPPEN AT THE END OF THE ROUND IT MAKES NO SENSE FOR IT TO BE RUNABLE AT THE BEGINNING. DON'T REMOVE THE FREEDOM OF PICKING A MAP PLEASE.

[Timonk]

I want to get off of Me. Meldrons wild adminbus ride

[Higgin]

our bus will win, it's invisible so we have the element of surprise

[Jacquerel]

When are we making it so map votes happen after the round each and every time? Why can people do map votes before and during a round? Can we just make it so a map vote shows up after a round ends every time?

I would HEAVILY prefer map votes happening over it being random. PLEASE DO NOT GET RID OF MAP VOTES FOR THE LOVE OF GOD I WILL NOT BE HAPPY I DONT CARE WHAT YOU GUYS THINK LET US DO A MAP VOTE. JUST MAKE IT HAPPEN AT THE END OF THE ROUND IT MAKES NO SENSE FOR IT TO BE RUNABLE AT THE BEGINNING. DON'T REMOVE THE FREEDOM OF PICKING A MAP PLEASE.

theres an open policy thread about this where basically were just figuring out if its possible without breaking anything right now, i do think basically everyone wants this

[DrAmazing343]

This was a highpop round on Metastation, players' favorite map -- Do not run roundending events like forcing zombies 10 mins in on maps the playerbase actually likes

RULE 1: NO EVENTS ON METASTATION

There should be a BIG announcement header in OOC before running these kind of events

RULE 2: SPOIL THE ENTIRE THING FOR US

ASK THE ANTAGS before spawning roundending crap like zombies

RULE 3: ISN'T THERE SOMEONE YOU FORGOT TO ASK?

Please be a bit more creative

RULE 4: FIRE UNORIGINAL ADMINS

All gas and NO BREAKS! Fucking immense, thank you.

[LiarGG]

Good admins know to wait until antagonists have had time to cook before pressing the big round-altering buttons.

Good admins know to run roundstart zombies on green shift. Because zombies.. ARE.. GREEN

[MooCow12]

To be fair there should always be a general indicator before every round if its going to be an adminbus round so people dont get too invested or can consider if they want to participate or not.


or at least let people ghost / suicide as soon as an adminbus thing happens even if its at roundstart.


And antagonist roles are rare and sacred, a lot more effort than an admin pressing buttons when they feel like it.



As for zombies..the antag needs a rework if c*ders have purposefully decided to soft remove romerol from the traitors, we should probably rework them so they'll be in a state where we can undo that and lower the bar for them to be in a normal round (nukie rounds are not normal rounds they are a 30 minute TDM)

[RedBaronFlyer]

To be fair there should always be a general indicator before every round if its going to be an adminbus round so people dont get too invested or can consider if they want to participate or not.


or at least let people ghost / suicide as soon as an adminbus thing happens even if its at roundstart.


And antagonist roles are rare and sacred, a lot more effort than an admin pressing buttons when they feel like it.



As for zombies..the antag needs a rework if c*ders have purposefully decided to soft remove romerol from the traitors, we should probably rework them so they'll be in a state where we can undo that and lower the bar for them to be in a normal round (nukie rounds are not normal rounds they are a 30 minute TDM)

I'm kind of 50/50 on this. On one hand, admins can use the fact that no one is expecting an admin thing to happen to great effect. On the other hand, it does suck when the round gets going, and you realize twenty minutes in that the round is going to be 40-120 minutes of admins pushing all the buttons and seeing what happens. In my experience, admins are usually upfront if it's going to be a "we're going to press all the buttons and we'll see what happens" round before the round starts. Admin-run events usually aren't announced beforehand but also don't tend to hijack the round too much.

[LiarGG]

Whether it's appropriate to announce an event in ooc kinda depends on what's the event about.

Admin-bus stuff where you make everyone an antag, drop around instakill rifles and sm swords? - Prolly worth to announce as it's completely destructive for the round.

Purposefully spawning in antags? - Prolly not necessary if it serves a purpose of creating a story/ narrative. If it's not meant to be an outright TDM, I don't see much reason to announce it.

I'd say that zombies fall into the second category. All in all zombies are still a thing that can happen via nukies, necrotic revival of final tot objective. I'd say there are enough ways for it to happen naturally to not be eligible for a blatant roundending admin-bus.
Either case it would be a good practice to send at least a CC announcement if it was ran roundstart, but I don't think any agreement beforehand, or OOC notification is necessary.

[dendydoom]

trust me when i say that bad feedback from an event is enough of a deterrent already. having an entire server of people pissed at you is quite intense and i've seen it dishearten some admins to the point that they want to quit.

sorry if you have a bad round and feel like your precious time has been wasted, but in the end it really is just part of the game and thus part of the decision you must consider when choosing to participate. sometimes you will die from something that was caused by rng or by an admin pushing a button at some point. it won't be fair and you'll just have to accept it.

running events is part of the expected role of admins. we don't want them to be banbots and babysitters. they are not only allowed to run events, it's part of training and we want to see them engaging with players and DMing rounds.

announcing things is included in that admin's discretion. sometimes they'll want to surprise you or they'll announce it if they feel it's better that way. if you have advice for them on this from a player pov, then again this is something valuable that could and should go into feedback.

please do not be scared of telling admins how you feel about an event. as part of the freedom we give them to operate at their discretion, we also expect them to be able to handle and accept criticism.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

If a traitor got jumped by zombies instantly in my "secretly its zombies" round and ahelped being upset I might have given them a token for it since yeah I guess thats my fault you ate shit unavoidably, but banning events on metastation because you like playing on it is beyond ridiculous.

[WineAllWine]

I was around for the end of this event (adminning not playing) and watching it [edit: "it" here referring to the negative reaction in ooc] made me incandescent with anger.

I might have slightly fanned the flames of anger on the players part by curtly responding "no" to players asking for antag tokens, for which I apologise. (apologise for the curtness, you understand, not for denying the request).

Anyway I have probably inherited my admin dad's attitude towards admin events — they are excellent and every effort should be made to encourage them when at all possible. Every barrier towards an admin running an event should be removed. You see a barrier to an admin event? Remove that shit.

[kinnebian]

I really dislike the regard in which we hold antag tokens, they should be given out more loosely- but also as rewards. Sure a positive note is nice, but antag tokens are something tangible. Having more guaranteed antag rounds will encourage people to have fun with it, salt less when their plan fails in a spectacular fashion

[WineAllWine]

I really dislike the regard in which we hold antag tokens, they should be given out more loosely- but also as rewards. Sure a positive note is nice, but antag tokens are something tangible. Having more guaranteed antag rounds will encourage people to have fun with it, salt less when their plan fails in a spectacular fashion

If I were a headmin my day 1 policy would be removing all restrictions from handing out antag tokens

[ekaterina]

Good admins know to wait until antagonists have had time to cook before pressing the big round-altering buttons.

Good admins know to run roundstart zombies on green shift. Because zombies.. ARE.. GREEN

So true. We appreciate admins who turn rounds that would be lame greenshits into fun events.

[conrad]

I really dislike the regard in which we hold antag tokens, they should be given out more loosely- but also as rewards. Sure a positive note is nice, but antag tokens are something tangible. Having more guaranteed antag rounds will encourage people to have fun with it, salt less when their plan fails in a spectacular fashion

They can be done in this way. The directive for antag tokens is constantly misinterpreted by admins thinking it's super, super restrictive, when in fact it's only restrictive surrounding a very specific subject.

[WineAllWine]

I really dislike the regard in which we hold antag tokens, they should be given out more loosely- but also as rewards. Sure a positive note is nice, but antag tokens are something tangible. Having more guaranteed antag rounds will encourage people to have fun with it, salt less when their plan fails in a spectacular fashion

They can be done in this way. The directive for antag tokens is constantly misinterpreted by admins thinking it's super, super restrictive, when in fact it's only restrictive surrounding a very specific subject.

[Antag Tokens] are given in cases where an admin may ruin an round beyond the point of any redemption. In some cases these are given as rewards for specific events like the wiki drive or feature freeze with approval from headmins for them to be given.
[...]
They WILL NOT be given just because you feel like giving one out for something or the other.
These tokens are not to be given out lightly;

It went from willy nilly Admins giving them out for events, to not give out, to it's okay to give out here, then now it's not okay.
[...]
Just handing out antagonist for some half-assed event is poor form.

I don't think you're allowed to give them out as a reward

[Jacquerel]

i should use my antag tokens some day

[iwishforducks]

I really dislike the regard in which we hold antag tokens, they should be given out more loosely- but also as rewards. Sure a positive note is nice, but antag tokens are something tangible. Having more guaranteed antag rounds will encourage people to have fun with it, salt less when their plan fails in a spectacular fashion

If I were a headmin my day 1 policy would be removing all restrictions from handing out antag tokens

based

[PapaMichael]

Don't love the idea of more antag tokens tbh.

Was the discussion where they stopped being given out as a reward public, or was it admin-only?

It's just a much stronger avenue of (real or perceived) admin favoritism toward specific players. This is obviously always going to exist to some extent—one simply cannot spend time in a community with the same people for hours upon hours without liking some people more than others. But antag tokens are too powerful, and completely opaque to non-admins.

[conrad]

I really dislike the regard in which we hold antag tokens, they should be given out more loosely- but also as rewards. Sure a positive note is nice, but antag tokens are something tangible. Having more guaranteed antag rounds will encourage people to have fun with it, salt less when their plan fails in a spectacular fashion

They can be done in this way. The directive for antag tokens is constantly misinterpreted by admins thinking it's super, super restrictive, when in fact it's only restrictive surrounding a very specific subject.

[Antag Tokens] are given in cases where an admin may ruin an round beyond the point of any redemption. In some cases these are given as rewards for specific events like the wiki drive or feature freeze with approval from headmins for them to be given.
[...]
They WILL NOT be given just because you feel like giving one out for something or the other.
These tokens are not to be given out lightly;

It went from willy nilly Admins giving them out for events, to not give out, to it's okay to give out here, then now it's not okay.
[...]
Just handing out antagonist for some half-assed event is poor form.

I don't think you're allowed to give them out as a reward

The purpose written in that ruling is that antag tokens are to be given in special circumstances. I've handed antag tokens before for players fixing stuff I broke (i.e.: accidentally exploding the shuttle, spawning players randomly from the ghost pool, they make the shuttle really cool, they get antag tokens), which isn't some form of irredeemable admin fuck up. I haven't been deadminned for that.

The scope of the writeup was for admins fucking up vs admins not fucking up when handing out tokens. That's measured on the distinction between "handing out tokens for something or other is not allowed" (like, say, hypothetically, here's a token 'cos you've spoken in OOC before everyone else), vs "rewarding events is poor form" (I did a cookout and the winner got an antag token). When I'm told rewarding for events is in poor form when it was previously said it wasn't allowed, I am convinced that I can reward a player for exceptional circumstances.

So rewarding them for exceptional circumstances is fine, as there are admins (myself included) that reward players with antag tokens for those specific exceptional circumstances, and I haven't been bollocked yet. I think I've given like 3 antag tokens in my first year as admin.

Finally, here's a not-so-true justification that's a completely personal bias: that writeup is from 2017, and hasn't been touched since then I think. We didn't have dynamic in 2017, and rounds were specifically tied to antags (Traitor round, cult round, rev round, etc.). Adding a random-ass antag to that could be outstandly disruptive; right now, adding an antag to a dynamic round is mostly fine (unless that round has, idk, 15 antags already or something). Little known fact, admins can also reject a token's redemption based on the current round.

I feel a discussion regarding antag tokens on the current round and antag ecosystem is warranted, if at least to codify and either actually punish admins for handing out tokens, or remove some of those barriers.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

2017? Werent all antag tokens able to be redeemed for any antag back then?

[conrad]

2017? Werent all antag tokens able to be redeemed for any antag back then?

Unless it changed recently, no. All antag tokens need a specified antag.

[mrmelbert]

I really dislike the regard in which we hold antag tokens, they should be given out more loosely- but also as rewards. Sure a positive note is nice, but antag tokens are something tangible. Having more guaranteed antag rounds will encourage people to have fun with it, salt less when their plan fails in a spectacular fashion

Antag Tokens were a lot more relevant back when it was secret because you'd be able to inject yourself in as any antag in any round.

But with Dynamic I never feel the "need" to use an antag token.
Not only are all antags more common in general, giving you a higher likelihood you get an antag you want at any given moment, but there's also much higher likelihood you use your token just to get owned by the first midround spawn being a dragon observer main who rolls the station.

So that's why I don't really want to hand out more tokens.

[Waltermeldron]

Since the policy thread was closed before I could find out about it and post my own comments, I'd like to clarify that the alternative during the zombie event was that no antags would spawn.

I had already disabled most antags beforehand but wanted to keep some on so that they'd spice up the zombie event even more, it just kinda sucks when people feel entitled to getting an antag token when the entire round was preplanned to be an event anyways. Players should just learn to go with the flow and accept that sometimes they'll lose to things out of their control or that they should adapt to the situation produced by the event, not every round has to be a standard one set out by dynamic.

Some specific points I want to clarify my position on in regards to this event:
Big announcements when doing some event
This would ruin the surprise of the event and make it immediately known that an event round is taking place. A big part of why the zombie event worked is because it was a big surprise to people and people did not have the time to prepare their roles preround for the event as a result. Not all events can or should be announced because they will make the event worse. It's akin to the secret gamemode we used to have, where you didn't know which gamemode was taking place so you had no way of preparing.

There's a reason why romerol is a progtot roundending item
The reason it's a progtot item (I'm the person who made and designed progtot) is because traitor is not supposed to be a round ending role. Similarly, things like malf AI are a progtot final objective but they can also exist at the start of a round. The point isn't that they should only happen far late into a round, the point is that a traitor (a somewhat benign antagonist compared to nukies, wizard, etc) shouldn't be able to create them early on in a round.

"B-but nukies and cult also end the round" Yeah but those are purely random, not admin forced.
I don't see why it being random makes any difference compared to a preplanned admin event where I had generally minimal input other than just keeping things moving and keeping the threat alive. It's like if I manually chose to do the meteors event where I'd shoot random meteors at the station but instead I'm carefully injecting threat into my 'gamemode' so to speak, so that the round can keep moving and the event stays engaging to both deadchat and living players.

Additionally, admins can send these antagonists anyways and you may not even notice. Often times, we do to spice up the threat within a round. The only real difference between this event and just sending/forcing a nukeops is that you're familiar with nukeops and would think it's part of the game, whereas now that it's a recognizable admin event, you have someone to blame. From what I heard, a lot of people enjoyed this event, so I'm sorry if you weren't able to and I was rather hoping that you'd use your antagonist role to spice up the round and adapt to the situation to create even more threat, but not everything always goes to plan and maybe it would've been better if I had just turned off all antagonist roles completely. I wasn't paying that much attention to the other traitor/BB antagonists this round, but the hope was for them to distract security forces so that the zombies had a chance to get some infections in and spread.

[iansdoor]

Hahahaha. For real, it is. The man made TV, that has ruined so many rounds.

Edit: I love the fucking TV.

[Timonk]

Walter varedited my grandma

[WineAllWine]

The purpose written in that ruling is that antag tokens are to be given in special circumstances. I've handed antag tokens before for players fixing stuff I broke (i.e.: accidentally exploding the shuttle, spawning players randomly from the ghost pool, they make the shuttle really cool, they get antag tokens), which isn't some form of irredeemable admin fuck up. I haven't been deadminned for that.

The scope of the writeup was for admins fucking up vs admins not fucking up when handing out tokens. That's measured on the distinction between "handing out tokens for something or other is not allowed" (like, say, hypothetically, here's a token 'cos you've spoken in OOC before everyone else), vs "rewarding events is poor form" (I did a cookout and the winner got an antag token). When I'm told rewarding for events is in poor form when it was previously said it wasn't allowed, I am convinced that I can reward a player for exceptional circumstances.

So rewarding them for exceptional circumstances is fine, as there are admins (myself included) that reward players with antag tokens for those specific exceptional circumstances, and I haven't been bollocked yet. I think I've given like 3 antag tokens in my first year as admin.

Finally, here's a not-so-true justification that's a completely personal bias: that writeup is from 2017, and hasn't been touched since then I think. We didn't have dynamic in 2017, and rounds were specifically tied to antags (Traitor round, cult round, rev round, etc.). Adding a random-ass antag to that could be outstandly disruptive; right now, adding an antag to a dynamic round is mostly fine (unless that round has, idk, 15 antags already or something). Little known fact, admins can also reject a token's redemption based on the current round.

I feel a discussion regarding antag tokens on the current round and antag ecosystem is warranted, if at least to codify and either actually punish admins for handing out tokens, or remove some of those barriers.

I think you're using antag tokens really well. I think you're breaking the rules. Were I to be headmin would I deadmin you?

No. You're not broken, the rules are.

But I don't think you should continue. I think we should fix the rules, or you should be punished. Having admin guidelines that admins can ignore is stupid.

But I think at this point we are just loudly agreeing with each other. Let's make a policy thread.

[conrad]

The purpose written in that ruling is that antag tokens are to be given in special circumstances. I've handed antag tokens before for players fixing stuff I broke (i.e.: accidentally exploding the shuttle, spawning players randomly from the ghost pool, they make the shuttle really cool, they get antag tokens), which isn't some form of irredeemable admin fuck up. I haven't been deadminned for that.

The scope of the writeup was for admins fucking up vs admins not fucking up when handing out tokens. That's measured on the distinction between "handing out tokens for something or other is not allowed" (like, say, hypothetically, here's a token 'cos you've spoken in OOC before everyone else), vs "rewarding events is poor form" (I did a cookout and the winner got an antag token). When I'm told rewarding for events is in poor form when it was previously said it wasn't allowed, I am convinced that I can reward a player for exceptional circumstances.

So rewarding them for exceptional circumstances is fine, as there are admins (myself included) that reward players with antag tokens for those specific exceptional circumstances, and I haven't been bollocked yet. I think I've given like 3 antag tokens in my first year as admin.

Finally, here's a not-so-true justification that's a completely personal bias: that writeup is from 2017, and hasn't been touched since then I think. We didn't have dynamic in 2017, and rounds were specifically tied to antags (Traitor round, cult round, rev round, etc.). Adding a random-ass antag to that could be outstandly disruptive; right now, adding an antag to a dynamic round is mostly fine (unless that round has, idk, 15 antags already or something). Little known fact, admins can also reject a token's redemption based on the current round.

I feel a discussion regarding antag tokens on the current round and antag ecosystem is warranted, if at least to codify and either actually punish admins for handing out tokens, or remove some of those barriers.

I think you're using antag tokens really well. I think you're breaking the rules. Were I to be headmin would I deadmin you?

No. You're not broken, the rules are.

But I don't think you should continue. I think we should fix the rules, or you should be punished. Having admin guidelines that admins can ignore is stupid.

But I think at this point we are just loudly agreeing with each other. Let's make a policy thread.

YES WINE I AGREE WITH YOU

BRASIL



BRROOPPPZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

[DrAmazing343]

Watching the geezers loudly agree with each other drinking the fruitiest mimosa on the planet pulling out my suntan tray with sunglasses on waiting for the policy thread to open

[BonChoi]

Sparking a conversation to change antags tokens was not what I had in mind when I started this peanut thread but overall I'm happy that it has the chance to do something productive.

[Justice12354]

<snip>

You lost me at "Good admins know to..." [insert yawning emoji]
Embrace being a badmin!!! SINGULOOSE AS AN EVENT

[Timonk]

ekat lost me at the fact that it is a serious ekat post