[policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team loses
- Deitus
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 5:26 pm
- Byond Username: Deitus
[policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team loses
i didnt know this was a rule until the recent cuck merge, this seems like a highly exploitable rule that leaves a big loophole to grif
>bomb kills a bunch
>WE WON SO ITS OK
i mean cmon i cant be the only one here
EDIT: the round in question went like this
>observe a round
>cuck cult
>crew spends 45 minutes waiting around for the teleporter to activate
>finally does
>everyone goes in
>one yahoo with ash storm staff covers the whole area
>most people die
>admins say that its ok since non-cults win in the end
no matter what happens thats a thing that should have been actionable, whether a team wins or loses just seems like a footnote to me.
EDIT EDIT:
wrong forum someone move it
>bomb kills a bunch
>WE WON SO ITS OK
i mean cmon i cant be the only one here
EDIT: the round in question went like this
>observe a round
>cuck cult
>crew spends 45 minutes waiting around for the teleporter to activate
>finally does
>everyone goes in
>one yahoo with ash storm staff covers the whole area
>most people die
>admins say that its ok since non-cults win in the end
no matter what happens thats a thing that should have been actionable, whether a team wins or loses just seems like a footnote to me.
EDIT EDIT:
wrong forum someone move it
Last edited by Deitus on Thu Aug 24, 2017 3:28 am, edited 2 times in total.
- Qbmax32
- Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:05 am
- Byond Username: Qbmax32
- Github Username: qbmax32
- Location: in your walls
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
situation was that miner used ash storm staff to murder everyone during the siege of reebe, he killed all the cultists, but he also killed all the noncultists, if it wern't for the borg that survived that came and killed the ark, clockies would have one because of it
- Rustledjimm
- Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 9:07 pm
- Byond Username: Rustledjimm
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
The reason Deitus is posting this is because it was end round on clock cult attacking the Ark.
A miner basically fucked the crew using the Staff of Storms. LOT'S of non-antags died and he was converted and died himself I believe. But because a syndie borg created by xeno won the round it apparently means that miner (who did not even create said borg that won the round) escapes his ban for causing a slaughter among non-antags.
So following this rule, if a scientist had a max cap bomb and threw it at an antag, as long as the antag died it's ok! Who cares he also just killed 10 other non-antags, he got an antag so no bannu!
It's a stupid fucking rule.
EDIT: Can we move this to policy discussion because Deitus can't use a forum.
A miner basically fucked the crew using the Staff of Storms. LOT'S of non-antags died and he was converted and died himself I believe. But because a syndie borg created by xeno won the round it apparently means that miner (who did not even create said borg that won the round) escapes his ban for causing a slaughter among non-antags.
So following this rule, if a scientist had a max cap bomb and threw it at an antag, as long as the antag died it's ok! Who cares he also just killed 10 other non-antags, he got an antag so no bannu!
It's a stupid fucking rule.
EDIT: Can we move this to policy discussion because Deitus can't use a forum.
So uhh, I'm an admin. Please leave feedback! Oops took me a while to strike that through.
Will Baker
Suzu Suzaku
TBC
Personal Ban Length Record: 2.1024e+006 minutes
Will Baker
Suzu Suzaku
TBC
Spoiler:
- D&B
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 2:23 am
- Byond Username: Repukan
- Location: *teleports behind you*
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
Phyrric victories are cool.
I remember one round I had made a due date and anhilitahed everyone in medbay because it was full of cult structures and cultists. I ended up killing a few non cultists but it was ok because I had no way of checking and it stopped the cult.
I observed a round where a scientist maxcapped medbay when cultists and constructs broke in to summon. He effectively crippled the station but it was a last ditch attempt in stopping the cult
I guess the way I see it, in game it's the character last way of stopping a murderous blood goddess/brass cuck/cartel of stepping on them. They make for cool stories so depending on context I would probably let it slide if it truly was a last ditch and you managed to cripple or severely inconvenience the others.
I remember one round I had made a due date and anhilitahed everyone in medbay because it was full of cult structures and cultists. I ended up killing a few non cultists but it was ok because I had no way of checking and it stopped the cult.
I observed a round where a scientist maxcapped medbay when cultists and constructs broke in to summon. He effectively crippled the station but it was a last ditch attempt in stopping the cult
I guess the way I see it, in game it's the character last way of stopping a murderous blood goddess/brass cuck/cartel of stepping on them. They make for cool stories so depending on context I would probably let it slide if it truly was a last ditch and you managed to cripple or severely inconvenience the others.
Spoiler:
- Rustledjimm
- Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 9:07 pm
- Byond Username: Rustledjimm
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
D&B wrote:Phyrric victories are cool.
I remember one round I had made a due date and anhilitahed everyone in medbay because it was full of cult structures and cultists. I ended up killing a few non cultists but it was ok because I had no way of checking and it stopped the cult.
I guess the way I see it, in game it's the character last way of stopping a murderous blood goddess/brass cuck/cartel of stepping on them. They make for cool stories so depending on context I would probably let it slide if it truly was a last ditch and you managed to cripple or severely inconvenience the others.
Perhaps. But the miner in question wasn't the reason we 'won' the round. All your examples are of people who fucked up but were the reason, or among the reasons, the round was won. This miner just caused an ashstorm, killed nearly everyone, got converted and then a syndie borg created by xenobiology won us the round.
That should be bannable for the miner.
So uhh, I'm an admin. Please leave feedback! Oops took me a while to strike that through.
Will Baker
Suzu Suzaku
TBC
Personal Ban Length Record: 2.1024e+006 minutes
Will Baker
Suzu Suzaku
TBC
Spoiler:
- Armhulen
- Global Moderator
- Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:30 pm
- Byond Username: Armhulenn
- Github Username: bazelart
- Location: The Grand Tournament
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
if your extremely griefy thing doesn't DIRECTLY WIN THE ROUND RIGHT AFTER it's griff and bannable
the miner should be banned rn
the miner should be banned rn
- Qbmax32
- Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 4:05 am
- Byond Username: Qbmax32
- Github Username: qbmax32
- Location: in your walls
- D&B
- Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2016 2:23 am
- Byond Username: Repukan
- Location: *teleports behind you*
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
Yeah I agree with that.Rustledjimm wrote:D&B wrote:Phyrric victories are cool.
I remember one round I had made a due date and anhilitahed everyone in medbay because it was full of cult structures and cultists. I ended up killing a few non cultists but it was ok because I had no way of checking and it stopped the cult.
I guess the way I see it, in game it's the character last way of stopping a murderous blood goddess/brass cuck/cartel of stepping on them. They make for cool stories so depending on context I would probably let it slide if it truly was a last ditch and you managed to cripple or severely inconvenience the others.
Perhaps. But the miner in question wasn't the reason we 'won' the round. All your examples are of people who fucked up but were the reason, or among the reasons, the round was won. This miner just caused an ashstorm, killed nearly everyone, got converted and then a syndie borg created by xenobiology won us the round.
That should be bannable for the miner.
Why did he thought usign a staff of storms without a Drake suit would be a good idea.
Spoiler:
- Deitus
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 5:26 pm
- Byond Username: Deitus
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
i was in the round too where medbay was bombed during blood cult
the cultists still regrouped and won, but the bomber didnt get a ban.
really jogs my noggin
the cultists still regrouped and won, but the bomber didnt get a ban.
really jogs my noggin
-
- Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 12:23 am
- Byond Username: Kromgar
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
So let me state what I THOUGHT would happen.
I thought by creating an ash storm. It would destroy all of the structures they had including the Ark. Also side benefit of killing all the cucks as the polymorphed army stormed the portal. Turns out the staff does not harm their structures whatsoever. Also turns out Cucks are for some reason ENTIRELY IMMUNE TO ASH STORMS.
I did get converted and used the staff again. Also people were claiming i was "Abusing the staff" I was wondering in nearspace activating the staff. Or activating it in empty offices non-harmful to anyone. Also i had a Drake suit. I was stumbling with hallucinogens when a ash storm immune cuckcultist killed me with a spear.
I thought by creating an ash storm. It would destroy all of the structures they had including the Ark. Also side benefit of killing all the cucks as the polymorphed army stormed the portal. Turns out the staff does not harm their structures whatsoever. Also turns out Cucks are for some reason ENTIRELY IMMUNE TO ASH STORMS.
I did get converted and used the staff again. Also people were claiming i was "Abusing the staff" I was wondering in nearspace activating the staff. Or activating it in empty offices non-harmful to anyone. Also i had a Drake suit. I was stumbling with hallucinogens when a ash storm immune cuckcultist killed me with a spear.
Planet Station Best Station
Vote Planetstation and Kor Phaeron 2017
Vote Planetstation and Kor Phaeron 2017
- Deitus
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 5:26 pm
- Byond Username: Deitus
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
tbh i thought it was fucking hilarious but when i heard about the policy that just kinda confused me, so im not really mad at you so much as this particular policy bit.
- RandomMarine
- Github User
- Joined: Fri Apr 18, 2014 8:50 am
- Byond Username: RandomMarine
- Github Username: RandomMarine
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
Why the fuck is play-to-win-fuck-everything-else behavior being codified?
That's something that should always be left to admin judgement, making a hard and fast rule of 'Doesn't matter if you killed ten innocent people, YOU KILLED DAT FUKIN TATOR! GO YOU!!11!' is just going to lead to toe-lining bullshit.
That's something that should always be left to admin judgement, making a hard and fast rule of 'Doesn't matter if you killed ten innocent people, YOU KILLED DAT FUKIN TATOR! GO YOU!!11!' is just going to lead to toe-lining bullshit.
-
- Joined: Sat Jun 25, 2016 8:38 pm
- Byond Username: Factoryman942
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
Nuke the station so it kills all the antags
- MrAlphonzo
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:55 pm
- Byond Username: MrAlphonzo
- Location: U S A, U S A, U S A
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
Oopsie, had a bad understanding of the policy.
I blame Kevinz.
Kromgar is gonna take some time off, but that doesn't mean the policy discussion should stop.
Just felt I should inform the thread.
I blame Kevinz.
Kromgar is gonna take some time off, but that doesn't mean the policy discussion should stop.
Just felt I should inform the thread.
- calzilla1
- Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2016 5:55 pm
- Byond Username: Calzilla1
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
So... having a team death match in which one team cant decipher who is and isnt on their team causes team killing? Wowwie zowwie!
Life is too short for anything meaningful and too long for anything memeingful
Super Aggro Crag wrote: The best shitpost youll ever be responsible for will be your obituary.
Quality debate brought to you by ColonicAcid wrote:imagine having this little empathy
do you have autism bud? does your brain not see these people as humans? are they just a faceless statistic to you?
- ShadowDimentio
- Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 3:15 am
- Byond Username: David273
- Armhulen
- Global Moderator
- Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2016 4:30 pm
- Byond Username: Armhulenn
- Github Username: bazelart
- Location: The Grand Tournament
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
1. Ash storm staff kills everyone, it's not like he casted it thinking he was the only non cultist leftcalzilla1 wrote:So... having a team death match in which one team cant decipher who is and isnt on their team causes team killing? Wowwie zowwie!
2. That isn't even true too cultists get a red glow when the ark powers up
- FantasticFwoosh
- Joined: Mon May 04, 2015 11:25 pm
- Byond Username: FantasticFwoosh
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
was it funny to watch XYZ antagonist get vaporised Y/N? is the only policy you'll ever need.
Spoiler:
- Rustledjimm
- Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 9:07 pm
- Byond Username: Rustledjimm
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
I think we're getting off topic here.
The argument from some seem to be
We are discussing
>non-antag #1 uses staff of storms which kills loads of non-antags in the final battle against antags
>non-antag #1 even gets converted and becomes an antag after having already killed a tonne of non-antags
>non-antag #2 is spamming xenobio creatures and one HERO BORG saves the round so crew wins
non-antag #1 who did nothing but hinder the rest of the crew should not just get away with having caused the deaths of many just because the round won. He didn't do anything cool, he didn't really stop the cultists, he killed a bunch of fellow crew and someone else won the round despite this.
The matter is mostly closed now but just to clarify as some people keep coming in here talking about the first example which is incorrect.
The argument from some seem to be
That is not what we are discussing here.But if he suceesfully killed the antags and it was cool/funny it's ok
We are discussing
>non-antag #1 uses staff of storms which kills loads of non-antags in the final battle against antags
>non-antag #1 even gets converted and becomes an antag after having already killed a tonne of non-antags
>non-antag #2 is spamming xenobio creatures and one HERO BORG saves the round so crew wins
non-antag #1 who did nothing but hinder the rest of the crew should not just get away with having caused the deaths of many just because the round won. He didn't do anything cool, he didn't really stop the cultists, he killed a bunch of fellow crew and someone else won the round despite this.
The matter is mostly closed now but just to clarify as some people keep coming in here talking about the first example which is incorrect.
So uhh, I'm an admin. Please leave feedback! Oops took me a while to strike that through.
Will Baker
Suzu Suzaku
TBC
Personal Ban Length Record: 2.1024e+006 minutes
Will Baker
Suzu Suzaku
TBC
Spoiler:
- kevinz000
- Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 8:41 am
- Byond Username: Kevinz000
- Github Username: kevinz000
- Location: Dorm Room 3
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
why the fuck is this in general chat and not the POLICY DISCUSSION SUBFORUM?
Local catgirl scratching post - Shezza
Usually seen as Skylar Lineman/Mekhi Anderson.
Commissions way too much art...
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 7&p=239075 - IN GAME ADMINISTRATOR
Usually seen as Skylar Lineman/Mekhi Anderson.
Commissions way too much art...
https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic ... 7&p=239075 - IN GAME ADMINISTRATOR
NSFW:
- Deitus
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2015 5:26 pm
- Byond Username: Deitus
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
kevinz000 wrote:why the fuck is this in general chat and not the POLICY DISCUSSION SUBFORUM?
ITT kevinz learns to readDeitus wrote: EDIT EDIT:
wrong forum someone move it
also i really think this should be getting more discussion. maybe ill make it a canidate debate thing.
-
- Joined: Fri May 02, 2014 3:01 am
- Byond Username: Incomptinence
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
More information required.
If culties managed to catch and convert him before dying to the storm he might have been right to call it down before they got him.
I don't know if he was cornered with a powerful but indiscriminate item or what.
If culties managed to catch and convert him before dying to the storm he might have been right to call it down before they got him.
I don't know if he was cornered with a powerful but indiscriminate item or what.
- WarbossLincoln
- Joined: Wed Feb 10, 2016 11:14 pm
- Byond Username: WarbossLincoln
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
Isn't a big criteria for whether you get banned also whether it ends the round, not just killing the antags? I seem to recall more than one Oldman ban appeal because of suicide bombs killing wizards but killing the wizard doesn't always end the round immediately.
- Nilons
- Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2016 5:38 pm
- Byond Username: NIlons
- Location: Canada
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
Doesn't this encourage people to just go for greentext? It shouldn't be a situation where the ends justify the means. Is it really fair to multiple players being removed from the round for however long because the guy who murdered them didnt even actively get them the greentext but it just kind of fell that way.
- Rustledjimm
- Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2017 9:07 pm
- Byond Username: Rustledjimm
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
This is what happened.
Compare it to this.>Did the non-antag help stop the antags? Yes or No?
No
>Did the non-antag kill lot's of other non-antags?
Yes
>Did the round end soon afterwards with the crew winning?
Yes
NO BAN
After that round it was quite clear that people were very unhappy with the top situation. Especially since we were told 'it's policy' which is why this thread was created in the first place. If someone manages to stop and end the round with a suicide bomb then nice, well done. You got lucky making a very risky play. But if someone throws a bomb kills a lot of people and doesn't end the round, even if their intention was to stop antags and end the round, do they not get banned? Despite the round perhaps ending very soon afterwards coincidentally? It's a risky play for a reason, they should know their is a chance of bannu and that they won't get off scott free if they fuck up leaving behind tonnes of dead crew members.>Did the non-antag help stop the antags? Yes or No?
No
>Did the non-antag kill lot's of other non-antags?
Yes
>Did the round end soon afterwards with the crew winning?
No
BANNU
So uhh, I'm an admin. Please leave feedback! Oops took me a while to strike that through.
Will Baker
Suzu Suzaku
TBC
Personal Ban Length Record: 2.1024e+006 minutes
Will Baker
Suzu Suzaku
TBC
Spoiler:
- Oldman Robustin
- Joined: Tue May 13, 2014 2:18 pm
- Byond Username: ForcefulCJS
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
People doing stupid mass-casualty shit to fuck up team antags is one of the most unique and memorable experiences you can have in this game. Yes it can backfire, and admins shouldn't hesitate to warn people if it does, but it should only become a ban if someone repeatedly uses poor judgment or they use indefensible judgment on a given occasion.
Occasionally losing because of WMD friendly fire is a fair price to pay for the entertainment value they bring.
Occasionally losing because of WMD friendly fire is a fair price to pay for the entertainment value they bring.
- Cobby
- Code Maintainer
- Joined: Sat Apr 19, 2014 7:19 pm
- Byond Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobby
- Github Username: ExcessiveUseOfCobblestone
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
Perhaps we should just remove toxins if it's going to be exclusively an antag-only item or a mining device [which im willing to say there's situations here that'll probably net you a science ban too]. I am really not comfortable with it existing as a sort of honeypot to give people blackmarks/bans.
For all our hate about 1 click wonders like stuns, bombs can literally 1click perma remove several people from the round at once and be made within 5-10 minutes without any gating whatsoever. The only gating to toxins anyways is personal knowledge, as most people consider securing the TTVs as powergaming so it's not like you have to go to say the RD or HoS to finish your bomb.
I am not surprised one of the more notorious bombers are trying to swoon policy to make it so they can bomb more often without repercussions :^) TAKE OFF THOSE PURPLE-TINTED SCIENCE GOGGLES
and fix gang loser
For all our hate about 1 click wonders like stuns, bombs can literally 1click perma remove several people from the round at once and be made within 5-10 minutes without any gating whatsoever. The only gating to toxins anyways is personal knowledge, as most people consider securing the TTVs as powergaming so it's not like you have to go to say the RD or HoS to finish your bomb.
The only memorable experience I have with bombs collectively (which I've seen plenty) is blowing a bit of air through my nose when an admin plays cuban pete after someone leveled the station, and even then the novelty wears off pretty quick.Oldman Robustin wrote:People doing stupid mass-casualty shit to fuck up team antags is one of the most unique and memorable experiences you can have in this game. Yes it can backfire, and admins shouldn't hesitate to warn people if it does, but it should only become a ban if someone repeatedly uses poor judgment or they use indefensible judgment on a given occasion.
Occasionally losing because of WMD friendly fire is a fair price to pay for the entertainment value they bring.
I am not surprised one of the more notorious bombers are trying to swoon policy to make it so they can bomb more often without repercussions :^) TAKE OFF THOSE PURPLE-TINTED SCIENCE GOGGLES
and fix gang loser
Voted best trap in /tg/ 2014-current
- Iatots
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2016 3:17 pm
- Byond Username: Iatots
- Github Username: Iatots
Re: [policy] WMD's are only bannable if the user's team lose
Did everyone in this thread play the round? Because I am not seeing anyone asking the really important question:
Has this miner attempted to collaborate with the crew or did he just enter the portal and wordlessly drop the storm the moment he landed?
Because the latter is a flat out dick move. You know the whole station has been preparing for over half an hour to storm the place and you know most of them won't have eva protection. A shock and awe blitz from hardsuited loyalists tearing through reebe's defenses while cultists are caught in momentary panic sounds awesome; some random miner using his OP loot to nullify a gamemode 40 minutes into the round sounds like shit.
Has this miner attempted to collaborate with the crew or did he just enter the portal and wordlessly drop the storm the moment he landed?
Because the latter is a flat out dick move. You know the whole station has been preparing for over half an hour to storm the place and you know most of them won't have eva protection. A shock and awe blitz from hardsuited loyalists tearing through reebe's defenses while cultists are caught in momentary panic sounds awesome; some random miner using his OP loot to nullify a gamemode 40 minutes into the round sounds like shit.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users