/tg/Station 13

Posted: **Mon Dec 29, 2014 1:04 am**

Bottom post of the previous page:

Another round of SS13. Reckless HoP is reckless and hires a scientist to the security force. Without consulting the HoS, who was me/I. And gives the officer maintenance access.

I implant the security officer, named Dmitri Bocharov. Three times. Once with Chloral Hydrate, once with a tracker, and once for loyalty. The round goes on.

A few minutes later, this happens:

Message from Josiah Lombardi (Detective), "TO LABOR SHUTTLE. DIMITRI IS ABSORBING THE CLOWN" (Reply)

I rush my way into the labor shuttle to find a blood trail and a headset. I get the shuttle to take me to the labor camp. No one is in there. I get back to the station. We all have this lovely conversation over radio:

Spoiler:

At this point, I pushed a couple buttons in the prisoner console. Dmitri went to sleep. For a very long time. Still using the prisoner console, I managed to locate Dmitri's soon-to-be-debrained body in Arrivals North Maintenance. He was grabbed, debrained, and borged.

After this, Dmitri ahelped it and I talked to Sometinyprick:

Code: Select all

Admin PM from-Sometinyprick: So why did you implant Dmitri Bocharov?
PM to-Admins: New officer.
Admin PM from-Sometinyprick: Ah I see
Admin PM from-Sometinyprick: Why the tracking implant and the chemical implant though?
PM to-Admins: I try to make sure that if someone backstabs my security team, they don't do it more than once.
PM to-Admins: The thing about antags is that they'd love to be granted a taser gun and a stun baton.
PM to-Admins: So they are very, very eager to join sec. You get a reckless HoP, like this one, and we get lings in sec.
[b]Admin PM from-Sometinyprick: That's metagamming and powergaming mate. Just don't okay.[/b]

And that's what I want to discuss. Is it meta/powergaming to implant new officers with trackers and chemical implants? And how about the ones that you didn't ask for and whose promotion was never disclosed to you?

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:02 am**

Given any other reason than "Antags are bad" I'm pretty sure this wouldn't have been a problem at all.

I can only imagine that it's somewhat common knowledge that security forces are routinely searched and background checked to no longer be possible antags. Someone trying to become a security member mid round is sketchy as fuck, and seeing as you don't have the centcomm resources (waterboarding) to make sure they're not sizing your own crew up like human juice boxes, giving them a cyborg kill switch is the next best thing.

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2014 5:07 am**

Raven776 wrote:Given any other reason than "Antags are bad" I'm pretty sure this wouldn't have been a problem at all.

I can only imagine that it's somewhat common knowledge that security forces are routinely searched and background checked to no longer be possible antags. Someone trying to become a security member mid round is sketchy as fuck, and seeing as you don't have the centcomm resources (waterboarding) to make sure they're not sizing your own crew up like human juice boxes, giving them a cyborg kill switch is the next best thing.

Yeah, see, purely IC? Valid.
However, his provided OOC reasoning sort of made it power/metagamey, as much as I want to support this stuff.

On a semi-related note, my personal headcannon regarding Security is that they're just a low-brow private security firm hired off to protect the station on a shift-by-shift basis, thus explaining how some of them are wicked badasses while others can't hit one in every hundred taser shots. Implants are Nanotrasen-provided and removed at the end of their contract period.

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2014 7:28 am**

I like to think NT owns a huge expanse of space, and security members who are pulled from stations closer to the "Frontier" have seen some shit, giving you those really hardcore guys who are foul tempered and are "my way or the highway." Then you got accademy aces who tend to be bestcurity and skilled to boot. The security guards are either well meaninged guys who are used to helping kids cross the street more than they are used to bashing someone's skull in, and the shit tier officers are the classic thugs who sign up to feel powerful because they realize deep down they are awful and pathetic.

The fact he was contacted is what was super sketchy. He didn't say ICly he did it "because antag." He said it OOCly, and there is a huge difference. Everyone is saying it is ok to act on the metaknowledge that antags want to infiltrate sec, so why is it wrong to explain that reasoning OOCly? If he was shouting about it ICly I would mind, but he wasn't.

In fact he stated the IC reasoning FIRST. You are basically getting up in his grill for thoughtcrime. If this is allowed and ICly he didn't act like a jerk about it, what is the problem?

He did this to someone joining the sec team willingly, when they mysteriously just showed up, didn't shout in a meta way ICly, didn't kill him until after the guy admitted he was a changeling, and only THEN the changeling had a problem with it? Does anyone else see a major problem with this entire scenario?

That is poor form. If the changeling really felt like he was being treated unfairly he should have adminhelped the implant. This is an antag whining about how he died. And the admins should have told him to buzz off if he complained about it when he was implanted, he is an antag trying to infiltrate sec and the way he was brought on was sketchy.

It isn't powergaming until you act ICly on OOC information that is not presented ICly. The blue alert and loyalty system are IC bits of information that convey OOC information to the characters explicitly to excuse people acting rationally to the understanding that they may be in danger. The bluespace message specifically talks about subversive elements, so if the HoS was asked why he did that by NT officials he would point to that message. However, lets not require the PLAYERs to pretend to be stupid when talking to the ADMINS, who both know the primary source of infiltration for sec, the only legitimate one even, is antags. The honest answer 100% of the time is to stop antag infiltration and perhaps trolls.

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2014 8:09 am**

I actually kinda agree with Dezzmont... It's a smart idea to do these kinds of implants for VERY good reasons (Security antag was removed for a reason) so... What IS the problem? Because he was a bit powergamey in a game full of nothing but powergaming? Because he WON?

The admin shouldn't have penalized him for being honest. Anyone can come up with an excuse, but we all know why he did it... To inevitably stop someone in security garb from murdering half the station.

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2014 1:26 pm**

That's actually a very good point, that the ling only bitched about the implant after dying. There is no way the ling could have got the three implants without his knowledge, os if he had an OOC issue with it, ahelp it then. Otherwise deal with the implant, or get another ling to remove the tracking and chem implant, kill another officer and pretend to be him.

And he said
PM to-Admins: I try to make sure that if someone backstabs my security team, they don't do it more than once.
Before
PM to-Admins: The thing about antags is that they'd love to be granted a taser gun and a stun baton.
PM to-Admins: So they are very, very eager to join sec. You get a reckless HoP, like this one, and we get lings in sec.

Which is perfectly fine, as already stated, he gave an IC reason, then explained to admins the OOC logic behind it. You can't punish people for not being retarded.

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2014 3:45 pm**

So, uh, if we didn't have security protection, which used to be the case for quite some time, HoS would be allowed to chem implant everyone?

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2014 8:40 pm**

Lo6a4evskiy wrote:So, uh, if we didn't have security protection, which used to be the case for quite some time, HoS would be allowed to chem implant everyone?

Probably.

Luckily the current security rules are generally not dumb, and security has a set of expectations on them to act like things actually matter. Which kind of makes me feel that it is stranger to allow random people into sec willy nilly than to get suspicious at someone just showing up when you just got an alert that is essentially saying "Caution: Espionage, beware of spies!"

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2014 10:10 pm**

Well the chem implant would have also covered an incompetent recruit or plain griefer but he said antag in an OOC communication ooh scary! You even got the IC reasoning first but hey what's role playing?

Yeah the ling just took three implants like a putz and could even see they were there on his sec hud, a total moron ahelping whatever they can.

Posted: **Tue Dec 30, 2014 11:01 pm**

It's not even like the old days where he could even conceivably not understand he had an implant in him. The big pill sign shows up on the screen now.

Posted: **Wed Dec 31, 2014 10:29 pm**

dezzmont wrote: The fact he was contacted is what was super sketchy. He didn't say ICly he did it "because antag." He said it OOCly, and there is a huge difference. Everyone is saying it is ok to act on the metaknowledge that antags want to infiltrate sec, so why is it wrong to explain that reasoning OOCly? If he was shouting about it ICly I would mind, but he wasn't.

Yeah, it's pretty dubious to crack down on someone for giving an OOC explanation when asked OOC about his intentions.

In the same way that we don't IC-know about round types, but we should know what a Code Blue means, we don't IC-know that security officers can't be traitors or lings, but we should know that Internal Affairs has indoctrinated and background-checked and drug-tested them and signed off on their papers before sending them aboard. So some new guy skips that whole process and says "Hi, your personnel officer just assigned me to security, gimme my badge and gun" and hell yes, the HOS can take extra steps to monitor him. The loyalty implant is supposed to keep him in line, but we know (from cases like this!) that loyalty implants don't work on everyone. Hence, tracking and chem implants.

(Frankly, this ling player died for playing ling the wrong way. If you want to be a security officer, you eat a real officer and steal his identity. Asking the HOP to assign you to sec is just drawing attention to yourself. Which is what happened, and got him killed. The system works as intended.)

Posted: **Thu Jan 01, 2015 11:24 pm**

Sounds like a complete IC issue. This is really not something that needs a ruling imo...

Posted: **Fri Jan 02, 2015 12:26 am**

I'm disappointed that the majority of purple names are so incredibly wrong.

Here are some facts:
-We are entitled to know what antags exist and how they work
-We are fully permitted to carry knowledge over from one round to another.
-Never really been mentioned but I've always assumed we're allowed to know the Captain and Security are antag protected, when its switched on.

Putting those points together any experienced sec player is going to be mistrustful of non-centcom appointed security, for the simple facts that it is code blue and more importantly that that person has not gone through the same vetting process of background checks, intensive medical examines, etc etc to ensure that person is 100% loyal to NT.

Any veteran sec player is going to know, based on their numerous past experiences, that no one volunteers for security mid round (if they do they get sec borged instead) unless they are someone attempting to infiltrate their ranks.
Because thats definitely what my past experience has always been.

And lets not forget there's a very good fucking reason security can't be bloody antags in the first place, because they're in a position of trust and it makes everyone's lives shitty when the people they should be able to trust the most, the closest thing to protags in the game, are actually antags.
And lets not even go into how an antag in sec is a rotten seed that will quickly contaminate the rest of security into shitcurity.

So there is absolutely, positively, nothing wrong with security being wary of potential infiltrators and taking out insurance policies (or in my case: absolute refusal of midround sec transfers) to prevent/minimise the potential damage the risk of infiltration carries.

Posted: **Fri Jan 02, 2015 12:35 am**

Way, I see it, if the round has been going on for a while and you know traitors are present, sure. That's fine. If you do it at round start? That's metagaming.

Posted: **Fri Jan 02, 2015 1:01 am**

I don't understand, does it mean I would get bwoinked if I dunked someone who transferred to the department I'm in and blatantly acted like an antag including trying to kill me?

I already know that heads are the last word of their department and can refuse someone if they were not consulted by the HoP before they added someone to their department

Posted: **Fri Jan 02, 2015 2:38 am**

Aleph wrote:I don't understand, does it mean I would get bwoinked if I dunked someone who transferred to the department I'm in and blatantly acted like an antag including trying to kill me?

I already know that heads are the last word of their department and can refuse someone if they were not consulted by the HoP before they added someone to their department

You might get bwoinked, but that doesn't mean you'd be banned. If they're actually acting like an antag ie trying to murder you, you'd be in the right to handle it.

Posted: **Fri Jan 02, 2015 7:46 am**

Honestly antags that join sec are the least robust people ever. Once you get implanted you automatically get weapons and more importantly trust, which is like the most valuable resource in the game. I think implanting new recruits(with stuff other than loyalty) is metagamey as fuck though, but antags joining sec are taking the easy route, and there should be deterrent to this

Posted: **Mon Jan 12, 2015 10:45 pm**

kosmos wrote:
Saegrimr wrote:The problem here is your reasoning was "b-b-but antags".
How does that change anything? Should've he rephrased it to "My character wants to keep the crew safe and knows that traitors exist on the station and doesn't want them joining the security force"?

This is a case that I see where people don't know how to communicate to admins, and often ruin themselves, because he could have put his case a better way.

Cecily wrote:A new officer magically shows up in your force without prior notice from the HoP. The Head of Security is 100% in the right to take measures to ensure officers who enter under suspicious circumstances have a sort of panic button built into them.

You are not 'playing to win' by implanting these people. Want IC reasoning? The Head of Security knows what Code Blue means - There are possible subversive elements among the crew, and as a result, that is total validation to taking bonus Security measures when dealing with new officers who join under questionable circumstances. Chemical and tracking implants are underused either way; you have a box of them for a reason, and I hate to see people get bwoinked for actually making sensible use of them in a legitimate situation.

Cecily really put it pretty well. It's not 'metagaming traitors.' Centcomm warns you of half a dozen threats at roundstart.

Posted: **Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:02 am**

Jeb wrote:Should also be noted that heads can demote people from their own departments.

Why are there no id consoles in their offices to do this?

Posted: **Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:41 am**

There is an ID console on the bridge. Use that.

Posted: **Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:28 am**

paprika wrote:At least 80% of the time people sign up for sec mid round or at the start is because they're traitors, period.

Ban paprika for being a metagaming shit please.

/tg/Station 13

[Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

[Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers

Re: [Poll] (Chem and Track) Implanting Hired Sec Officers