/tg/Station 13

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.

I feel like this thread has descended into a false dilemnia of "let security do whatever they want forever" vs "I guess we have to let security be murdered if they arrest people now!"

It's possible to let security suffer consequences for bad behavior, whether from admins or player retaliation, without saying they're perma valid to anyone.

Kor wrote:I feel like this thread has descended into a false dilemnia of "let security do whatever they want forever" vs "I guess we have to let security be murdered if they arrest people now!"

It's possible to let security suffer consequences for bad behavior, whether from admins or player retaliation, without saying they're perma valid to anyone.

It probably has to do with the fact that the only "feasible" options offered so far would require adding new shit to the game specifically to push back against security or making admins pick up the slack when security is being shitcurity.

Both of those options are kinda fucky because getting people to agree on the security pushback feature will be a pain in the ass, and admins of course aren't going to want a higher workload just because shitcurity can't keep their murderboner in their pants.

Grazyn wrote:

Supermichael777 wrote:The real problem is that people see escalation as a permanent round thing when its not supposed to be

Once you disengage from the fight and are no longer at risk you LOSE the right to fight back with lethal force. You have lethal force justification if they come back for round 2 but you can't disengage, get healed, then go hunting for that valid. this especially apply if you get arrested. The fight is over, you lost, once the punishment is done you don't get to go DEATH DEATH MURDER RED. i see so many shitheads trying to pick fights so they can hunt someone all round its not funny. the kind of assholes who stay in the brig to have a punch-up with another detainee over a bar fight from an hour ago.

Actually escalation policy explicitly mentions that "Proportionate retribution is defined as a relatively equal amount of force applied to someone in revenge for an earlier attack". This means that even if you lose the initial confrontation (e.g. you got killed and cloned) you can go back for round 2. And 3, and 4 etc. Your right to revenge doesn't expire.

Now, it may be a meme, but most people really seem to apply the non-aggression principle when dealing with security, they never assume that sec might be in good faith and acting on incomplete or wrong information, they immediately believe that any coertion against themselves is malicious and outrageous, then use the full extent of their powers to get revenge from those who wronged them, even if it turns out to be the whole of security.

You misidentify what Supermichael is trying to say. He's saying that shitters will purposely start fights just so they can self-escalate themselves into 'I-can-murder-without-repurcussions' territory.

IE:

'I broke in, bashed a guy in the head and stole some of his equipment'
'Gee, this officer wants me arrested... You know what'd really piss him off? If I stunned him with contraband weaponry and constantly run away at any attempt of peaceful resolution '
'Oh that pissed them off, now I'm wanted and all points-bulletined by the security department. I should start stunning and slip-memeing all officers and stealing their guns if they drop now!'
'Whoa-ho, They're really after me now! I better start really getting into real war mode and start beating them to death after I stun them to get them off me!'
'Woopdie woo! They want me dead on sight now for killing officers. That means I get to kill them, they're going to kill me!

Circular self-escalation is one of the biggest problems security officers face, and it always means that every officer has to be aware that even a single justified arrest could mean that shitter could self-escalate themselves to be a massive problem in the round. And it's basically allowed by admins so long as they have an excuse just above 'They hurt my feelings.'

Saegrimr wrote:

Screemonster wrote:

J_Madison wrote: Antag and past history from previous rounds.

are you saying that as sec you will arrest someone for being an antag on a previous round

Please say yes please say yes please say yes

that's too easy.
nope I'm talking about the guy that ahelps because of improper escalation after he did the same shitty gimmick 5 games in a row under the same name and didn't expect to be treated differently.

TheWulfe wrote:

Grazyn wrote:

Supermichael777 wrote:The real problem is that people see escalation as a permanent round thing when its not supposed to be

Once you disengage from the fight and are no longer at risk you LOSE the right to fight back with lethal force. You have lethal force justification if they come back for round 2 but you can't disengage, get healed, then go hunting for that valid. this especially apply if you get arrested. The fight is over, you lost, once the punishment is done you don't get to go DEATH DEATH MURDER RED. i see so many shitheads trying to pick fights so they can hunt someone all round its not funny. the kind of assholes who stay in the brig to have a punch-up with another detainee over a bar fight from an hour ago.

Actually escalation policy explicitly mentions that "Proportionate retribution is defined as a relatively equal amount of force applied to someone in revenge for an earlier attack". This means that even if you lose the initial confrontation (e.g. you got killed and cloned) you can go back for round 2. And 3, and 4 etc. Your right to revenge doesn't expire.

Now, it may be a meme, but most people really seem to apply the non-aggression principle when dealing with security, they never assume that sec might be in good faith and acting on incomplete or wrong information, they immediately believe that any coertion against themselves is malicious and outrageous, then use the full extent of their powers to get revenge from those who wronged them, even if it turns out to be the whole of security.

You misidentify what Supermichael is trying to say. He's saying that shitters will purposely start fights just so they can self-escalate themselves into 'I-can-murder-without-repurcussions' territory.

IE:

'I broke in, bashed a guy in the head and stole some of his equipment'
'Gee, this officer wants me arrested... You know what'd really piss him off? If I stunned him with contraband weaponry and constantly run away at any attempt of peaceful resolution '
'Oh that pissed them off, now I'm wanted and all points-bulletined by the security department. I should start stunning and slip-memeing all officers and stealing their guns if they drop now!'
'Whoa-ho, They're really after me now! I better start really getting into real war mode and start beating them to death after I stun them to get them off me!'
'Woopdie woo! They want me dead on sight now for killing officers. That means I get to kill them, they're going to kill me!

Circular self-escalation is one of the biggest problems security officers face, and it always means that every officer has to be aware that even a single justified arrest could mean that shitter could self-escalate themselves to be a massive problem in the round. And it's basically allowed by admins so long as they have an excuse just above 'They hurt my feelings.'

Burer and Uhangi have been banned for literal years, it is time to let go.

And this still false dilemma nonsense. Nobody in this thread has argued you should be able to kill security after they try to arrest you for legitimate crimes.

But that doesn't mean security should be able to run death camps and gulag people for max points over nothing while breaking in everywhere and taking whatever they want while being shielded from IC consequences.

Can we bring up the fact that I have a huge thing for IAA again

It seems that ever since we joined the hub, that the quality of head roles / sec player. Has gone down the drain, and those roles are constantly being filled by new players or assholes. There isn't often anything you can do about it as it's almost always ruled as an IC issue. And if you have the audacity of trying to get some sort mild revenge, you not only have to deal with the player being a dick. But all of sec, all of command, the AI, and the crew. Because everyone seems willing to jump on the lynch he banwagon when you're trying to just put someone in their place. For brigging you for ten minutes for syndi-cakes and stealing your gloves and toolbelt.

That's the real issue I've noticed, that the crew / other players. Will 100% of the time believe whoever is playing sec / command, over a chef or a cargo tech. You can't get anything done by going to a lawyer if the warden is being a complete douchebag to you for the whole round. Because the captain is a new player ordering asteroid shuttle, and the HoS is so new he can't even figure out how to type. There is no quality standard for sec/command anymore. It's simple, if they're sec they're implanted and can't be an antag, so if you're complaining then you're just a grey tider who's whining about getting any sort of justice being dished out. If you're stun prodding the sec officer who did this to you and stealing all their gear to throw into space well you're just an antag, changeling, rev, wizard killing me at arrivals! Help!!

Kor wrote:Burer and Uhangi have been banned for literal years, it is time to let go.

And this still false dilemma nonsense. Nobody in this thread has argued you should be able to kill security after they try to arrest you for legitimate crimes.

But that doesn't mean security should be able to run death camps and gulag people for max point s over nothing while breaking in everywhere and taking whatever they want while being shielded from IC consequences.

Literally who? I could care less about what shitters you protect when they want to mess with security, I just semi-quoted from an old thread because it's relevant to the self-escalation officers face every round.

Dilemmas are what policy discussion is about. And legitimate crimes is constantly blurred into "they're 'messing with my round', time to fight back'".

why not deescalate the situation instead of escalating it? talk to their superior officer about what happened, most of the time the officer didn't even have malicious intent. or just give it up and do whatever you were doing before (Unless it's crime, in which case you were seeking revenge for a legitimate brigging). Both of those ideas are more likely to keep you in the round and not make security angry than prodding the arresting officer and starting a stationwide manhunt.

BeeSting12 wrote:why not deescalate the situation instead of escalating it? talk to their superior officer about what happened, most of the time the officer didn't even have malicious intent. or just give it up and do whatever you were doing before (Unless it's crime, in which case you were seeking revenge for a legitimate brigging). Both of those ideas are more likely to keep you in the round and not make security angry than prodding the arresting officer and starting a stationwide manhunt.

Alright, but sometimes that doesn't work. And when it doesn't, admins should step in.

If security has special protection, they need higher standards as well.

TheWulfe wrote:reeeeee

>guy is playing with a foam toy
>escapes arrest for it
>tries to turn himself in and return stolen gear repeatedly
>refuse and hunt him forever because security must never compromise
>make three threads complaining about it after he knocks you out (crits?) you and runs away
>still complain about it almost a year later and say security should never have rules ever and nobody should be allowed to stand against them

Seek help. Escalation baiting is against the rules, this is about a narrow set of circumstances that fall both under admin protection for the instigator and "IC issue" for the victim. Read the thread or stop posting in it.

Yes how dare he have an experience he had form their opinion.

Kor wrote: >refuse and hunt him forever because security must never compromise

that's the bit I don't get 'cause as far as I'm concerned if I'm sec and someone vanishes into maintenance to hide and nobody ever sees or hears from them again for the rest of the shift while they lay low then that's a better outcome than wasting time brigging them

Kor wrote:

TheWulfe wrote:reeeeee

-snip-
Seek help. Escalation baiting is against the rules, this is about a narrow set of circumstances that fall both under admin protection for the instigator and "IC issue" for the victim. Read the thread or stop posting in it.

This is not mannered discussion. Quit trying to gaslight any reaction I'm having to a past incident or a thread. I'm totally offhanded and as content and cool as a cucumber.

It's an experience I have as a security. Maybe the reason security is more or less impossible to deal with is because the crew is impossible to deal with. It's a Catch-22 for officer each time they wanna arrest someone, and hope to god they don't retaliate.

Last round, I arrested a clock cultist near the start. Several people began yelling on the radio that they wanted to join. They began PDA messaging his captured PDA. Here are their stories

Person A: Attempted to join cult at abandoned bar, tased, saved by others, fled, arrested later and implanted, left and got their implant taken out, PDAd again asking to join, captured, executed (and then they got banned when they adminhelped about it)

Person B: Attempted to join cult at abandoned bar, helped save others, tased, saved, tased again, saved again, kept trying to join, threw a spear at me, permabrigged, escaped, executed

Person C: Attempted to join cult at abandoned bar, stole my autorifle (I'd run out of non lethal ammo trying to tase five people in maint), fled, attacked me again and stole my taser (he now had a baton), offered his guns to the cult via PDA, arrested, executed.

Person D: Pulled person B away from me during an arrest, gulagged for 1k points.

Person E: Attempted to join cult at abandoned bar, again tried via PDA to do so in the bar, arrested, executed (my patience was gone by then).

I'm not arguing security shouldn't be brutal when it's needed, this is literally just "people shouldn't have free reign to grey tide but while wearing red"

There should never be an area of our rules where it is okay to grief another player, but bannable for them to retaliate. Either crack down on the original behavior, or allow retaliation.

I don't think this thread would even be controversial if not for

Jembo wrote:if they're sec they're implanted and can't be an antag, so if you're complaining then you're just a grey tider who's whining about getting any sort of justice being dished out.

TheWulfe wrote:

Kor wrote:

TheWulfe wrote:reeeeee

-snip-
Seek help. Escalation baiting is against the rules, this is about a narrow set of circumstances that fall both under admin protection for the instigator and "IC issue" for the victim. Read the thread or stop posting in it.

This is not mannered discussion. Quit trying to gaslight any reaction I'm having to a past incident or a thread. I'm totally offhanded and as content and cool as a cucumber.

It's an experience I have as a security. Maybe the reason security is more or less impossible to deal with is because the crew is impossible to deal with. It's a Catch-22 for officer each time they wanna arrest someone, and hope to god they don't retaliate.

It's not gas lighting to tell you to not turn this thread into another platform for the security victim/martyr complex.

If you need to be RULES FREE and allowed to gulag the clown half the round for slipping you once, or to break into medbay to steal everything rather than risk talking to the staff just because you had a bad incident with a greyshirt over a year ago, you're not cut out to play security.

If you don't do either of the above things, or similar, then this thread isn't about you, and you're not doing security any favours by valiantly defending silent pubbies who can't even set brig timers.

i don't blame sec, excepting the worst possible cases of abuse (usually be griefers or newbies, or both) there is no real way to tell the difference between harmless clown slip and murderous slip, and especially after a round or two playing a hunted animal it gets tiring to constantly be ambushed and killed with very little hope of survival. the second you are disabled you are dead with no recourse, and that's frustrating. as seen with the recent "metacomming shitcurity breaks into my department and wordlessly kidnaps my boss against his will, when i fight back I get banned" incident, it's mostly an admin problem. because that makes no goddamn sense.

It's not so much a complex when you play a game where you can be a literal victim and it models being smashed into a pulp pretty decently.

Kor wrote:Several people asked to join the cult

Isn't this heavily frowned upon? Non-antags explicitly searching to be antagged without good reason? I'm no rules lawyer so I'm not sure, but just something I'd thought I'd heard before.

Also, I don't get what point you're trying to prove in this spiel, other then that you had to deal with a lot of shitters while as a sec officer and you migrated from trying to gulag/imprison people to "executed", which is a fairly acceptable progression when a cult/pre-cult shitters are being a pain.

Kor wrote: There should never be an area of our rules where it is okay to grief another player, but bannable for them to retaliate. Either crack down on the original behavior, or allow retaliation.

How many "shitter griefing sec officers" are actually around? Is this a storm in a teapot of one or two? Because these people should be weeded out by the rules as stands. Perhaps note-giving needs to be more aggresive for security so that admins have a greater foundation of information to judge against when they receive a complaint against a sec officer?

Also re: the multiple "we only get shitsec when we're on hub", security is still a time restrained role and the fact is that on low pop its fairly frequent to get next to no or no sec officers says that regular players don't want to play sec.

Kor can try and dismiss the claim as "security martyr complex" but the fact is that if players don't want to play sec, theres something wrong, either witht he job itself or with the perception of it. Maybe fix that.

Arianya wrote:Isn't this heavily frowned upon?

It is and I fixed it.

lol you guys rezzed j_mad with this thread

the problem with security (why people don't want to play it) is mechanical, and threefold:

1. realistically it can't handle many team antagonists, at least on even ground, playing against team antagonists requires turbohitler level one million and contributes overwhelmingly to the negative perception of security OR requires non-turbohitler behavior in which case you will lose 100% of the time, usually dying piecemeal without anything exciting happening; security is a """"combat""""" role in that you should expect to see combat; for security, combat is usually "you are ambushed, stunned, instantly incapacitated and/or dead, usually by someone you did not know was a threat until they delivered a deathblow from stealth"

2. other than some grand catastrophe such as revolution or the cult(s) there is often very little to do until the end of (1) happens

3. it's a totally thankless job where you will be screamed at in OOC often for doing pretty much nothing and/or something, too much or too little.

the balance seesaw continually rocks (well, mostly in one direction, increased antagonist strength) while security gets nothing; every minor security buff is a 300 reply PR and will inevitably be shot down. security gets increasingly outclassed every month that goes by, with very little new content and a thankless job to do. the strength of security waned immensely after the slew of recent sillicon nerfs, which made security harder and more thankless; security was forced to operate with less intelligence with AIs that got tired of fruitlessly trying to prevent harm (by security, which it cannot oppose due to flash protection, or the crew which it cannot oppose due to numbers/lack of ability to incapacitate anything)

you can only really stack things so far before the swing becomes self-sustaining; buff antags, security gets weaker; less people play security. nerf sillicons, ditto, less security means less security strength relative to antagonist; means less security. the feedback loop continues until the modern day when i can't even name a HOS that i recognize because there simply aren't any.

i'd play it myself but it's more frustrating than AI at it's worst, and very frequently so.

tl;dr steelpoint and oldman were right and security is now ded

it's up to the maintainers to fix it and judging by the reception of oldman and steelpoint it will probably never be fixed

how did that go again i think it was "become a coder if you want to fix the game"
and then they got shut out

correct me if i'm wrong

I've been playing space station for 5 years, the only two reasons I don't play sec is because I find it boring. All the weapons and toys just handed to you at the start of the round make dealing with even the more OP antags easy. It's like a more complex game of rock paper scissors.

The other reason is I hate dealing with over aggressive or completely incompetent players. It's like someone will be going around e-magging doors and they'll get beaten to death and dismembered on the spot by captains and HoS. I feel like most players don't follow space law. Lel RP is an option, space law is a guide line that nobody follows. Clown slips somebody 10 minutes bucklecuffed, tries to break out of cuffs? Resisting arrest resets timer. Try to stop that sec player from abusing said player, or demote said sec officer? Halp *insert name* is a ling!! Killing me in the brig!!! It's fucking horrible to have to deal with said players, and I'd rather play a job role where you can get by without interacting with them.

Yep exactly. It's getting worse as stuck up players like Mekhi scream and harass you if you don't deal with things their way.

>am warden
>brigging a librarian who speared a guy for breaking something in the library
>giving him a whole minute
>mime rushes perma trying to free someone
>capture mime and go back
>mekhi screams WHO THE FUCK BUCKLECUFFED THE LIBRARIAN
>explain what happened
>OKAY BUT WHY IS HE BUCKLECUFFED YOU SHITTER
>again explain I had to stop someone
>KEK YOU ARE BAD

Just table mehki

arrest mekhi for insubordination

sign him up for 6 o clock tabling

I'd like to propose a policy in dealing with new players jumping into sec. Something like a two week whitelist, keeping players in other roles until they learn the controls and how to properly play the game. If they're a shit player then odds are they'll end up copping a ban if they're just around to grief. Maybe even push this for head roles as well, given the amount of incompetent / bad players that have been joining from the hub.

As for holding sec to a higher standard as they have more rule protection, most of their actions even if shitty are rules as IC issues. A way to handle this would be to do a strike style system. A person feels wronged by the person involved, but it ends up being an IC issue. If it's an issue that sec officer provoked and was rather awful but enough to cop a ban or warning. You'd just throw it in notes, and if a player builds up enough of these you'd issue a warning / job ban.

Jembo wrote:I'd like to propose a policy in dealing with new players jumping into sec. Something like a two week whitelist, keeping players in other roles until they learn the controls and how to properly play the game.

What is the difference between this and the time locks we already have on silicons/heads?

Ultimately the mechanical solutions will fail. The problem has to be tackled at its core. Goodcurity has to stamp out the shitcurity. HoS and Captain have to be held to the higher standards.

Lumbermancer wrote:HoS and Captain have to be held to the higher standards.

It's a pretty sad day when I feel safer with a randomname sec i've never seen than the HoS.

When I have AI set to high, CE to middle and HoS to low job preference I have around a 60% chance to spawn as HoS.

So keeping the job to higher standards is dandy, but there is already trouble keeping the role occupied in the first place.

What if we split the sec team in half and added a second HoS in high pop? This means your oversight is less difficult

We don't have enough good* HoSes to fill those roles.

* Good meaning people who play HoS without turning into TURBOMEGAHITLTER 4000 ValidHunt Edition

oranges wrote:What if we split the sec team in half and added a second HoS in high pop? This means your oversight is less difficult

>Two brigs on opposite sides of the station
>Blue and Red sec uniforms for Blue and Red HoS
>Blood feuds over whose valids belong to who
>Detective caught in the middle puts his .38 in his mouth rather than dealing with two HoSes fighting over who gets to use his expertise

Saegrimr wrote: What is the difference between this and the time locks we already have on silicons/heads?

None but given the admin protection sec is allowed, as well as all the tools they have to grief. I think it's fair that they should be treated with the same level of scrutiny no?

As Kor said it, it's nearly impossible to deal with sec ICly. If a sec officer does you injustice stealing your items, harassing you, brigging you / gulaging you for excessive amounts that don't merit the crime that you committed. Beating you into crit, leaving you bucklecuffed, pepper spraying you while you're waiting for your sentence to play out. Raising said timer, or just flat out killing you for any sort of resistance that you might exhibit while they're blatantly violating the Don't be a dick rule. All the while, if you adminhelp you get greeted with a IC issue.

How can Assistant Joe, deal with sec? Stun prod, and spears? I mean you're fighting a heavily armored sec personal with an auto I win button in the form of a flashbang. Let's say you do get the drop on said player? Guess who's gonna scream that you're X Y Z antag and that they're being killed. So now even though your actions are justified, you now have to deal with valid hunters, the AI, all of sec, all of command. So what's your options as a player? Killing them and spacing them knowing flat out that if you get caught just trying to exact some sorta revenge that you'll end up dismembered and dumped into perma, brig medical, spaced, or cremated in the chaplains office. Well I hope you're ready to get boinked by an admin for over escalation of a situation. But if you pm'd that you got killed trying to get any sorta payback? Well IC issue, you knew the risk when trying to take down the always trusted. Never wrong, never antags of the station known as sec.

Perhap's a Sargeant role, a second level head like the QM is to the HoP

I remember someone once suggested making the detective more comparable to the QM's role
the sargeant could be the detective

oranges wrote:Perhap's a Sargeant role, a second level head like the QM is to the HoP

Ignored, shit on, and overall frustrated at having to command an army of different coloured greytiders?

actually organizing security into squads or fireteams or whatever with visible markings (on armor, headgear, arms, whatever) probably won't achieve that much simply because security isn't very numerous anymore.

abuses go unchecked many times because there is nobody to check them; sillicons no longer are capable and sec itself is not knowledgeable or numerous enough.

part of the problem here is the "cry wolf" problem; when abuses are actually ongoing there's probably screaming on the radio, but there's always screaming on the radio. everybody's always screaming ; HEL PQIW FPGU SHITCURITY ARRESTAN MEI regardless if it's actually abuse or not. there used to be IC correction; when security was fully staffed and overwatched by a decent HOS, abusive or griefy officers would be dealt with; demoted, or killed if they refused to knock it off. secborgs could incapacitate them and door bolts would actually stop them.

with recent changes none of these things exist. good HOS all quit because of security's lack of attention, sillicons only have flashes now which security are immune to, most AIs have gotten tired of opposing something they have no ability to oppose and door bolts are easily circumvented by hitting the door with something.

tl;dr abusive security didn't used to be a problem and then all of the ways to deal with it were removed

Sec doesn't have the ability to stop other sec officers from being horrible. For example I was responding to a break in at the captains office. I managed to stun them but they kept getting back up before I could cuff them. So I kept stunning them, the HoS arrived and told me to stop and I said no, so they fired lethal lasers at me only two. Because I was refusing to follow orders then they stunned me with their baton. The ling got up and arm bladed me into crit and escaped. I later tired to arrest the HoS for assaulting me and letting the ling escape and I explained the situation to him while I was arresting him. I proceeded to get locked into the brig by the AI as I was giving the HoS his 5 minute brig timer. Until the AI let all of sec gather up outside with the captain before unbolting the doors to let them inside to lynch me. The only option for players dealing with horrible sec players is admin intervention or risk getting lynch mobbed by anyone willing to take the other side.

Stricter enforcement of Rule 1, problem solved.

DrPillzRedux wrote:Yep exactly. It's getting worse as stuck up players like Mekhi scream and harass you if you don't deal with things their way.

>am warden
>brigging a librarian who speared a guy for breaking something in the library
>giving him a whole minute
>mime rushes perma trying to free someone
>capture mime and go back
>mekhi screams WHO THE FUCK BUCKLECUFFED THE LIBRARIAN
>explain what happened
>OKAY BUT WHY IS HE BUCKLECUFFED YOU SHITTER
>again explain I had to stop someone
>KEK YOU ARE BAD

:^) that's because you are
i'm more reasonable to the /CREW/ than you think.
also I didn't even realize it was you after round ended i assumed you were some hubbie who didn't know how things worked as that's how it's been for like the last week of me playing security so I guess sorry?

Jembo wrote:Sec doesn't have the ability to stop other sec officers from being horrible. For example I was responding to a break in at the captains office. I managed to stun them but they kept getting back up before I could cuff them. So I kept stunning them, the HoS arrived and told me to stop and I said no, so they fired lethal lasers at me only two. Because I was refusing to follow orders then they stunned me with their baton. The ling got up and arm bladed me into crit and escaped. I later tired to arrest the HoS for assaulting me and letting the ling escape and I explained the situation to him while I was arresting him. I proceeded to get locked into the brig by the AI as I was giving the HoS his 5 minute brig timer. Until the AI let all of sec gather up outside with the captain before unbolting the doors to let them inside to lynch me. The only option for players dealing with horrible sec players is admin intervention or risk getting lynch mobbed by anyone willing to take the other side.

Jesus fuck that AI needs a ban.

Saegrimr wrote:Guys what if

wait

no what if

we ban shitty sec players from sec

I still think this is the best solution to this problem. I know it's extra work for the admins, and there's a lot of grey area and opinions regarding what's reasonable to do as a security officer - but I think there are plenty of times where it's abundantly clear that the security officer is either wildly inexperienced or blatantly in the wrong. If you're giving someone a 10 minute sentence, bucklecuffed to the bed for petty theft, it should be noted. If you summarily execute someone for trying to disarm an officer without any other extenuating circumstances, they should eat a sec ban. Yeah, you're security, and yeah you're a target in literally every roundtype, but if you off someone (or do the equivalent, by stripping and throwing them in perma) because they *might* hurt you, you should suffer the same consequences as the greyshirt who killed another greyshirt because "he *might* have tried to kill me since he disarmed me". I know we're strapped for good security officers, but having fewer is better than being flooded with morons who will accidentally or willfully ruin other player's rounds, or are otherwise just walking loot crates to traitors.

I've always been a fan of more admin intervention when it comes to player shittery. Sure, there are plenty of times when it's more fun to let the game take it's course, but this is not one of those times. Incidentally, I feel the same way about security cyborgs. Secborg was one of my favorite roles, yet it got removed because so many fucking incompetent players couldn't follow their laws that they removed the role instead of dealing with the shitters. And the people who abused security cyborgs are probably now abusing the human counterpart.


As far as why security is hard to fill: It is nigh-impossible not to burn out playing security. This is /tg/ station, where the traitors are robust and being lenient will get you killed. I used to main security way back when I started playing, and it's exhausting. To survive, you're forced to take no chances and give no quarter. You will get killed, a lot. You will get killed even more if you try to be nice. You will get killed, yelled at, and shit on for doing your job and doing it well. When I played security, I remember being relatively lenient and friendly compared to the other sec players I usually played with. It was still the most thankless job I've played on the station, and I constantly got cussed out by people in game and out of game. This means that the primary form of your enjoyment is almost never through player interaction. It's through "winning" the game by redtexting every antag you cross paths with. Which of course means that if you don't succeed in "winning", you've "lost". Without sounding overly dramatic, I've found that it's just emotionally exhausting to play security for any extended period of time. There's very little incentive to play it at all unless you think you can "win". And to win you have to be ruthless. Which, honestly, ties into why people are oftentimes such shit and completely abuse their position. You either stop playing a hero, or you play long enough to see yourself become Hitler.


As for fixes? Mechanically, I think that there should be more incentives to play security outside of "winning". How you could accomplish that is a pretty tough debacle. As for people being shit, I think admin intervention is the best course. Nothing IC or mechanically is going to stop people from abusing their position when they're at the top of the pyramid. And encouraging people to retaliate against sec or the HoS as nonantags because they're being shit is only going to cause more issues. And it'll make even less people want to play security. Just nip that shit in the bud and try to keep sec players in line.


TL;DR Being a shitty/abusive sec player should net you notes/sec bans. It's better than having it staffed with awful players. And sec is a hard position to fill because it's usually only enjoyable if you're redtexting antags and is otherwise exhausting to play.

just got off a round with someone who played security. they walked into science and shot a golem in one of the labs FNR and shot me when I tried to free the golem as a security officer. said that if you aren't killing anyone you're allowed to kill you're playing security wrong. literally said i should validhunt anyone who can be valided.
next round rushed promotion to HOS, asked captain to let him perma a clown for /walking into/ (not breaking in!) the brig, criticized me over helping the golem the PREVIOUS ROUND, captain thought he was a good choice somehow and i was just completely done with security at that moment and fucked off because I can't deal with shitters who get put into a HoS role and captains who side with said shitters. Traitors hijacked the shuttle and I barely gave a fuck.

also pillz this is exactly the type of player that made me assume you were just bucklecuffing him FNR because so many people do random bullshit as security.

kevinz000 wrote:just got off a round with someone who played security. they walked into science and shot a golem in one of the labs FNR and shot me when I tried to free the golem as a security officer. said that if you aren't killing anyone you're allowed to kill you're playing security wrong. literally said i should validhunt anyone who can be valided.
next round rushed promotion to HOS, asked captain to let him perma a clown for /walking into/ (not breaking in!) the brig, criticized me over helping the golem the PREVIOUS ROUND, captain thought he was a good choice somehow and i was just completely done with security at that moment and fucked off because I can't deal with shitters who get put into a HoS role and captains who side with said shitters. Traitors hijacked the shuttle and I barely gave a fuck.

also pillz this is exactly the type of player that made me assume you were just bucklecuffing him FNR because so many people do random bullshit as security.

Did you ahelp it

Maybe ban requests and secborgs weren't so bad after all.

Arianya wrote:

kevinz000 wrote:just got off a round with someone who played security. they walked into science and shot a golem in one of the labs FNR and shot me when I tried to free the golem as a security officer. said that if you aren't killing anyone you're allowed to kill you're playing security wrong. literally said i should validhunt anyone who can be valided.
next round rushed promotion to HOS, asked captain to let him perma a clown for /walking into/ (not breaking in!) the brig, criticized me over helping the golem the PREVIOUS ROUND, captain thought he was a good choice somehow and i was just completely done with security at that moment and fucked off because I can't deal with shitters who get put into a HoS role and captains who side with said shitters. Traitors hijacked the shuttle and I barely gave a fuck.

also pillz this is exactly the type of player that made me assume you were just bucklecuffing him FNR because so many people do random bullshit as security.

Did you ahelp it

My mistake for not doing so but no as golems ARE ruled valid so I'm assuming it'll be brushed off.

kevinz000 wrote:

Arianya wrote:

kevinz000 wrote:just got off a round with someone who played security. they walked into science and shot a golem in one of the labs FNR and shot me when I tried to free the golem as a security officer. said that if you aren't killing anyone you're allowed to kill you're playing security wrong. literally said i should validhunt anyone who can be valided.
next round rushed promotion to HOS, asked captain to let him perma a clown for /walking into/ (not breaking in!) the brig, criticized me over helping the golem the PREVIOUS ROUND, captain thought he was a good choice somehow and i was just completely done with security at that moment and fucked off because I can't deal with shitters who get put into a HoS role and captains who side with said shitters. Traitors hijacked the shuttle and I barely gave a fuck.

also pillz this is exactly the type of player that made me assume you were just bucklecuffing him FNR because so many people do random bullshit as security.

Did you ahelp it

My mistake for not doing so but no as golems ARE ruled valid so I'm assuming it'll be brushed off.

metagrudging someone for taking a side other than them on a previous round isn't fuckin' valid though

Screemonster wrote:

kevinz000 wrote:

Arianya wrote:"kevinz000"]just got off a round with someone who played security. they walked into science and shot a golem in one of the labs FNR and shot me when I tried to free the golem as a security officer. said that if you aren't killing anyone you're allowed to kill you're playing security wrong. literally said i should validhunt anyone who can be valided.
next round rushed promotion to HOS, asked captain to let him perma a clown for /walking into/ (not breaking in!) the brig, criticized me over helping the golem the PREVIOUS ROUND, captain thought he was a good choice somehow and i was just completely done with security at that moment and fucked off because I can't deal with shitters who get put into a HoS role and captains who side with said shitters. Traitors hijacked the shuttle and I barely gave a fuck.

also pillz this is exactly the type of player that made me assume you were just bucklecuffing him FNR because so many people do random bullshit as security.

Did you ahelp it

My mistake for not doing so but no as golems ARE ruled valid so I'm assuming it'll be brushed off.

metagrudging someone for taking a side other than them on a previous round isn't fuckin' valid though[/quote]

Didn't actually metagrudge but made a very fucking snarky comment about "OH GLAD YOU DONT DEFEND HOSTILE SPACE CARP LIKE YOU DEFENDED THAT GOLEM"
Everything in my posts are paraphrased but the general meaning will always be accurate :/ could pull logs if you want exact quotes lmao

kevinz000 wrote:

Arianya wrote:

kevinz000 wrote:just got off a round with someone who played security. they walked into science and shot a golem in one of the labs FNR and shot me when I tried to free the golem as a security officer. said that if you aren't killing anyone you're allowed to kill you're playing security wrong. literally said i should validhunt anyone who can be valided.
next round rushed promotion to HOS, asked captain to let him perma a clown for /walking into/ (not breaking in!) the brig, criticized me over helping the golem the PREVIOUS ROUND, captain thought he was a good choice somehow and i was just completely done with security at that moment and fucked off because I can't deal with shitters who get put into a HoS role and captains who side with said shitters. Traitors hijacked the shuttle and I barely gave a fuck.

also pillz this is exactly the type of player that made me assume you were just bucklecuffing him FNR because so many people do random bullshit as security.

Did you ahelp it

My mistake for not doing so but no as golems ARE ruled valid so I'm assuming it'll be brushed off.

Was it a lab golem or a lavaland golem

I don't think lab golems are valid unless they are seen helping an antag