/tg/Station 13

https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=35&t=4287

For background. Administration is all over the place on this issue, I thought Saeg represented the high water mark of "don't do this" but Vekter came in at the end and locked it while claiming any non-wizard bombing as a nonantag is 24hr ban + 24hr for every victim.

That's clearly not been our policy here since I've bombed malf ais, cultists, slaughter demon, xenos, shadowling, blobs, abductors, and a space ninja (and all without any collateral crew deaths tyvm).

People also couldn't seem to agree whether my behavior addressed in that thread was justified. A majority felt that killing the officer was justified but there was more disagreement as to whether bombing the gulag shuttle at Gulag was rule breaking. Complicating the matter was a secondary death by a gulag prisoner who ran up to the breach and died of space exposure.

Since Center super helpfully locked the thread instead of moving it, let's resunexpected that discussion here. I'm more interested in getting a clear idea of our bomb policy than pestering adminbus to remove the last few hours of a dayban.

Officer was a massive shithead and 100% deserved it.

The bomb being implanted is where I kinda have to go ehhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

I can see that getting out of control fast.

Bombing antags is a bit iffy right now what with mulligan and all.
Things that would make you the savior of the station before now just make you an asshole that everybody else has to clean up after.

It is shit to blow up parts of the station because one person is shit.

It will virtually always hinder people.

And yes I do use the gulag.

Not going to argue that Gulag is completely useless but the marginal utility it provides for security is negligible outside of rev rounds with a super aware AI. If you want to give a set sentence you have brig cells, if you want to take them out of the round then there's perma or execution.

I would argue that you could deconstruct the Gulag shuttle in a regular round with no provocation and still get away with it being IC (where you claim its inhumane or something), so the idea of Gulag being virtually unusable as the threshold for bannable behavior isn't particularly persuasive to me.

Kor's argument was that it is silly to ban someone for taking a person out of the round for 30 minutes because of their behavior when admins follow up and take that person out of the game for 1440+ minutes because of their behavior. The disagreement primarily comes from perspectives on whether bombs deserve special rules that make them per se bannable (i.e. using them on a non-antag as a non-antag solely due to escalation is always bannable no matter what) or whether bombs are just a means to an end and each case should be evaluated by the outcome/effect/results and the corresponding justification. Saeg and Vektor have the per se bannable view that all non-antag bombings outside of wizard/blob are autobans.

Edit: I'd also point out that sec wasn't in top form that game. The warden flat out ignored me yelling for help in interrogation, another officer saw me dragged from interrogation to gulag screaming for help, nobody ever questioned it or stopped and asked Fisher about her behavior (Warden even witnessed me getting a clean search previously so he had a basis for believing that the guy screaming in interrogation might have a legitimate complaint). When you're that complacent in mistreating crew then maybe just MAYBE you don't get to complain when your shuttle to Guantanamo breaks down.

CPTANT wrote:It is shit to blow up parts of the station because one person is shit.

It will virtually always hinder people.

Implanting bombs as a non-antag is also just fucking retarded conduct because while it's not against the rules it's saying "IM READY TO TOE THE LINE DO YOU WANT TO ESCALATE" or exists simply to kill antagonists

Somewhat unrelated but toxins players seem to have this weird disconnect where they get all dindunuffin when arrested for BOMB THREATS ("It was a joke guys!"), I don't see how people get surprised when they get arrested and their six 5/10/20 zero counterplay meme explosives get taken as a result.

Scones wrote:

CPTANT wrote:It is shit to blow up parts of the station because one person is shit.

It will virtually always hinder people.

Implanting bombs as a non-antag is also just fucking retarded conduct because while it's not against the rules it's saying "IM READY TO TOE THE LINE DO YOU WANT TO ESCALATE" or exists simply to kill antagonists

Somewhat unrelated but toxins players seem to have this weird disconnect where they get all dindunuffin when arrested for BOMB THREATS ("It was a joke guys!"), I don't see how people get surprised when they get arrested and their six 5/10/20 zero counterplay meme explosives get taken as a result.

... Except he only implanted it after I told him that I was 99 percent sure we had shadowlings, just saying. He was also almost kidnapped by a shadowling and thrall earlier that round, so he had a reason to do so.

Anywho, it ought to be about intent, location, and casualties from the direct blast / space if they try to escape it. Anything else seems... Irrational. It's a weapon like any other, and so long as you don't take out critical equipment or detonate in a critical area, it should stick to the results, and only the results.

Bomb policy's always been clear/fair to me: If you antag hunt with bombs, you'd better end the round by killing the antag or make damn sure there isn't any collateral damage. Otherwise you're subject to the same rules as anyone else. I really don't think this needs to be circlejerked to death.

Honestly not everything has to be set in stone with policy, and considering how varied situations involving bombs can be this is IMO best left to admin discretion

Personally I think the circumstances kinda dictated the officer deserved such an amazing dunk.

I just really really don't want to see implanted bombs become the norm.

I mean, he did say you'd be arrested if you brought a bomb out of toxins and then you brought a bomb out of toxins. (The only hole in that is that he didn't know it was there until it killed him).

Does it really need to be beaten in to people that blowing up bits of the station and killing two other people who aren't even antagonists (one by accident, but it was still your doing) is a bit shit though?

I'm with Scones, it should depend on all what is going on, the reasons for it, did it kill anyone else, the damage done to the station, etc..

Otherwise if you have a set in stone policy (nonantaging always being 24hr + 24hr for each victim), then toxins has no reason to exist except for antags to max cap the station.

Example, lets say there's a cult and it's known there is. I'm the chaplain and I get a bomb implanted because I know the cult will want me. Later I'm captured (not seeking to be for the purpose of bombing but just end up being caught) and taken to their base, where in I detonate, becoming a martyr for my god and dispensing his wrath on the heathen scum.

It's nonantag bombing, but is that valid? I would feel it is, and having sufficent reason to be implanted with a bomb. Kinda an example other than a sec being a shit. Just trying to explain why a set policy is a bad idea.

Policy however does need to exist so players have some kind of visible protection.

It was clearly against the bomb policy but it should have been an exception- unimportant area, no other recourse, officer was a total shit and deserved it.

Scones wrote:

CPTANT wrote:It is shit to blow up parts of the station because one person is shit.

It will virtually always hinder people.

Implanting bombs as a non-antag is also just fucking retarded conduct because while it's not against the rules it's saying "IM READY TO TOE THE LINE DO YOU WANT TO ESCALATE" or exists simply to kill antagonists

Somewhat unrelated but toxins players seem to have this weird disconnect where they get all dindunuffin when arrested for BOMB THREATS ("It was a joke guys!"), I don't see how people get surprised when they get arrested and their six 5/10/20 zero counterplay meme explosives get taken as a result.

I agree that the bomb implanting as a non-antag is close to "the line". That's why I've only done it ~3 times across 2,000+ rounds and I only proceeded with doing it after two people had failed to abduct me and I had heard references to shadowlings. You can gib an ascended shadowling with a bomb and even before that if you're being enthralled in maint with no help on the way you're probably good to go with allahu'ing disposals to take out the shadowling thats destroying your free will. If there's any concern that making this valid would somehow prompt me to shove maxcaps in my bowels every round, you're getting worked up for nothing.

I would also agree that informing security that you've taken a bomb outside of science is an arrestable, searchable, and if any evidence exists that you did, briggable offense (wording it as a THREAT would be briggable too), removing TTV's from science after that would also be perfectly sensible. If I ever act surprised, offended, or angry that you take my bombs/search me/arrest me as security, it's just that - ACTING -.

Jacquerel wrote:I mean, he did say you'd be arrested if you brought a bomb out of toxins and then you brought a bomb out of toxins. (The only hole in that is that he didn't know it was there until it killed him).

Does it really need to be beaten in to people that blowing up bits of the station and killing two other people who aren't even antagonists (one by accident, but it was still your doing) is a bit shit though?

The first part is only relevant due to a misconception (by myself during the round) that I was being arrested for mentioning that I took a bomb outside of science via PDA to Emily Ranger. It was just a joke to Emily who I had spoken with earlier, was on good terms with, and I had already reported being a crime victim to them and given them all the names and details I could recall. I had joked earlier that I would take it as a challenge to see if I could smuggle a bomb past her, so when I used my PDA to report that masked unknowns were gathering in locker room and chasing me when I approached I attached a joke that I had succeeded in sneaking a bomb past her. Emily reported in the last thread that she understood that I was being playful and hadn't requested my arrest/search/brigging based on that comment, Fisher arrested me for a completely different reason that he hasn't explained at all either in the round or in the thread (Something about reports of me attacking an assistant, which logs clearly show never happened). It was only because I initially ASSUMED that Emily put me on arrest that I even made comments about not having a bomb and the lizard then asked me more about it, the whole bomb discussion was just a sideshow to whatever their true purpose for arresting me was. Fisher straight up said she wasn't searching me for bombs, there was another motive at play that she has yet to disclose.

Lastly, nobody is calling this model behavior. It shouldn't be encouraged, promoted, or lauded. This thread is to determine what we tolerate. I'm not pushing for a set-in-stone policy either, in fact I oppose one (NO BOMBS OUTSIDE OF MAGICMANMODE GUYS, THATS GOOD POLICY), but what I am pushing for are clearer guidelines as to what makes a bomb bannable vs. not.

If you're a non-antag hurting other non-antags with explosives, you're doing it wrong.

To help keep this discussion productive, here are some thought experiments to try out (for the purpose of these questions just assume that I was forced into these situations and not just being a roaming valid-hunting aloha snackbar patron):

• Is it ok to bomb ANYONE who's valid to you as long as you don't seriously damage the station or innocents in the process? (it seems perfectly acceptable to suicide bomb a space traitor while you're both in open space away from station)
• When does the bomb policy take an EX-POST FACTO analysis versus an EX-ANTI analysis? (If I bomb a changeling in space right as a locker full of innocent crew heading to derelict flies by... am I banned? If I bomb a changeling in the dorms do I get a free pass just because nobody else was hurt?)
• If innocent people are KNOWINGLY claimed in the blast, is an immediate round end the only way you'll escape a ban? (I.E. I throw a bomb next to blob core after repeated warnings about imminent bombs, a few players on the edge of your screen aren't listening but you go ahead anyway, the blob shunts to a new core right before the bomb goes off... am I banned? what if I succeed but MULLIGAN?)
• What level of station damage (created by the bomb) is justified in bombing someone and to what degree is the justification threshold altered by the threat posed? (Can I bomb the singularity containment if it means stopping the nukeops from arming the nuke? Can I bomb a space traitor if it means shattering the windows on the holodeck?)

Bombing a non-antag was a first here, but does antag status really matter in this case? From my perspective I was being taken out of the round because a powertripping rogue shitcurity officer didn't like me, would it have been any better if it was a ling taking me somewhere for a quiet absorption? I know both are going to take me out of the round due to their shitty nature, at least with the ling it didn't spend 10 minutes taunting/insulting/beating me in interrogation first. Kor's argument was that it would be silly to say "Ok we're taking Saphira out of the GAME for a day due to shitty behavior, but Oldman taking her out of a ROUND for 30 minutes because he was directly impacted by said behavior is too much and he needs a ban too".

The fact is, Oldman broke the word of the law but not the spirit. The gulag barely counts as bombing the station and setting off the bomb was his only chance to get even for what was clearly shit behavior. This is how this kind of shit SHOULD be handled. It was funny, the only person who got butthurt deserved it, and if anything the security player deserves a long security time out.

Well to throw in some precedents

Guys you don't always need to make max caps, we had a player once ask if it was acceptable to suicide a wizard with a maxcap and they got a no answer in reply back then and then it somehow came up that he'd be more than welcome to try with a bomb that wasn't maxcap. He did exactly that, he made a rather controlled tiny bomb, used it, killed the wizard, everyone was happy and admins stopped mulligan and ended the round.

in answer to oldman

yes

ahelp first, we can observe and see it happen which makes things easier in case something happens that you didn't anticipate. I wouldn't bomb a changeling in the dorm area but like mentioned above it's NOT necessary to make maxcaps all the time. If shit happens and you detonate a bomb, it's easier on you, other players and admins, if you use a smaller bomb.

blob bombs seem a-ok. One player in particular, in fact the one mentioned above, does it often. While I stress this is on a case by case basis, if we can see you make a reasonably decent attempt at being competent and bombing the blob from an angle where it minimizes crew losses then sure why not bomb the blob. Obviously, if you're being retarded with bombs and throwing them into the edge of the blob where other players are fighting, you will get banned.

It's case by case thing. Stick to well known precedents like blob cores, malf AIs, a ticking nuke, stuff like that.

rdght91 wrote:The fact is, Oldman broke the word of the law but not the spirit.

I think this sums up what happened best. Honestly if I pissed someone off to the point that their solution was to maxcap both of us, I'd probably look at my own actions first then feel a bit impressed that they decided to blow the both of us up after the salt wore off.

Was that sec shit and earned it? Yes. Did Oldman deserve a ban for nonantag bombing? In word, yes, in spirit, it was justified. We're I him I'd just say 'worth it' to teach the shitsec a lesson and take the day ban holiday.

Ironically (well not really irony but whatever) one of my first plans for the following round (before LongBowMan bwoinked me) was to begin experiments on minibomb-tier explosions that have almost no risk of inadvertent collateral death. I didn't like that I had to shear off the front of the gulag and blow up the shuttle just to take out the shitter standing next to me. I figured there'd be a lot less qualms all around if I tried using more controlled explosives since leveling the entire room is rarely necessary to stop a threat. I tried once before but toxins test had a destructable indestructable wall a couple weeks ago and testing more than one bomb became a PITA.

Alas such noble work has been delayed 1440 minutes.

It doesn't make sense to ban purely because it was a 'non antag using a bomb'.

We've already got established in escalation that you can kill and bloody hide/dispose of the body if some chucklefuck keeps coming back for more, so say if you did this by bombing them in space (so no collatoral damage of any sort), would you suddenly get a 2 day ban just because you used a bomb instead of a gibber?

If you're blowing chunks out of the station for any reason then trying to protect the crew from a serious threat (ops/wiz/angry shadowling/gang domination/etc) then yeah, that's very shitty and should be bannable.

But it's the fucking gulag. I use it more then most (I use it instead of timed sentences, for people that are just being shitters, since they tend to ghost rather then mine for 2 minutes), but even so most rounds it doesn't even get used.
Even if it's out of commission, it hardly inconveniences anyone anyway.

lumipharon wrote:It doesn't make sense to ban purely because it was a 'non antag using a bomb'.

We've already got established in escalation that you can kill and bloody hide/dispose of the body if some chucklefuck keeps coming back for more, so say if you did this by bombing them in space (so no collatoral damage of any sort), would you suddenly get a 2 day ban just because you used a bomb instead of a gibber?

Because of the collateral damage I guess, but also mostly because lots of our admins are very touchy about the rules as written rather than the intent behind them.

This is why we need to move to the low rules thing. There's a number of cases now where someone is being a shit and toeing the line (or even crossing it) hard, gets dunked through a means that violate some obscure rule nobody even remembers, "victim" cries about it. That officer should have been told to get fucked and their lucky they didn't get banned first thing.

Collateral damage is the key difference between bombs and something like a toolbox or laser.
The gulag being blown up isn't as important as the fact that there was an innocent bystander there, who now is going to either suffocate or die from pressure loss due to the front part of the gulag being a gaping hole into space.
Guns and melee fights only hurt the person you are targeting, while bombs damage in a radius, and cause hull breaches.

palpatine213 wrote:Collateral damage is the key difference between bombs and something like a toolbox or laser.
The gulag being blown up isn't as important as the fact that there was an innocent bystander there, who now is going to either suffocate or die from pressure loss due to the front part of the gulag being a gaping hole into space.
Guns and melee fights only hurt the person you are targeting, while bombs damage in a radius, and cause hull breaches.

That's not quite the case, In a mob situation you can very easily kill people caught up in the rush who aren't actually part of the conflicting force.

My personal opinion has been 'never bomb any part of the actual station as a non-antag for any reason, yes, even blobs and wizards and shit' but that's just IMO. At very best you've killed something that deserved it and in the process punched a big old hole through your own station, endangering everyone and requiring the effort of repairs and reconstructing the possibly hundreds of items and structures you wiped out. And if you're not careful, you've killed some people who really didn't deserve it as much, or even fucked over the entire round.

A bomb is uniquely disruptive, nothing short of the singulo destroys as much, as fast. And is often just as hard to control since its effects are felt long after it's set off.

Kor wrote:Because of the collateral damage I guess, but also mostly because lots of our admins are very touchy about the rules as written rather than the intent behind them.

If you've decided that some of the admins you agreed to try and lead/direct are flat-up wrong, Kor, let's have some names.

I think the non-a tag bombing has it's place in extreme situations.

Like if an alien outbreak has gotten so bad that half the station is dead and aliens wander the halls freely?

Sure bomb their nest and queen since it's unlikely anyone living will be there and you're doing a service to the station as a whole .

Blobs?

Yeah sure as long as you make sure to clear the area of bystanders.

Wiz?

Eh, not unless they're at some fringe part of the station near the end of the round and you know nobody will get caught in the blast ( for example bombing a wizard in the sec pod that is about to leave)

Nuke ops I would say no in general except for the most extreme circumstancess.

Shadowlings I would reserve bombing for ascendants.

But I don't think using it as revenge is okay, old man keeps saying that the person who died in the collateral damage could have just not gone to the breach, but by blowing up he gulag shuttle you've made it impossible for them to return to the station in the first place.

People keep harping about that random dude, but You gotta also consider that robustin was told the place was unused, and never saw him until after the bombing.

Falamazeer wrote:People keep harping about that random dude, but You gotta also consider that robustin was told the place was unused, and never saw him until after the bombing.

Part of me wants to say that bombs are indiscriminate by nature, and not knowing who your bomb would hit isn't really an excuse.

Blowing up unrelated people is an inherent risk of bombing, and the consequences for that risk could be a ban.

Hibbles wrote:Things

I'd rather continue nudging them in the direction I want one on one privately, or in general statements about how I want the game/admins to run, instead of publicly shaming individuals for doing their jobs in a way that they've been told is correct by previous hosts/head admin. Most people I've spoken to in PM have been pretty receptive and willing to try and adapt.

Hibbles wrote:My personal opinion has been 'never bomb any part of the actual station as a non-antag for any reason, yes, even blobs and wizards and shit' but that's just IMO. At very best you've killed something that deserved it and in the process punched a big old hole through your own station, endangering everyone and requiring the effort of repairs and reconstructing the possibly hundreds of items and structures you wiped out. And if you're not careful, you've killed some people who really didn't deserve it as much, or even fucked over the entire round.

Sure, but this sort of thing is what interesting rounds are made of. It gets old fast if it happens all the time, but there should be some provision for a non-antag scientist who goes to the trouble of making bombs to feel like there's a solid chance for it all to pay off. I'd say just require the bomber to make a good faith effort to use it in a place and time that doesn't catch any innocents in the blast (maybe there will be one in maint nearby, but shit happens) and doesn't destroy any vital equipment (cloners, cryo, gravgen, singulo... comms console, maybe). We rely on antagonists to spice up rounds, but that doesn't mean that actions directly taken by antagonists are the only ones allowed to create hazards.

palpatine213 wrote:Collateral damage is the key difference between bombs and something like a toolbox or laser.
The gulag being blown up isn't as important as the fact that there was an innocent bystander there, who now is going to either suffocate or die from pressure loss due to the front part of the gulag being a gaping hole into space.
Guns and melee fights only hurt the person you are targeting, while bombs damage in a radius, and cause hull breaches.

I agree that it sucked about the collateral victim but there were 3 mitigating circumstances:

1) He wasn't killed directly by the bomb, rather he died when he walked up to the breach while already damaged to check out what happened and proceeded to die there from space exposure. There were still habitable areas of gulag even once a bomb has shredded off the entrance.

2) The officer fucking with me stated that the Gulag had gone unused.

3) With a brute pack, non-breached rooms, a radio, and a still usable shuttle (drop 2 chairs she's good as new) someone who really wanted to survive the blast could have. With radio you can whine until someone rides over in an EVA suit + Spare just to get you to shut up.


But more importantly it doesn't really address the ex-post ex-anti thing. If the officer had told me "OH MAN OLDMAN THE GULAGS FILLED TO THE BRIM WITH INNOCENT PRISONERS, BUT ILL MAKE ROOM FOR YOU" and I bombed her anyway giving 0 fucks about collateral.... but nobody else was hurt. Would that be better or worse than "The Gulags gone unused", me bombing a gulag that I reasonably assumed was desolate, and then it turns out that there was someone inside who ended up dying.

It seems we're leaning toward the former mentality, basically bombs are like playing Russian Roulette with your ban status. On the other hand it's a whole lot fucking easier to adjudicate "DID INNOCENTS DIE: Y/N?" than trying to piece together someone's mindset, knowledge, and intent when they detonated a bomb to figure out if they had a bannable mens rea. I don't feel too stongly about it, I've bombed the station plenty as a non-antag but I don't think I've ever eaten a ban for it (until now) because I do a pretty good job of ensuring nobody is caught in the blast and that seems a lot easier to defend than constantly playing the wildcard cop to the admin angry police sergeant (THAT WAS A DAMN GOOD BOMB ROBUSTIN BUT YOURE A LOOSE CANNON, INNOCENTS COULDVE DIED AND NOW THE CHIEF WANTS YOUR HEAD, TURN IN YOUR TOXINS BADGE ROBUSTIN), but I think that ex-anti approach is more fair than letting essentially luck decide if your bomb was bannable. Regardless of which side is right, it helps to understand which is actually our bomb policy.

Please don't make more situation-specific policies; more often than not they just encourage people to toe the line with interpretations. I would rather an admin pass their own judgement on a situation considering all factors, rather than having players punished because they broke one word of a specific rule that fails to consider all scenarios.

How about this?
If the bomber's not an antagonist, and the purpose of the bomb was either to kill other non-antagonists or cause significant damage to the station*, this is bad.

*If the purpose was to do something else, but this happened anyway (e.g. a Mining asteroid bomb that hit another miner)...
If the outcome was foreseeable and likely, it's bad.
If the bomber couldn't have predicted the outcome, it's alright.

The question you should ask yourself is, would a reasonable SS13 employee detonate high-yield explosives in this situation? (I say reasonable SS13 employee because otherwise you can't bomb anything ever.)

While I agree with what you say, Arete, I can't help but worry the same thing I do with the Low Rules stuff. A lot of things, if they were made okay to do once in a while, would indeed spice up the game and make it more fun/interesting. But if they move from Don't Do It to 'you can do it if you feel you have justification'...

Then it's going to happen. And not sometimes, but all the time. People inherently think they're justified as a rule, and when playing SS13 and mad, that number goes to almost 100 percent. "You can do this if you think you're in the right" = "You can do this" 90+ percent of the time. Hence what happens when the rules are actually lax over the long haul; it gets real, real old.

This might look off-topic but I think it applies to le bomba.

EDIT: Nightingale's policy also wouldn't bother me too much if we wanted to go in that direction.

Suggestion for bombing rules and death:

Normally we don't punish people for consequences they couldn't have known about (IE: Assistant breaking into a room was trying to get the clown out alive, assistant didnt spill the beans when arrested and clown died), but for bombings, you're using a WMD, and suffer a punishment equivalent to the results, not your intentions.

If you're detonating a bomb safely on the Toxins test range, and a passing engineer wiring the solars gets hit, that's a tragic workplace accident and the insurance companies take the blame.

TheNightingale wrote:If you're detonating a bomb safely on the Toxins test range, and a passing engineer wiring the solars gets hit, that's a tragic workplace accident and the insurance companies take the blame.

I was referring to situations like the Oldman Affair, where to his knowledge the area was deserted, but there was actually another guy, or if you detonated a bomb on the derelict and killed three engineers who were behind a wall.

You keep saying that he would be fine if he stayed away from the bombed area, I saw the damage in that screen shot, no area was safe, the whole thing was massively leaking into space.

Bombs render vast areas inhospitable, you are responsible for deaths caused by that.

You also destroyed the shuttle completely. There was no fucking way for that guy to escape.

You chose a max cap to implant, something that was almost guaranteed to cause collateral damage.

I would support changing the bombing rules into that what matters is if your bomb kills unrelated people you are held responsible for it, but to include those killed by the MASSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD it creates.

If you knowingly detonate a bomb, you're responsible for all the people that end up dead. Isn't that how it's always been?

Void Slayer wrote:You keep saying that he would be fine if he stayed away from the bombed area, I saw the damage in that screen shot, no area was safe, the whole thing was massively leaking into space.

Bombs render vast areas inhospitable, you are responsible for deaths caused by that.

You also destroyed the shuttle completely. There was no fucking way for that guy to escape.

You chose a max cap to implant, something that was almost guaranteed to cause collateral damage.

I would support changing the bombing rules into that what matters is if your bomb kills unrelated people you are held responsible for it, but to include those killed by the MASSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL HAZARD it creates.

Not to get into semantics but:

1) The equipment storage room would've been perfectly safe to remain in. Only one wall was damaged to the adjacent medical room and there was sufficient metal in the room and elsewhere to repair that wall.

2) The screenshots clearly show that the shuttle was still operational, you can see 5-6 tiles that made it back to the station. At that point you can get the shuttle functional in under 60 seconds just by going to EVA grabbing 2 suits (wearing one yourself) and then dropping a couple chairs on the empty tiles and telling AI to send the shuttle. Yes I clearly didn't make Darin's round any easier (well unless he had a big point goal and I could've secured his early release) but this sort of thing definitely falls into a grey area and frankly opinions are going to be colored by whether you already think I should've been banned for this. (Proban: OMG Oldman bombed an innocent crewmember and killed him, obvious ban, Antiban: The dude committed suicide in a hull breach, he was an idiot, Oldman not responsible etc.).

Odman, you bombed the station as a non-antag. I don't think anybody is going to take your side here.

Luke Cox wrote:Odman, you bombed the station as a non-antag. I don't think anybody is going to take your side here.

For some strange reason, quite a few people are because "he deserved it".

Luke Cox wrote:Odman, you bombed the station as a non-antag. I don't think anybody is going to take your side here.

Reading is FUNdamental.

It was the gulag. Lesser of two evils. not good, but not really as cut and dried either

Falamazeer wrote:

Luke Cox wrote:Odman, you bombed the station as a non-antag. I don't think anybody is going to take your side here.

Reading is FUNdamental.

It was the gulag. Lesser of two evils. not good, but not really as cut and dried either

Bombing anything (except for the mining asteroid for excavation purposes) as a non-antag is generally unacceptable.

Luke Cox wrote:

Falamazeer wrote:

Luke Cox wrote:Odman, you bombed the station as a non-antag. I don't think anybody is going to take your side here.

Reading is FUNdamental.

It was the gulag. Lesser of two evils. not good, but not really as cut and dried either

Bombing anything (except for the mining asteroid for excavation purposes) as a non-antag is generally unacceptable.

This. It's not "bombing is OK as non-antag unless XYZ", it's "bombing is not OK as non-antag unless XYZ". Killing another non-antag because they huwt your feewings isn't one of those reasons.

Taking you out of the round, in fact is a valid reason to kill a non antag.

lumipharon wrote:Taking you out of the round, in fact is a valid reason to kill a non antag.

Adminhelp exists

and people are encouraged to settle things IC wise, when possible.
Also it's meta to assume antag status or lack there of.

If some random shitler suddenly tried to space me or something, I'm goin to damn well try kill the fucker. I'd probably ahelp it AFTER the fact, just to let the admins know what happens, and to let them deal with it if it was a non antag.
But I'm not going to sit there doing nothing saying a-admins wil get you.

lumipharon wrote:If some random shitler suddenly tried to space me or something, I'm goin to damn well try kill the fucker. I'd probably ahelp it AFTER the fact, just to let the admins know what happens, and to let them deal with it if it was a non antag.

What if its a sec officer arresting you for a 200 point gulag sentence, because then you get to where this diverges from a random shitler trying to kill you forever.