Page 8 of 8
Security is more or less impossible to deal with IC
Posted: Sun Dec 11, 2016 6:53 pm
by onleavedontatme
Bottom post of the previous page:
What is the appropriate response when security attacks you/abuses you/arrests you FNR for 20 minutes?
Adminhelping about cell times or false arrests is generally "IC issue," but retaliating violently will get you banned. If you retaliate non violently they'll "escalate" to murdering you or permabrigging you. They're allowed to break into anywhere they want, take what they want, etc. Nobody IC will care because everyone knows they can't be antagonists.
Is there an appropriate response other than rolling over and dying/letting the guy mess with your round?
And no this isn't just about that recent ban appeal, this has been something that's been bothering me for a while. We have a class of player who is more or less rules free yet it's bannable to retaliate or protect yourself.
Re: Security is more or less impossible to deal with IC
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 4:31 am
by oranges
now it's just turned into ban requests the thread
Re: Security is more or less impossible to deal with IC
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 4:39 am
by ShadowDimentio
Nobody plays sec because it's a thankless job. The only reason I play it is because I've managed to create a opioid-like drug extracted from the salty tears of dunked antags, and am addicted.
Re: Security is more or less impossible to deal with IC
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 5:02 am
by D&B
oranges wrote:now it's just turned into ban requests the thread
Maybe if you played more often you'd know they got permabanned a long time ago and are currently sitting in the kinfe's edge in vg
But I digress. Many admins knew/know there's metagangs in basil and Sybil but since they're oldfags or regulars it works hurt the status quo to break them up rather than letting them be. Yet, they're not the problem.
The problem is that players usually have this mentality of "that person in the cell did no wrong because I don't know the wrong they did." Many people act on their previous interactions with sec and seek to hinder or annoy sec in order to "get back," so to say.
Hell, you don't even need to put them in a cell. Many will happily snatch a prisoner away from you as they are cuffed in your grasp and you're trying to move them to the brig.
Re: Security is more or less impossible to deal with IC
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 6:22 am
by FantasticFwoosh
D&B wrote:Cells are shit because if you try to give someone a fair sentence their metabuddies or other tiders will break them out, or the AI will let them out because for some reason most AI players hate fucking security.
There's a space law clause i like to cite for that event in which anybody co-operating in a major or capital level crime inflicts equally the same punishment on to them (To which the lawyer will be needed to clear or de-escalate their case)
Fuck it. It's time to rewrite & enforce space law for sec & players because admins have lost control and have no idea what they are doing/too lenient on IC.
D&B wrote:The problem is that players usually have this mentality of "that person in the cell did no wrong because I don't know the wrong they did." Many people act on their previous interactions with sec and seek to hinder or annoy sec in order to "get back," so to say.
Hell, you don't even need to put them in a cell. Many will happily snatch a prisoner away from you as they are cuffed in your grasp and you're trying to move them to the brig.
Metagrudging, sec shouldn't tolerate this behaviour from a OOC perspective and there needs to be more awareness that sec are just doing their job (well of course if you're getting back at someone because the officer acts like a bit of a asshole, then thats on their behaviour but still unacceptable)
To be honest, it'd be easier if we could just fine somebody on the spot or apply a real punishment for minor crimes (but we lack the economy to do that) other than just beating the up and/or tying them to a chair because the walk-time between where you are and the cell exceeds the punishment and means you have to let them go with a half hearted warning.
Re: Security is more or less impossible to deal with IC
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 6:41 am
by Screemonster
D&B wrote:The problem is that players usually have this mentality of "that person in the cell did no wrong because I don't know the wrong they did."
the same could be said of some of the people defending banned players :v
Re: Security is more or less impossible to deal with IC
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 2:33 pm
by D&B
Screemonster wrote:D&B wrote:The problem is that players usually have this mentality of "that person in the cell did no wrong because I don't know the wrong they did."
the same could be said of some of the people defending banned players :v
Yamete
Re: Security is more or less impossible to deal with IC
Posted: Thu Jan 12, 2017 4:59 pm
by CPTANT
Oldman Robustin wrote:Saegrimr wrote:
This is the polar opposite to say, when SoS was around and sec wasn't allowed to do anything, so nobody played it, then the shittery started to rise.
As opposed to now where Basil can have 70 people on with 1 officer and no HoS or Warden? People not playing sec because of admins is just a myth that gets perpetuated. There might be a few people who had a bad runin with an admin while playing sec but generally those were just bad admins, not bad policy. People decide to play sec due to a huge number of factors, the occasional admin intervention was never a big issue. Some admins needed to dial it down a notch with security but this whole "Sec can murder anyone who even slightly inconveniences them" is far too wide a swing in the opposite direction.
I would even argue that sec has lost its excitement when the only people who you have to deal with are GAME-CERTIFIED ANTAGONISTS.
The basic brig cells go empty for several rounds in a row because its far too easy to discern between minor grief and antagonistic behavior since admins made all the middle-ground tiding punishable by bans or immediate executions, sec doesn't even have to enforce minor laws since they know it will never escalate. When I played sec ~5 years ago I would constantly be putting people into cells for trying to hack into the brig, punching officers, disarming me and taking my baton, etc. - now I can't even remember the last time I did something besides let someone go after a search or immediately execute someone. Likewise when I'm an assistant either I never see the inside of the brig or I get my head caved in with a baton, I don't remember the last time I saw the inside of a regular brig cell. Our policy punishes anyone who engages in moderate harassment against security and also punishes security who use moderate punishments against crew. Why would any jaded security player bother with the struggle of putting someone in a cell when 9/10 times the admins will tolerate you killing that guy on the spot?
I always felt the answer was pretty intuitive. If sec endorses a Gestapo mentality absent any kind of adequate provocation or warning, then it absolutely justifies crewmembers who attack/kidnap security. Revolution shouldn't just be a mode, it's something that our escalation rules should absolutely permit. If you're an officer with Hitler and Eichmann as your HOS and Warden then you should either object, desert, or be prepared to accept the IC consequences for throwing in with their cause. Obviously this doesn't mean the HOS can just start lasering crew at roundstart, but we already give the HOS and security a ton of leeway in their escalation. If we don't like that solution then we need to start cracking down on sec grief because admins have been trained to be WAYYY too lenient on security murder to justify banning people who fight back.
This.
There is way too much moderation against "greytide". Greytide actually keeps rounds as security interesting as well.