Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

General SS13 Chat
User avatar
Coconutwarrior97
In-Game Head Admin
 
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:14 am
Byond Username: Coconutwarrior97

Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Coconutwarrior97 » Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:10 am #563671

Looking over alot of stuff and how Manuel is going to proceed going forward.
I think some better guidelines for administrators need to be established regarding it which will help make more consistent rulings and encourage interaction on the server.
So I apologize for some of the delay with answering Manuel policy threads, they will be handled in time.

Some thoughts for now:
I believe good faith, effort, and interaction should be the principle standard upon which rulings are decided.
I do not want Manuel to be a "Lets all be friends!" server where conflict is minimal; chaos and crisis are integral to SS13.
I do not like greytiding at all, avoids interaction and it has no place in MRP.
You can't expect a traitor to not kill the two people who watched them just murder someone, its part of the game.

I can answer some general questions or whatever here if you want, and take some feedback, this was mainly a status update.



cybersaber101
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2019 1:30 am
Location: Canada, eh?
Byond Username: Cybersaber101

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby cybersaber101 » Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:25 am #563674

Will you ask for input outside of the forum? the forum community is very small.
The same poster, over and over and over and over and over and-

User avatar
Coconutwarrior97
In-Game Head Admin
 
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:14 am
Byond Username: Coconutwarrior97

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Coconutwarrior97 » Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:31 am #563675

cybersaber101 wrote:Will you ask for input outside of the forum? the forum community is very small.

I believe the forum is sufficient, and the best medium for me to get thoughts on it.

User avatar
carshalash
 
Joined: Sat Aug 26, 2017 4:57 am
Byond Username: Carshalash

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby carshalash » Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:36 am #563676

How about that game mode change that people have been talking about?

User avatar
Coconutwarrior97
In-Game Head Admin
 
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:14 am
Byond Username: Coconutwarrior97

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Coconutwarrior97 » Tue Jun 02, 2020 1:37 am #563677

carshalash wrote:How about that game mode change that people have been talking about?

It'll be handled in time, the main thing is to figure out the general direction of the server first.

User avatar
confused rock
 
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 12:18 am
Byond Username: The unloved rock

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby confused rock » Tue Jun 02, 2020 2:16 am #563681

this is the weirdest thing I'll ever say but I feel like whitelists might be perfect for a mediumrp environment. the ideal of mediumrp is allowing all the unique situations of lowrp with the actual effort of highrp. whitelists could be the only way to enforce """good faith""" which i also believe is ideal. but not being part of the whitelist is the most painful feeling known to man so I'm not saying do this but someone will bring up whitelists eventually
Image
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
PKPenguin321
In-Game Game Master
 
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2014 7:02 pm
Location: U S A, U S A, U S A
Byond Username: PKPenguin321
Github Username: PKPenguin321

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby PKPenguin321 » Tue Jun 02, 2020 2:36 am #563682

Coconutwarrior97 wrote:I do not want Manuel to be a "Lets all be friends!" server where conflict is minimal; chaos and crisis are integral to SS13.

pls consider looking at viewtopic.php?f=33&p=563641
i play Lauser McMauligan. clown name is Cold-Ass Honkey
i have three other top secret characters as well.
tell the best admin how good he is
Spoiler:
Image

User avatar
Coconutwarrior97
In-Game Head Admin
 
Joined: Fri Oct 06, 2017 3:14 am
Byond Username: Coconutwarrior97

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Coconutwarrior97 » Tue Jun 02, 2020 2:51 am #563685

PKPenguin321 wrote:
Coconutwarrior97 wrote:I do not want Manuel to be a "Lets all be friends!" server where conflict is minimal; chaos and crisis are integral to SS13.

pls consider looking at viewtopic.php?f=33&p=563641

I've looked at it. This falls under what I stated previously, "It'll be handled in time, the main thing is to figure out the general direction of the server first."

User avatar
BangingDonk
 
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 11:34 pm
Byond Username: BangingDonk

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby BangingDonk » Tue Jun 02, 2020 5:37 am #563697

A lot of us have been encouraged to actually sit down and think about what they want from MRP in the first place, and specifically from Manuel, so I sat down during my breaks and thought about what I want. Some of this needs to be taken with a grain of salt since I keep weird hours and typically only play during medium or low pop.

1: Conflict. I want things to happen. As a result, I don't necessarily think that things like mass murder or bombing and certainly not the clown car to be banned on MRP. These sorts of things bring conflict and give multiple departments things to do. A person with a “die a glorious death” objective going down the halls with dual revolvers and an armored vest on shooting folks is one thing. It's another when you get a grey suit gas mask double e-sword assistant systematically murdering the entire station and forcing recalls because they aren't done yet. A scientist actually using maxcaps every so often can be engaging for both survivors and engineering. When it happens every round is when the problem happens.

2: ' Staying in your Lane’. I disagree with the idea that if you aren't a specific job that you can never do it. But if there's a doctor in medbay, and you're an engineer, and the captain is dead? Let the doctor do the work on them, even if the engineer’s player is actually better at doing medical. A lot of folks on /tg/ have been around for quite a while and as such, are fairly close to omnicompetent. But I have absolutely had people seethe at getting shoved aside because somebody thinks (rightly or not) that they can do the job faster. Lowpop means people need to be skilled in a lot more things than normal, yes, but if you actually have staffed departments, let them handle it. It doesn't matter if they aren't good at it -- they'll never GET good at it unless you let them.

As a corollary to this, let sec be sec. Absolutely defend yourself, but unless it's a station threat that could end the entire round (blob, war ops, etc): if there's actual security around and they're there to do their job, let them do it. If you're John Q Engineer, and somebody busts into your workspace with a weapon, your goal should be reporting and disengagement, rather than stunprodding and throwing them into the SM.

3: Roleplay. I think it's safe to say that people on Manuel care about their statics. As such, it should be reasonable to expect an environment in which they can actually express opinions on things beyond just work without being treated like they're some kind of maniac for caring about what someone thinks. I think in-world memes are fine, things like Cuban Pete and Robusting are totally within the scope of what people would do. Heck, I even like Free Bindy, even if most people don't even know who that is anymore. What id like to NOT see is yet another sentient virus named Covid-19, or a black assistant straight out of Habbo Hotel named “Dindu Nuffin” whose sole purpose in life is to break things. And I definitely don't want to see the latter fucking with people trying to do roleplay -- id rather get shot by a traitor in the middle of a bar than have somebody steal a persons wheelchair just to have fire extinguisher races with the clown.

Roleplay on Manuel doesn't need to be high art. Honestly, it just needs to be somewhere around like an old ass radio show where people you recognize interact with, befriend, and betray other people you recognize.

I'm sure there's more than this, but this is a starting point I guess. In short? I want Manuel to be like the tabletop game Paranoia XP or Sealab 2021 -- potentially serious, frequently deadly, and sometimes you have to perform surgery with a toilet plunger and play it dead straight because that's just how things are going today.

This went long, but like I said at the start, we were asked to give it some serious thought. So I did.

User avatar
confused rock
 
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 12:18 am
Byond Username: The unloved rock

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby confused rock » Tue Jun 02, 2020 5:59 am #563699

The spot manuel is in right now feels like half the people treating it as norp and half the people treating it as highrp. I'm not sure which is more of a problem.
Image
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
XivilaiAnaxes
 
Joined: Sat May 11, 2019 7:13 am
Byond Username: XivilaiAnaxes

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby XivilaiAnaxes » Tue Jun 02, 2020 6:47 am #563708

BangingDonk wrote:If you're John Q Engineer, and somebody busts into your workspace with a weapon, your goal should be reporting and disengagement, rather than stunprodding and throwing them into the SM.

"um why did you kill greg?"

"he had an esword and tried to murk me"

"um buddy you need to 'disengage and report' stay in your lane"

"Sec is literally just 1 guy with 5 rounds"

"well that means you should just accept your death or run away endlessly since you're his target"

This is straight stupid - as long as John Q Engineer doesn't decide to chase this guy out of the department and then validhunt him across the station you shouldn't be bwoinked.
Stickymayhem wrote:Imagine the sheer narcisssim required to genuinely believe you are this intelligent.

Jack7D1
 
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:00 am
Byond Username: Jack7D1

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Jack7D1 » Tue Jun 02, 2020 12:42 pm #563740

Donk got it right in the nose.

User avatar
vkalls
 
Joined: Tue Jun 02, 2020 6:16 pm
Byond Username: Vincent Kallstrom

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby vkalls » Tue Jun 02, 2020 6:32 pm #563796

I think that sec should be more regulated on Manuel. Right now they are extremely powerful because they know all the antag tricks. This is probably very hard to make policy for but I think the general direction should be to make sec less powergamey and more focused on roleplay.
Image

User avatar
RaveRadbury
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2019 3:41 am
Location: BK ChatZone
Byond Username: RaveRadbury
Github Username: RaveRadbury

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby RaveRadbury » Tue Jun 02, 2020 7:07 pm #563798

vkalls wrote:I think that sec should be more regulated on Manuel. Right now they are extremely powerful because they know all the antag tricks. This is probably very hard to make policy for but I think the general direction should be to make sec less powergamey and more focused on roleplay.


The solution is to make sec antag naive.
How's my administrating? Call 1-800-RADBURY
ImageImageImage
Heart Emoji ~ Winter Ball Queen 2019

User avatar
confused rock
 
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 12:18 am
Byond Username: The unloved rock

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby confused rock » Tue Jun 02, 2020 11:14 pm #563838

"reporting and disagreement" and especially "antag naive" are both things that shouldn't exist on MEDIUMrp. people will toe that line as much as possible and more importantly it's an extremely boring line that nobody will like to feign ignorance of every round. Mediumrp can be the best of both worlds, or it can be the worst of both worlds, with all the ridiculous names and races of tg which make immersion hard while having all the annoying restrictions of highrp.

Just please god no more rulesets literally ripped from goon with no changes i beg you
Last edited by confused rock on Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:03 am, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
wesoda25
 
Joined: Thu Aug 10, 2017 9:32 pm
Byond Username: Wesoda25

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby wesoda25 » Tue Jun 02, 2020 11:22 pm #563841

RaveRadbury wrote:
vkalls wrote:I think that sec should be more regulated on Manuel. Right now they are extremely powerful because they know all the antag tricks. This is probably very hard to make policy for but I think the general direction should be to make sec less powergamey and more focused on roleplay.


The solution is to make sec antag naive.

No thanks!

Ivuchnu
 
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2020 10:07 am
Byond Username: Ivuchnu

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Ivuchnu » Tue Jun 02, 2020 11:29 pm #563846

No thanks! x2
Heal w. water/starlight/rads +self-resp
Not happy with game, not happy with code.

User avatar
BangingDonk
 
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 11:34 pm
Byond Username: BangingDonk

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby BangingDonk » Tue Jun 02, 2020 11:48 pm #563850

I guess my thoughts on reporting and disengagement were either not phrased as well as I could and/or were more contentious than I would have thought.

What I really want from that is for people to leave antagonist hunting primarily to sec, and that antags should, ideally, be arrested instead of murdered with exceptions for nuke ops and the like.

If someone is in your workspace trying to fuck you up, call it out, but don't just sit there and take it either. You can beat them up to crit, even, but you shouldn't ideally round remove someone for trying to steal the magboots and, in my ideal game setting, you shouldn't be going on a manhunt unless you're sec.

User avatar
XivilaiAnaxes
 
Joined: Sat May 11, 2019 7:13 am
Byond Username: XivilaiAnaxes

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby XivilaiAnaxes » Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:15 am #563854

I agree on the "no going on manhunts" point, but using your department's sacred tools on intruders is a god given right - trying to murk you in the robotics lab is basically asking to be borged - same with attacking the engine room.
Stickymayhem wrote:Imagine the sheer narcisssim required to genuinely believe you are this intelligent.

Shikarego
 
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2017 2:20 pm
Byond Username: Shikarego

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Shikarego » Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:15 am #563855

Idk if this falls under the umbrella of this thread, but round-enders like meteors, xenos, and wiz need to be tweaked or removed.

I can't find anything fun about meteors. At all.
Xenos have those fat stuns.
Remove wiz.
I've also heard some solid arguments about cult on manny, namely that it similarly removes the ability to RP by being a shuttle call TDM. I like cult, but I think proponents of such arguments are onto something.

I also think the pop-cap should be revisited. Sometimes I'll join at 50+ and somehow there are important jobs unstaffed in sci, medical, or engi.

I'm tempted to go on to talk about how it seems the Manny playerbase feels alienated by the direction the coders have been taking the game, but I'm not sure if that would be relevant. This OP is pretty vague.

User avatar
BangingDonk
 
Joined: Sat Jun 07, 2014 11:34 pm
Byond Username: BangingDonk

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby BangingDonk » Wed Jun 03, 2020 12:26 am #563858

XivilaiAnaxes wrote:I agree on the "no going on manhunts" point, but using your department's sacred tools on intruders is a god given right - trying to murk you in the robotics lab is basically asking to be borged - same with attacking the engine room.


I'm willing to disagree with you on this one but with the caveat being that neither of us are inherently wrong. I agree with the concept of what is effectively space castle doctrine, but the wiggly points are how far you can and/or should go.

Go with god, weird Roman man.

User avatar
confused rock
 
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 12:18 am
Byond Username: The unloved rock

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby confused rock » Wed Jun 03, 2020 2:13 am #563890

talked about what antags themselves should be allowed to do, in regards to murderbone. I think there's a difference between murderbone and killing someone for a weak reason, and antagonists should be allowed to do the latter. It's not too hard to tell a murderbone from a murder, but the reason I think this is important is so we don't get into a situation where someone acts aggressively towards an antag because they know the antag can't hurt them too bad, just like how we shouldn't have antags going friendly because they know security acting againt them would be seen as validhunting. Antags should be seen as dangerous by everyone, and knowing that they could kill YOU for no reason at all is important, even if they can't kill EVERYONE for no reason.

Basically, antags should be able to kill someone for a flimsy reason here and there because the crew needs reason to fear antags. An traitor killing another scientist for using the research points on the wrong thing or for working in xenobio when he wants to work there alone is a crazy threat that should exist. If you see sec put up a wanted poster for your coworker you could be protective of them because they're your friend, but people should also be able to have the reaction that that coworker is an actual danger towards you and everyone else in the crew.

I'm reminded of an attempt at banning murderbone ScaredofShadows did where I recall he tried to set a limit on how many innocent people antags could kill? it was pretty dumb to have it that concrete now I can vaguely see how such a limit could be useful.
Image
Image
Image
Image

User avatar
XivilaiAnaxes
 
Joined: Sat May 11, 2019 7:13 am
Byond Username: XivilaiAnaxes

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby XivilaiAnaxes » Wed Jun 03, 2020 2:54 am #563902

confused rock wrote:talked about what antags themselves should be allowed to do, in regards to murderbone. I think there's a difference between murderbone and killing someone for a weak reason, and antagonists should be allowed to do the latter. It's not too hard to tell a murderbone from a murder, but the reason I think this is important is so we don't get into a situation where someone acts aggressively towards an antag because they know the antag can't hurt them too bad, just like how we shouldn't have antags going friendly because they know security acting againt them would be seen as validhunting. Antags should be seen as dangerous by everyone, and knowing that they could kill YOU for no reason at all is important, even if they can't kill EVERYONE for no reason.

Basically, antags should be able to kill someone for a flimsy reason here and there because the crew needs reason to fear antags. An traitor killing another scientist for using the research points on the wrong thing or for working in xenobio when he wants to work there alone is a crazy threat that should exist. If you see sec put up a wanted poster for your coworker you could be protective of them because they're your friend, but people should also be able to have the reaction that that coworker is an actual danger towards you and everyone else in the crew.

I'm reminded of an attempt at banning murderbone ScaredofShadows did where I recall he tried to set a limit on how many innocent people antags could kill? it was pretty dumb to have it that concrete now I can vaguely see how such a limit could be useful.

I agree with pretty much all of this - and I would like to add regarding donk's view that I feel you certainly shouldn't be validhunting antags in your own department (If a clown antag breaks into the engine he's engine food, but if it's another engineer and you think he has tator gear then unless he actually does something to you or the engine you should either leave him be or let someone else know so they can handle it).
Stickymayhem wrote:Imagine the sheer narcisssim required to genuinely believe you are this intelligent.

User avatar
YuiY1997
 
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2019 2:57 am
Byond Username: YuiY1997

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby YuiY1997 » Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:26 am #563929

I think one of the biggest problems with manuel is everyone is perpetually afraid of conflict of any kind. Just about every conflict I've been in has been ended with a bwoink and it's silly. People will ahelp whenever they get killed. This might be more of a culture thing, since most people just want to bitch about any conflict being a bagil moment, but conflict is what actually drives rounds. It would be nice to have more standard MRP escalation rules so you actually know what kind of conflict is and isn't allowed. Both admins and players are bother OOC too often for shit that should be IC, but it's vague what is and isnt' because of the rules.


Another thing I think needs more specific rules are AI laws. I get in trouble for being goofy with AI laws, but mods can never agree on what's past the point of too goofy.
Image

Jack7D1
 
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:00 am
Byond Username: Jack7D1

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Jack7D1 » Wed Jun 03, 2020 10:58 am #563963

YuiY1997 wrote:I think one of the biggest problems with manuel is everyone is perpetually afraid of conflict of any kind. Just about every conflict I've been in has been ended with a bwoink and it's silly. People will ahelp whenever they get killed. This might be more of a culture thing, since most people just want to bitch about any conflict being a bagil moment, but conflict is what actually drives rounds. It would be nice to have more standard MRP escalation rules so you actually know what kind of conflict is and isn't allowed. Both admins and players are bother OOC too often for shit that should be IC, but it's vague what is and isnt' because of the rules.


Another thing I think needs more specific rules are AI laws. I get in trouble for being goofy with AI laws, but mods can never agree on what's past the point of too goofy.

This is why we're here. What would you like to see?

User avatar
Shadowflame909
 
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 10:18 pm
Location: Think about something witty and pretend I put it here
Byond Username: Shadowflame909

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Shadowflame909 » Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:45 am #563965

I would like to be a geneticist traitor, kidnap the captain, remove their implant, hypno flash them, put them in the genetics machine, steal their identity, give them mine. Have them hold me hostage (the fake captain) in an attempt to complete my objectives.

When security valids them and kills them, I will be free, and loot my objectives off their dead rotten corpse

it is the perfect ss13 thriller with the biggest twist of them all

The reason I can't do this is that on MRP I cannot lure the captain to follow me into maint with delicious sweets.

We aint there yet fellas.

I suggest adding a gullible rule to MRP. Or a guideline that incentivizes people generally to be more trusting. Like the assistant in maint with a mop cleaning up the blood tracks, not because he's a traitor but because he wanted to do the janitors job for him, wink.
Last edited by Shadowflame909 on Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

Spoiler:
Image

ThanatosRa wrote:My biggest problem is that I can't fix any of this.


Boris wrote:shadowflame either has a brain the size of a pea or one the size of the moon and he's playing 58D chess.


BeeSting12 wrote:please write an apology to this forums, this community, the host, and the internet as a whole for the data storage space you wasted with this complaint.


BebeYoshi wrote:Saltyflame909


Cobby wrote:The trash bin... have you lost your way home anon?

Jack7D1
 
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:00 am
Byond Username: Jack7D1

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Jack7D1 » Wed Jun 03, 2020 11:46 am #563966

Shadowflame909 wrote:I would like to be a geneticist traitor, kidnap the captain, remove their implant, hypno flash them, put them in the genetics machine, steal their identity, give them mine. Have them hold me hostage (the fake captain) in an attempt to complete my objectives.

When security valids them and kills them, I will be free, and loot my objectives off their dead rotten corpse

it is the perfect ss13 thriller with the biggest twist of them all

Stolen

Kryson
Code Maintainer
 
Joined: Thu Nov 29, 2018 11:04 pm
Byond Username: Kryson

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Kryson » Wed Jun 03, 2020 1:52 pm #563971

Some greytiding is essential to giving sec something to do that isn't super high stakes and prevents people from being able to metagame who is the antag.

User avatar
YuiY1997
 
Joined: Mon Aug 26, 2019 2:57 am
Byond Username: YuiY1997

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby YuiY1997 » Wed Jun 03, 2020 4:37 pm #563990

Jack7D1 wrote:
YuiY1997 wrote:I think one of the biggest problems with manuel is everyone is perpetually afraid of conflict of any kind. Just about every conflict I've been in has been ended with a bwoink and it's silly. People will ahelp whenever they get killed. This might be more of a culture thing, since most people just want to bitch about any conflict being a bagil moment, but conflict is what actually drives rounds. It would be nice to have more standard MRP escalation rules so you actually know what kind of conflict is and isn't allowed. Both admins and players are bother OOC too often for shit that should be IC, but it's vague what is and isnt' because of the rules.


Another thing I think needs more specific rules are AI laws. I get in trouble for being goofy with AI laws, but mods can never agree on what's past the point of too goofy.

This is why we're here. What would you like to see?


I mean you know more but I think that the current escalation laws need to center around not round removing people instead of not causing violent conflicts.

I think security needs clearer rules as to when you should be able to use lethal force. A lot of the time there are situations you know are about to be a fucking shitshow but you have to lovetap them with a disabler before they get to use the lethals first. I understand security is supposed to be held to a higher standard in terms of escalation, but it does get a bit silly.

I think people should be able to resist arrest violently so long as they don't hurt any non sec or command if only because it gives sec more to do. On manuel sec usually dont do much unless there's a massive fucking problem or unless the clown needs beating.

IC disagreements can and should leave to death if the escalate, just not round removal. A good example is when a head is being an asshole and gets robusted. It is inherently difficult to make rules about that in particular since most people have different levels of tolerance for condomry.

Most of these are already a thing, the thing is it's just not really always in writing. I really like the direction that policy is going in when it comes to wanting conflict to drive rounds and instead of punishing actual conflict to prevent senseless shittery with no IC motivation like tiding.
Image

User avatar
RaveRadbury
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2019 3:41 am
Location: BK ChatZone
Byond Username: RaveRadbury
Github Username: RaveRadbury

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby RaveRadbury » Wed Jun 03, 2020 5:03 pm #563992

Kryson wrote:Some greytiding is essential to giving sec something to do that isn't super high stakes and prevents people from being able to metagame who is the antag.

This is the excuse that every greytider makes. It doesn't work when everyone does it.
How's my administrating? Call 1-800-RADBURY
ImageImageImage
Heart Emoji ~ Winter Ball Queen 2019

NikoTheGuyDude
 
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2020 7:17 pm
Byond Username: NikoTheGuyDude

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby NikoTheGuyDude » Wed Jun 03, 2020 6:21 pm #564001

RaveRadbury wrote:
Kryson wrote:Some greytiding is essential to giving sec something to do that isn't super high stakes and prevents people from being able to metagame who is the antag.

This is the excuse that every greytider makes. It doesn't work when everyone does it.


I'm kind of opposed to the idea of giving everyone the greenlight to act vaguely antagonistic (see: greytider stealing shit just because they can) even if it does cause conflict, because what's stopping EVERYONE from being a greytider and turning the round into just anarchy? just because killing that guy would cause conflict doesn't mean you can do it, because if we let you do it, that would mean everyone with the same privileges as you should be able to do it too.

User avatar
confused rock
 
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 12:18 am
Byond Username: The unloved rock

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby confused rock » Wed Jun 03, 2020 7:11 pm #564006

Shadowflame909 wrote:I suggest adding a gullible rule to MRP. Or a guideline that incentivizes people generally to be more trusting. Like the assistant in maint with a mop cleaning up the blood tracks, not because he's a traitor but because he wanted to do the janitors job for him, wink.

This is as bad idea as any other form of feigning ignorance. it's going to be hard for some people to do it believably, frustrating for others, some people are going to avoid doing it as much as possible, and if you're so good at roleplay you could probably come up with a more believable excuse so that people don't have to feign ignorance, they actually buy it.
edit: and by some people avoiding it I mean a LOT. that is a line you're going to personally benefit from toeing. I've even had the opposite problem where ooc I know someone almost certainly isn't a syndie because I've seen them doing things that an antag wouldn't waste time doing but they still could totally be a syndie from a logical standpoint.
Image
Image
Image
Image

Sweets
 
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 6:19 am
Byond Username: Reondin

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Sweets » Thu Jun 04, 2020 2:45 am #564049

Revs should be straight up removed from Manuel, or Admins should actively start enforcing the rules during it.

It turns MRP into No RP and the "In general no, conversion should take priority, however if the situation is dire you are allowed to kill as many as required to accomplish your goals." gets met with "Sorry they are antag" when you ahelp getting beat to death, decapitated and left in maint as an unimplanted nonsec.
"

User avatar
XivilaiAnaxes
 
Joined: Sat May 11, 2019 7:13 am
Byond Username: XivilaiAnaxes

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby XivilaiAnaxes » Thu Jun 04, 2020 3:33 am #564052

Sweets wrote:Revs should be straight up removed from Manuel, or Admins should actively start enforcing the rules during it.

It turns MRP into No RP and the "In general no, conversion should take priority, however if the situation is dire you are allowed to kill as many as required to accomplish your goals." gets met with "Sorry they are antag" when you ahelp getting beat to death, decapitated and left in maint as an unimplanted nonsec.
"

If you got rid of the inbuilt IFF system that shows an R above everyone elses head revs would be forced to roleplay to avoid killing each other.
Stickymayhem wrote:Imagine the sheer narcisssim required to genuinely believe you are this intelligent.

User avatar
K Peculier
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri Jul 11, 2014 8:11 pm
Byond Username: K Peculier

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby K Peculier » Fri Jun 05, 2020 9:56 am #564200

I would heavily advocate for a clearer set of rules that players can't claim ignorance on. Currently from what I see is that rather than MRP its more that LRP players are treating Manuel as TG easy mode since initiating a conversation or anything more RP-sided is a free wack. And on the other side of the spectrum is some people being too afraid of conflict and believes that any escalation is grounds for LRP and a long ahelping.

Of course you actually have the people who understand this but unfortunately have their voices drowned out by angry LRP shouting and walls of HRP players. A simple whitelist might help as well so that people know what their signing up for. No need for the intricate ones that you see on other servers that need your firstborn child sacrificed to the admins or no game.

Currently I'm being a lot stricter to usual LowRP shenanigans. Its just not a good excuse to claim usual dick/tide behavior as 'my roleplay'. Why would players bother getting on Manuel in the first place just to do the same thing as our other servers? My guess is player population and how easy it is to server hop and not read the BIG BLARING TEXT that they are in Manuel as well as seeing MRP-HRP players as easy targets.

Clearer rules are needed or a cursed Manual Manuel ban. Its currently nigh impossible to admin Manuel with higher populations on LowRP stuff without certain players going on a long debate on whether something is even 'RP' or not to the point where it loses all meaning.
Also known as K Pecucklier
Yell at me here --> https://tgstation13.org/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=5075

User avatar
Mickyan
Github User
 
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:59 pm
Byond Username: Mickyan
Github Username: Mickyan

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby Mickyan » Tue Jun 09, 2020 4:59 pm #564908

I didn't like the idea of manuel specific bans at first but I think this is something that could be useful for admins that may otherwise get cold feet about banning someone from all servers over things like being awful at roleplaying but not enough that it's obvious they're taking the piss

So long as it's an alternative option rather than a "what happens on manuel stays on manuel" type of situation so if someone joins on manuel to stir up shit they can still get banned from all servers
ImageI play on Manuel as Swanni, the brain-damaged moth.
Be nice to each other.

User avatar
RaveRadbury
In-Game Admin
 
Joined: Fri Mar 08, 2019 3:41 am
Location: BK ChatZone
Byond Username: RaveRadbury
Github Username: RaveRadbury

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby RaveRadbury » Tue Jun 09, 2020 5:27 pm #564911

Whitelist MRP. Don't make it hard or exclusive, do make it so people have to make a post on the forums that they had to spend a few minutes on that shows they are aware of how MRP differs from LRP. I would be willing to help manage this.

A lighter alternative, panic bunker MRP, so new players have to connect to our other servers before they can just jump in.
How's my administrating? Call 1-800-RADBURY
ImageImageImage
Heart Emoji ~ Winter Ball Queen 2019

mortimermcmire
 
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 1:06 am
Byond Username: Mortimermcmire

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby mortimermcmire » Wed Jun 10, 2020 4:33 pm #565014

I think the ideas of tweaking gamemodes on Manuel, or adding Manuel-specific modes is the right way to go. Maybe add additional objectives to Traitor that aren't meant as a greentext challenge but just serve to spice up the round.

"Revs without the R symbol" is a fantastic idea

I think wizard is great if you remove the murderbone spells like fireball and smite and force them to use the more interesting spells. Make them more of a Q (from star trek) figure that's going to send people to the battle drome then turn them into a worm and smash them with a jackboot instead of EI NATH *jaunts away*. (PS ban friendly wizards)

Have you ever considered giving non-traitors objectives and/or some sort of persistence between rounds? I think it would be neat to be asked by Centcomm to make a variety of different pills to deliver to cargo and earn a fancy labcoat or something showing you're good at your job. Maybe a stationwide objective like "reopen the abandoned casino" would work too. Admin events work well on Manuel because the players are generally more open to it

RaveRadbury wrote:Whitelist MRP. Don't make it hard or exclusive, do make it so people have to make a post on the forums that they had to spend a few minutes on that shows they are aware of how MRP differs from LRP. I would be willing to help manage this.

A lighter alternative, panic bunker MRP, so new players have to connect to our other servers before they can just jump in.

and watch as manuel goes from 40-50 players to 10 because only a very small fraction of people post on the forums or have any desire to

I would never out myself as a MRP weirdo but I guess I just have

mortimermcmire
 
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 1:06 am
Byond Username: Mortimermcmire

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby mortimermcmire » Wed Jun 10, 2020 10:19 pm #565057

should traitors have hijack objective? on manuel, probably not

on MRP the only people really solving security issues are the security force so people generally don't equip themselves with syringe guns full of chloral and EMP nades etc, if you have hijack as anyone with even a little bit of authority you run rampant over the whole station

User avatar
confused rock
 
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 12:18 am
Byond Username: The unloved rock

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby confused rock » Wed Jun 10, 2020 11:45 pm #565069

I feel it's the opposite, manuel has less shitters running rampant so for the few antags that do exist the crew can better deal with them since they're the only real issue
Image
Image
Image
Image

mortimermcmire
 
Joined: Sat Jan 31, 2015 1:06 am
Byond Username: Mortimermcmire

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby mortimermcmire » Thu Jun 11, 2020 12:10 am #565070

confused rock wrote:I feel it's the opposite, manuel has less shitters running rampant so for the few antags that do exist the crew can better deal with them since they're the only real issue

I think the solution is to increase the number of traitors per round, not give a select few permission to smash the station in half

User avatar
XivilaiAnaxes
 
Joined: Sat May 11, 2019 7:13 am
Byond Username: XivilaiAnaxes

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby XivilaiAnaxes » Thu Jun 11, 2020 12:47 am #565071

Greytide traditionally provides a cover for Antags - removing greytiders completely would allow for more tators since sec won't be distracted with greyshit mc grey.

It would also encourage more officers to actually stay in their department since it's more likely you'll spot something odd just by being there.
Stickymayhem wrote:Imagine the sheer narcisssim required to genuinely believe you are this intelligent.

User avatar
confused rock
 
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2015 12:18 am
Byond Username: The unloved rock

Re: Regarding Manuel Policy Discussions

Postby confused rock » Thu Jun 11, 2020 1:10 am #565072

I think the occasional traitor should be able to smash the station in half because it makes it dangerous to assume a traitor won't blow a hole in escape and there are some situations that can't happen without truly merciless syndies. Traitors should be unpredictable and them not wanting to kill TOO many people is predictable.
Image
Image
Image
Image

Jack7D1
 
Joined: Tue Oct 29, 2019 2:00 am
Byond Username: Jack7D1

.

Postby Jack7D1 » Thu Jun 11, 2020 2:27 am #565075



Return to General Chat

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users