Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Forum rules
Only Certified™ Players™ may post in here.
If you are not able to post in here, you are not a Certified™ Player™. Play on a mainline /tg/ game server to gain posting powers in this forum. (certified gamers are only calculated once per day)
Only Certified™ Players™ may post in here.
If you are not able to post in here, you are not a Certified™ Player™. Play on a mainline /tg/ game server to gain posting powers in this forum. (certified gamers are only calculated once per day)
- Vekter
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:25 pm
- Byond Username: Vekter
- Location: Fucking around with the engine.
Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
viewtopic.php?p=687166#p687166
What do we think? tl;dr refusing to respond to a minor threat using your words (ie "silent arrests") voids your metaprotections as sec while doing so cements them.
I think this is pretty good. I'm worried it might slide the game further into a state where "actually fighting people is the point of the game" is a norm but I think it's an efficient way to handle the problem. What better way to disincentivize it?
What do we think? tl;dr refusing to respond to a minor threat using your words (ie "silent arrests") voids your metaprotections as sec while doing so cements them.
I think this is pretty good. I'm worried it might slide the game further into a state where "actually fighting people is the point of the game" is a norm but I think it's an efficient way to handle the problem. What better way to disincentivize it?
Omega_DarkPotato wrote:This sucks, dude.
Spoiler:
- Cheshify
- In-Game Game Master
- Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2020 6:42 pm
- Byond Username: Cheshify
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Waiting for seccie mains to start macro-ing phrases like "YOU ARE UNDER ARREST FOR B&E"
- sinfulbliss
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
- Byond Username: SinfulBliss
- Location: prisoner re-education chamber
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Very awesome ruling, POG. Use words or be treated like everyone else. Sec policy 6 was always really vague and the entire bottom paragraph of it basically said nothing so glad to see it updated with something more concretely useful too.
Spoiler:
-
- Joined: Thu May 12, 2016 10:16 pm
- Byond Username: B00t
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Big
bigger then that
Big Pog.
Super happy to see this kind of change especially coming from the player headmin himself. This kind of change is a long time in the making. It's a bad sign that when a ling transforms into a secoff they have to start killing more to stay in character, I can only pray that this will cut back on the redtide.
bigger then that
Big Pog.
Super happy to see this kind of change especially coming from the player headmin himself. This kind of change is a long time in the making. It's a bad sign that when a ling transforms into a secoff they have to start killing more to stay in character, I can only pray that this will cut back on the redtide.
-
- Joined: Tue Jul 20, 2021 2:06 am
- Byond Username: Heyhey69
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
It's almost like security has had a one button voice line for "Halt" this entire time that no one bothers to use.
-
- Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2021 5:43 pm
- Byond Username: Sheltton
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
I think its really good but if greyshiters abuse it to just shove secs mid arrest i hope they get yeeted and deleted
- Cheshify
- In-Game Game Master
- Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2020 6:42 pm
- Byond Username: Cheshify
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Bold of you to imply that this has ever worked
- zxaber
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Mon Sep 10, 2018 12:00 am
- Byond Username: Zxaber
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
We should replace the voice function of the sec gas mask with a function that, when enabled, will read out the most recent security record of the next person you point at. This would have the added benefit of further encouraging sec to do proper record keeping.
- sinfulbliss
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
- Byond Username: SinfulBliss
- Location: prisoner re-education chamber
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
The point isn't that it works and they halt, the point is that it shows the seccie is conducting an arrest and not just an antag disguised as a seccie about to ownzone them. Not sure if it'd qualify as the sort of "communication" this policy asks for but it'd be better than a completely wordless arrest.
Spoiler:
- Fren256
- Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2023 10:10 pm
- Byond Username: Fren256
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
This is a good idea, but instead of pointing at the person it should only be enabled for people with a wanted status. If two or more wanted people are within your view, it'll repeat the most recent record of the person you're the closest to.zxaber wrote: ↑Wed May 24, 2023 10:37 pm We should replace the voice function of the sec gas mask with a function that, when enabled, will read out the most recent security record of the next person you point at. This would have the added benefit of further encouraging sec to do proper record keeping.
- TypicalRig
- Joined: Sat May 01, 2021 8:18 pm
- Byond Username: TypicalRig
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
I'm happy that the bar for sec in terms of communication is a bit higher as it's frustrating to get the silent treatment and attacked by sec without knowing why. That being said, the ruling is a bit iffy in regards to what constitues low vs high threat and needs to be altered to stop misunderstandings in more chaotic rounds. "Obviously revs, cult, malf AI, nuke ops and the like are all high threats." But like, for example... confirmed revolution, or suspected revolutions? It's an important distinction because it's so easy to send the entire sec team into a paranoid frenzy on LRP over a revolution that doesn't actually exist. I can count the number of times I've gotten random mindshielded over revs that never existed on more than two hands. Normal procedure in an LRP confirmed rev round is to wordlessly stun and mindshield in bulk. Does this void their metaprots if it's only a suspected revolution?
- Cheshify
- In-Game Game Master
- Joined: Sat Oct 17, 2020 6:42 pm
- Byond Username: Cheshify
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
In all seriousness, this is a good change. I see (ICly and Adminning) security officers having literally no reason for arresting someone beyond "they were set to arrest".
- RedBaronFlyer
- Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 2:41 am
- Byond Username: RedBaronFlyer
- Location: SS13, Manuel Division, Cargo Bay
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
I'm all in favor of this change. I remember when I was being a shitter on manuel and smashing the queue line glass on icebox with an air tank, the HOP (I seem to recall it being Broly or Box or something, but idk) called security after I refused to stop. Fifteen seconds later, an officer walked up, wordlessly batoned me, then dragged me away to the brig. This was a shift that was basically a green shift, so it wasn't like there was a threat requiring them to do that.
WARNING, Prolonged exposure to my opinions can be mentally scarring or in some cases, FATAL
Stamper of papers, pusher of crates, and the cleaner of floors.
I'm Eugine Adrian Hynes on Manuel, I'm very uncool.
Stamper of papers, pusher of crates, and the cleaner of floors.
I'm Eugine Adrian Hynes on Manuel, I'm very uncool.
Super Aggro Crag wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 5:11 pm I assume he did it elsewhere because it's fucking goofball and he never half-asses his shitty ideas, he full asses them so both cheeks are absolutely slathered in shit
- vect0r
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2022 12:37 am
- Byond Username: Vect0r
- Location: 'Murica 🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
You were smashing up the glass line, and are wondering why an officer dragged you away? Could you please clarify?RedBaronFlyer wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 1:51 am I'm all in favor of this change. I remember when I was being a shitter on manuel and smashing the queue line glass on icebox with an air tank, the HOP (I seem to recall it being Broly or Box or something, but idk) called security after I refused to stop. Fifteen seconds later, an officer walked up, wordlessly batoned me, then dragged me away to the brig. This was a shift that was basically a green shift, so it wasn't like there was a threat requiring them to do that.
- BeeSting12
- Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2016 1:11 am
- Byond Username: BeeSting12
- Github Username: BeeSting12
- Location: 'Murica
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
As a sec player I have no problem with this, especially if doing so cements my protections as sec. I don't feel like I should have to fight a war with a player across a whole round for doing my job, and I've seen that happen for valid arrests. Most recently I had a player who shall remain anonymous cut sec's telecomms twice because I tried arresting them for blocking off the tram. I'm kinda curious about cases where I'm not able to get a word off such as I see them in the hallway and point at them and they just ignore it or whatever. My thought is that if they run off when a sec officer is pointing at them then the intent to talk is pretty obvious and not stopping lessens the requirement to ask to arrest.
- Vekter
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:25 pm
- Byond Username: Vekter
- Location: Fucking around with the engine.
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
I think I'd give the benefit of the doubt, especially if the sec officer explicitly told them why they were bringing them in after detaining them. Remember, the point isn't to make sec read out a paragraph of bullshit before actually trying to detain someone, it's to get them to effectively communicate with the person they're detaining.sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Wed May 24, 2023 10:48 pmThe point isn't that it works and they halt, the point is that it shows the seccie is conducting an arrest and not just an antag disguised as a seccie about to ownzone them. Not sure if it'd qualify as the sort of "communication" this policy asks for but it'd be better than a completely wordless arrest.
Ideally though, if it's just someone set to arrest for something like B&E or vandalism, something as simple as "Hey, [name]. I need to talk to you." would be just fine by me.
Omega_DarkPotato wrote:This sucks, dude.
Spoiler:
- Bawhoppennn
- Github User
- Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 11:42 pm
- Byond Username: Bawhoppennn
- Github Username: Bawhoppen
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
I don't know why people play to win so hard in the first place. On Manuel, unless it's like a shootout, I always am like "You're under arrest for XYZ" and then talk to them. It's not hard.
From an IC perspective it makes infinitely more sense, but more importantly, from an OOC perspective it's way better. It gives them a chance to run away, which keeps WAYY more interesting from a sportsmanship and story standpoint.
Why just do the most efficient thing? It doesn't gain you anything, except making the stories of the round worse.
Anyways yes this is a good change.
From an IC perspective it makes infinitely more sense, but more importantly, from an OOC perspective it's way better. It gives them a chance to run away, which keeps WAYY more interesting from a sportsmanship and story standpoint.
Why just do the most efficient thing? It doesn't gain you anything, except making the stories of the round worse.
Anyways yes this is a good change.
I consider myself a /tg/station historian. If you're interested in the server history at all, feel free to ask me and I'll try and get you an answer! #ConcurForever
<KorMobile> you're a hero
[21:20:53] <%oranges> Baw "has cute legs" hoppen
DEAD: ADMIN(Owegno) says, "Nothing lewd happens in adminbus sadly."
[07:13:57] <Rockdtben> Keep in mind that I'm an extremely successful and wealthy male in his late twenties.
(F) DEAD: Professor DonkPocket says, "Admins preventchaos with good messages"
OOC: Pogoman122: Fun fact if someone trespasses on your kitchen just turn them into a nugget
<+KorPhaeron> russians have no souls so magic enrages them
<+KorPhaeron> people who don't like rng are not from /tg/ and are likely redditors
<KorMobile> you're a hero
[21:20:53] <%oranges> Baw "has cute legs" hoppen
DEAD: ADMIN(Owegno) says, "Nothing lewd happens in adminbus sadly."
[07:13:57] <Rockdtben> Keep in mind that I'm an extremely successful and wealthy male in his late twenties.
(F) DEAD: Professor DonkPocket says, "Admins preventchaos with good messages"
OOC: Pogoman122: Fun fact if someone trespasses on your kitchen just turn them into a nugget
<+KorPhaeron> russians have no souls so magic enrages them
<+KorPhaeron> people who don't like rng are not from /tg/ and are likely redditors
ausops wrote:apart from this there is literally nothing more to say other than that this is the first thread in five years to have achieved something.
- Kendrickorium
- Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2019 1:00 am
- Byond Username: Kendrickorium
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
i've found that for awhile now clearly stating "I am going to fucking remove your head if you keep doing this" has not only very often stopped thing from happening, but has put me in the clear with admins when the person who kept doing the thing ahelps me for killing them
for instance, if i had simply said "Lucy you stupid fucking annoying crustacean, if you do not stop shoving me while I am attempting to arrest this person, I am going to remove your head", i might not have been slapped with a note for removing her head.
for instance, if i had simply said "Lucy you stupid fucking annoying crustacean, if you do not stop shoving me while I am attempting to arrest this person, I am going to remove your head", i might not have been slapped with a note for removing her head.
- Chadley
- Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2022 6:07 am
- Byond Username: Armodias
- Location: Northstar psych ward helping my patients.
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
THAT'S ME. THAT'S ME IN THE ANNOUNCEMENTS. THAT'S. ME!!!!!!
- sinfulbliss
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
- Byond Username: SinfulBliss
- Location: prisoner re-education chamber
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Still riding the high from this policy thread fellas.
No longer will the silent seccies be able to BITCH and CRY to the admins when they are retaliated against like everyone else.
No longer will the MRP-leaning supportmin be able to buzz in our ears when we dare raise a fist against the almighty NRP shitsec batong jockey.
I knew good things would happen when you combine a 900 hr HoS player with a rule scholar in a headmin term.
No longer will the silent seccies be able to BITCH and CRY to the admins when they are retaliated against like everyone else.
No longer will the MRP-leaning supportmin be able to buzz in our ears when we dare raise a fist against the almighty NRP shitsec batong jockey.
I knew good things would happen when you combine a 900 hr HoS player with a rule scholar in a headmin term.
Spoiler:
- sinfulbliss
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
- Byond Username: SinfulBliss
- Location: prisoner re-education chamber
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
I hate doing this because it feels so clearly like covering one’s tracks specifically for the purpose of if you’re ahelped. There’s lots of other ways to do this but it feels sort of lame and kinda messes up immersion yknow.Kendrickorium wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:00 am i've found that for awhile now clearly stating "I am going to fucking remove your head if you keep doing this" has not only very often stopped thing from happening, but has put me in the clear with admins when the person who kept doing the thing ahelps me for killing them
It’s best when it’s part of the natural RP like a real threat though.
Spoiler:
-
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:02 pm
- Byond Username: Chocolate_bickie
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Whenever someone flees from me as sec I point at them for this reason.sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 10:33 amI hate doing this because it feels so clearly like covering one’s tracks specifically for the purpose of if you’re ahelped. There’s lots of other ways to do this but it feels sort of lame and kinda messes up immersion yknow.Kendrickorium wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:00 am i've found that for awhile now clearly stating "I am going to fucking remove your head if you keep doing this" has not only very often stopped thing from happening, but has put me in the clear with admins when the person who kept doing the thing ahelps me for killing them
It’s best when it’s part of the natural RP like a real threat though.
Can't claim I didn't chase you for 5 minutes when point logs have coords.
- MrStonedOne
- Host
- Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 10:56 pm
- Byond Username: MrStonedOne
- Github Username: MrStonedOne
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
My advice to any sec wondering this question is to nag your heads to go to code red and remove all doubt.TypicalRig wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 12:15 am I'm happy that the bar for sec in terms of communication is a bit higher as it's frustrating to get the silent treatment and attacked by sec without knowing why. That being said, the ruling is a bit iffy in regards to what constitues low vs high threat and needs to be altered to stop misunderstandings in more chaotic rounds. "Obviously revs, cult, malf AI, nuke ops and the like are all high threats." But like, for example... confirmed revolution, or suspected revolutions? It's an important distinction because it's so easy to send the entire sec team into a paranoid frenzy on LRP over a revolution that doesn't actually exist. I can count the number of times I've gotten random mindshielded over revs that never existed on more than two hands. Normal procedure in an LRP confirmed rev round is to wordlessly stun and mindshield in bulk. Does this void their metaprots if it's only a suspected revolution?
but generally speaking for most people "suspected" is always given too much credence in the heat of the moment then it will get after the fact, so keep that in mind and try not to lean into it.
- RedBaronFlyer
- Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 2:41 am
- Byond Username: RedBaronFlyer
- Location: SS13, Manuel Division, Cargo Bay
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
vect0r wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 2:12 amYou were smashing up the glass line, and are wondering why an officer dragged you away? Could you please clarify?RedBaronFlyer wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 1:51 am I'm all in favor of this change. I remember when I was being a shitter on manuel and smashing the queue line glass on icebox with an air tank, the HOP (I seem to recall it being Broly or Box or something, but idk) called security after I refused to stop. Fifteen seconds later, an officer walked up, wordlessly batoned me, then dragged me away to the brig. This was a shift that was basically a green shift, so it wasn't like there was a threat requiring them to do that.
I was saying that I got wordlessly arrested. I'm not saying that I didn't know why I got arrested. There's a big difference between someone conducting an arrest, and someone running up, batoning you, and dragging you to the brig wordlessly. The station wasn't dealing with a dire threat, or any threat, really. Which makes the security officer's conduct particularly egregious, even if my behavior was borderline LRP shittery.
WARNING, Prolonged exposure to my opinions can be mentally scarring or in some cases, FATAL
Stamper of papers, pusher of crates, and the cleaner of floors.
I'm Eugine Adrian Hynes on Manuel, I'm very uncool.
Stamper of papers, pusher of crates, and the cleaner of floors.
I'm Eugine Adrian Hynes on Manuel, I'm very uncool.
Super Aggro Crag wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 5:11 pm I assume he did it elsewhere because it's fucking goofball and he never half-asses his shitty ideas, he full asses them so both cheeks are absolutely slathered in shit
-
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:02 pm
- Byond Username: Chocolate_bickie
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Please rp with me while I act as a griefing ape.RedBaronFlyer wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 4:01 pmvect0r wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 2:12 amYou were smashing up the glass line, and are wondering why an officer dragged you away? Could you please clarify?RedBaronFlyer wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 1:51 am I'm all in favor of this change. I remember when I was being a shitter on manuel and smashing the queue line glass on icebox with an air tank, the HOP (I seem to recall it being Broly or Box or something, but idk) called security after I refused to stop. Fifteen seconds later, an officer walked up, wordlessly batoned me, then dragged me away to the brig. This was a shift that was basically a green shift, so it wasn't like there was a threat requiring them to do that.
I was saying that I got wordlessly arrested. I'm not saying that I didn't know why I got arrested. There's a big difference between someone conducting an arrest, and someone running up, batoning you, and dragging you to the brig wordlessly. The station wasn't dealing with a dire threat, or any threat, really. Which makes the security officer's conduct particularly egregious, even if my behavior was borderline LRP shittery.
Sec should have handed you over to the HoP for 'fun of the workplace hazard variety' since you were already told to stop and refused.
- Vekter
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:25 pm
- Byond Username: Vekter
- Location: Fucking around with the engine.
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
This is a roleplaying game. If you're not here to roleplay, go elsewhere.chocolate_bickie wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:35 pm
Please rp with me while I act as a griefing ape.
Sec should have handed you over to the HoP for 'fun of the workplace hazard variety' since you were already told to stop and refused.
Omega_DarkPotato wrote:This sucks, dude.
Spoiler:
- Archie700
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2016 1:56 am
- Byond Username: Archie700
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
At the very least security has to confirm whether the person they're going to arrest is critical enough that they don't have to give a warning.
-
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:02 pm
- Byond Username: Chocolate_bickie
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Bruh, do you really think if sec started talking to this man his responce would be an eloquent debate of the validity of vandalism as a tool for social justice?Vekter wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:43 pmThis is a roleplaying game. If you're not here to roleplay, go elsewhere.chocolate_bickie wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:35 pm
Please rp with me while I act as a griefing ape.
Sec should have handed you over to the HoP for 'fun of the workplace hazard variety' since you were already told to stop and refused.
Here's an example from a recent Terry round I played.
I a pAI in robotics. 3 times someone starts breaking in while my creator is there. I speak to each of them. The most responce I got out of them was a an engineer screaming then running, grabbing what they wanted, then running out There's like 10 lines of me begging them to use their words as they were breaking in.
Another engineer left the door bolted open and electrified. None were antags.
- Vekter
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:25 pm
- Byond Username: Vekter
- Location: Fucking around with the engine.
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Bro, this isn't fucking Bay, alright? I'm not saying you have to have a long, drawn-out conversation about something. I'm saying you can do the bare minimum of telling someone you're arresting them before doing it.chocolate_bickie wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:50 pmBruh, do you really think if sec started talking to this man his responce would be an eloquent debate of the validity of vandalism as a tool for social justice?Vekter wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:43 pmThis is a roleplaying game. If you're not here to roleplay, go elsewhere.chocolate_bickie wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:35 pm
Please rp with me while I act as a griefing ape.
Sec should have handed you over to the HoP for 'fun of the workplace hazard variety' since you were already told to stop and refused.
Here's an example from a recent Terry round I played.
I a pAI in robotics. 3 times someone starts breaking in while my creator is there. I speak to each of them. The most responce I got out of them was a an engineer screaming then running, grabbing what they wanted, then running out There's like 10 lines of me begging them to use their words as they were breaking in.
Another engineer left the door bolted open and electrified. None were antags.
If someone beats your skull in because you didn't tell them you were taking them in, I'm not helping you.
Omega_DarkPotato wrote:This sucks, dude.
Spoiler:
- vect0r
- Joined: Thu Oct 13, 2022 12:37 am
- Byond Username: Vect0r
- Location: 'Murica 🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
No need to be mean about it.RedBaronFlyer wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 4:01 pmvect0r wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 2:12 amYou were smashing up the glass line, and are wondering why an officer dragged you away? Could you please clarify?RedBaronFlyer wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 1:51 am I'm all in favor of this change. I remember when I was being a shitter on manuel and smashing the queue line glass on icebox with an air tank, the HOP (I seem to recall it being Broly or Box or something, but idk) called security after I refused to stop. Fifteen seconds later, an officer walked up, wordlessly batoned me, then dragged me away to the brig. This was a shift that was basically a green shift, so it wasn't like there was a threat requiring them to do that.
I was saying that I got wordlessly arrested. I'm not saying that I didn't know why I got arrested. There's a big difference between someone conducting an arrest, and someone running up, batoning you, and dragging you to the brig wordlessly. The station wasn't dealing with a dire threat, or any threat, really. Which makes the security officer's conduct particularly egregious, even if my behavior was borderline LRP shittery.
I just wanted to clarify what was going on. Personally, if you are in the middle of doing a crime it should be pretty clear why you are getting arrested, but we can have different thoughts on this, and that's what makes us human <3.
- RedBaronFlyer
- Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 2:41 am
- Byond Username: RedBaronFlyer
- Location: SS13, Manuel Division, Cargo Bay
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Sorry, it was mean of me. I'm kind of bad at reading text so I didn't know if you were joking or not. Again, my issue wasn't that I got arrested. I fully understood why I would get arrested. My issue is with the way it went.vect0r wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 6:23 pm No need to be mean about it.
I just wanted to clarify what was going on. Personally, if you are in the middle of doing a crime it should be pretty clear why you are getting arrested, but we can have different thoughts on this, and that's what makes us human <3.
I mean to be fair after I got arrested, I went back, repaired the glass wall and grille, and apologized.
Also, unironically, yes. I would expect some roleplay on the MRP server. specially from security, who generally seem to be expected to perform to a higher standard. Although it doesn't have a fifty-page backstory, what I did would fall under "IC conflict." Like if a botanist refused to give the chef food, or the chef/medbay charged for their services, or the barkeep stole one of the chemistry machines and won't give it back.
For example, around two months back, medbay and security had several non-lethal fights because the HOS was being a shitter, and the CMO was denying security any sort of medical treatment in retaliation. It eventually turned into security using lethals in retaliation after several of their attempts to storm the medbay non-lethally failed.
And I would have welcomed that sort of thing since it would have been interesting. I fully knew what could happen after the HOP warned me with a disabler and then fired a shot at me when I kept hitting the glass. It would have been more interesting than a wordless arrest. If I'm going to act like an idiot, I fully intend actually to deal with the consequences (be it an arrest, a demotion, etc). I'm not one of those people that goes soulless in the brig because of a two-minute brig sentence. I'm not complaining that I got arrested. I 100% understand WHY I got arrested. I'm complaining about the "walk up and wordlessly baton me" arrest, as silent arrests are boring as shit.Sec should have handed you over to the HoP for 'fun of the workplace hazard variety' since you were already told to stop and refused.
Lets go over some hypothetical scenarios:chocolate_bickie wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:35 pmBruh, do you really think if sec started talking to this man his responce would be an eloquent debate of the validity of vandalism as a tool for social justice?
- If I ran?
- If I fought back?
- I fight back with an actual weapon?
So three things:Here's an example from a recent Terry round I played.
I'm sorry that happened, that sucks.
This was on manuel, where that kind of behavior is far less common. (though assistants running into departments where the door has been left open still happens)
I wasn't actually breaking into the HOPs office. Just smashing a barrier glass. See the spoilered section below.
I fully expect security to just start batoning and sorting out shit after the fact when it comes to breaking and entering or active assault or whatnot. This was, at worst, vandalism.
A story told in five panels:
► Show Spoiler
Last edited by RedBaronFlyer on Thu May 25, 2023 9:32 pm, edited 2 times in total.
WARNING, Prolonged exposure to my opinions can be mentally scarring or in some cases, FATAL
Stamper of papers, pusher of crates, and the cleaner of floors.
I'm Eugine Adrian Hynes on Manuel, I'm very uncool.
Stamper of papers, pusher of crates, and the cleaner of floors.
I'm Eugine Adrian Hynes on Manuel, I'm very uncool.
Super Aggro Crag wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 5:11 pm I assume he did it elsewhere because it's fucking goofball and he never half-asses his shitty ideas, he full asses them so both cheeks are absolutely slathered in shit
- Vekter
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:25 pm
- Byond Username: Vekter
- Location: Fucking around with the engine.
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Baron posted a very good example of a bad Sec interaction. Here's an example of a good one on LRP:
(An officer sees an assistant breaking a window.)
Officer: "Stop that or I'm arresting you."
Assistant: "No."
Officer: *Arrests the assistant.*
That's it. That's a completely valid interaction. It's that simple.
(An officer sees an assistant breaking a window.)
Officer: "Stop that or I'm arresting you."
Assistant: "No."
Officer: *Arrests the assistant.*
That's it. That's a completely valid interaction. It's that simple.
Omega_DarkPotato wrote:This sucks, dude.
Spoiler:
- Fren256
- Joined: Mon Feb 20, 2023 10:10 pm
- Byond Username: Fren256
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Your mistake was expecting roleplay on Terry.chocolate_bickie wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:50 pm Here's an example from a recent Terry round I played.
- BeeSting12
- Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2016 1:11 am
- Byond Username: BeeSting12
- Github Username: BeeSting12
- Location: 'Murica
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Goes both ways though. What's his reason in a roleplay sense for smashing the windows? What's Joe Schmo's reason for shoving every sec officer. From a roleplay perspective, it doesn't make much sense to shove the corporate security.Vekter wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:43 pmThis is a roleplaying game. If you're not here to roleplay, go elsewhere.chocolate_bickie wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 5:35 pm
Please rp with me while I act as a griefing ape.
Sec should have handed you over to the HoP for 'fun of the workplace hazard variety' since you were already told to stop and refused.
-
- Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2021 11:08 pm
- Byond Username: MooCow12
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Pretty much this also sec can say something to provoke a response and then stun baton while the other party is typing.
Thats the only thing im worried about this policy change, sec not communicating with you but at you right before running you down and then possibly getting metaprotection for it (we will have to wait and see but im hoping admins are able to get enough info to be able to tell the difference)
List of my favorite TG Staff.
Spoiler:
- BONERMASTER
- Joined: Sun Oct 21, 2018 2:28 pm
- Byond Username: BONERMASTER
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Let me state this for the record: I can recollect on one hand how many times security personnel not talking enough has negatively impacted my experience.
Contrary to this, I don't think there are enough hands in the universe to count where non-security personnel have negatively impacted my experience to the point of me comitting suicide, because the rancid level of shittery, grief and null-RP has completely demotivated me to engage in any sort of decent RP (on manuel, no less).
If you think tolerating serial shitters is acceptable while finding the issue with the security officers reciprocating their aggression and neglect for the game in kind, then truly, the issue has always been you all along.
With secure regards
-BONERMASTER
Contrary to this, I don't think there are enough hands in the universe to count where non-security personnel have negatively impacted my experience to the point of me comitting suicide, because the rancid level of shittery, grief and null-RP has completely demotivated me to engage in any sort of decent RP (on manuel, no less).
If you think tolerating serial shitters is acceptable while finding the issue with the security officers reciprocating their aggression and neglect for the game in kind, then truly, the issue has always been you all along.
With secure regards
-BONERMASTER
SIGNATURE UNDER CONSTRUCTION
*YOUR ADVERTISEMENT COULD BE HERE* - Contact BONERMASTER & Associates for further information
*YOUR ADVERTISEMENT COULD BE HERE* - Contact BONERMASTER & Associates for further information
-
- Joined: Sat Apr 10, 2021 11:08 pm
- Byond Username: MooCow12
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Actually bonermaster`s post did remind me that security do tend to BM alot especially after they cuffed their victim.
List of my favorite TG Staff.
Spoiler:
-
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:02 pm
- Byond Username: Chocolate_bickie
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
And I'm saying this rule only protects the people who flee everytime you try to talk to them, then claim you never told them why they were being arrested.Vekter wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 6:17 pm
Bro, this isn't fucking Bay, alright? I'm not saying you have to have a long, drawn-out conversation about something. I'm saying you can do the bare minimum of telling someone you're arresting them before doing it.
If someone beats your skull in because you didn't tell them you were taking them in, I'm not helping you.
I literally always tell people they are wanted before I arrest. But there is a notable group of players who use your type bubble as an excuse to flee.
Even before this ruling I have taken to pointing at arrestees, then chatting out why I am arresting them after they fled the room cos they say you never told them why they were being arrested, omitting the fact they never gave you a chance.
- oranges
- Code Maintainer
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2014 9:16 pm
- Byond Username: Optimumtact
- Github Username: optimumtact
- Location: #CHATSHITGETBANGED
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
this rule will be rolled back within 2 terms
- sinfulbliss
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
- Byond Username: SinfulBliss
- Location: prisoner re-education chamber
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Okay, so what? Why do you NEED to arrest the person who’s wanted for a minor crime (which this policy only applies to) in the most optimal possible way without giving them a chance to respond?chocolate_bickie wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 11:56 pmAnd I'm saying this rule only protects the people who flee everytime you try to talk to them, then claim you never told them why they were being arrested.Vekter wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 6:17 pm
Bro, this isn't fucking Bay, alright? I'm not saying you have to have a long, drawn-out conversation about something. I'm saying you can do the bare minimum of telling someone you're arresting them before doing it.
If someone beats your skull in because you didn't tell them you were taking them in, I'm not helping you.
I literally always tell people they are wanted before I arrest. But there is a notable group of players who use your type bubble as an excuse to flee.
Even before this ruling I have taken to pointing at arrestees, then chatting out why I am arresting them after they fled the room cos they say you never told them why they were being arrested, omitting the fact they never gave you a chance.
And how exactly does the policy protect them? You can STILL wordlessly arrest them. All it means is that they’re allowed to retaliate normally against you if you choose the wordless approach.
Spoiler:
- WineAllWine
- In-Game Admin Trainer
- Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 8:17 pm
- Byond Username: Wineallwine
- Location: LANDAN
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
I'm dubious about this rule. I think there's no harm in trying it out. There's so many Terry tiders that are more robust than most players that I think this'll result in loads of sec getting killed for doing valid arrests
- sinfulbliss
- Joined: Thu Apr 04, 2019 8:53 am
- Byond Username: SinfulBliss
- Location: prisoner re-education chamber
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
All they have to do is stop and state like “yo your prints were on bridge” or anything and then they can’t be retaliated against lethally. It doesn’t seem like a big ask.WineAllWine wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 1:05 am I'm dubious about this rule. I think there's no harm in trying it out. There's so many Terry tiders that are more robust than most players that I think this'll result in loads of sec getting killed for doing valid arrests
It’s sort of failRP for an officer to just randomly tackle someone down and cuff them AND expect the admins to protect them in doing that IMO.
Spoiler:
- WineAllWine
- In-Game Admin Trainer
- Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 8:17 pm
- Byond Username: Wineallwine
- Location: LANDAN
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
That's enough time for a tider with a stunprod to stunlock you. I think stun > handcuff > then ask questions now that you're safe seems reasonable.sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 1:09 amAll they have to do is stop and state like “yo your prints were on bridge” or anything and then they can’t be retaliated against lethally. It doesn’t seem like a big ask.WineAllWine wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 1:05 am I'm dubious about this rule. I think there's no harm in trying it out. There's so many Terry tiders that are more robust than most players that I think this'll result in loads of sec getting killed for doing valid arrests
It’s sort of failRP for an officer to just randomly tackle someone down and cuff them AND expect the admins to protect them in doing that IMO.
As I say maybe this will be okay, but I doubt it
- Vekter
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Thu Apr 17, 2014 10:25 pm
- Byond Username: Vekter
- Location: Fucking around with the engine.
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Just say "Hey, stop!" Or something when they run. That makes it clear you're trying to communicate and they're bailing on you.chocolate_bickie wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 11:56 pmAnd I'm saying this rule only protects the people who flee everytime you try to talk to them, then claim you never told them why they were being arrested.Vekter wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 6:17 pm
Bro, this isn't fucking Bay, alright? I'm not saying you have to have a long, drawn-out conversation about something. I'm saying you can do the bare minimum of telling someone you're arresting them before doing it.
If someone beats your skull in because you didn't tell them you were taking them in, I'm not helping you.
I literally always tell people they are wanted before I arrest. But there is a notable group of players who use your type bubble as an excuse to flee.
Even before this ruling I have taken to pointing at arrestees, then chatting out why I am arresting them after they fled the room cos they say you never told them why they were being arrested, omitting the fact they never gave you a chance.
Omega_DarkPotato wrote:This sucks, dude.
Spoiler:
- WineAllWine
- In-Game Admin Trainer
- Joined: Thu Jun 27, 2019 8:17 pm
- Byond Username: Wineallwine
- Location: LANDAN
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
The time it takes to type "Hey stop!" is probably longer than it would take a tider to get out of your viewVekter wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 1:17 amJust say "Hey, stop!" Or something when they run. That makes it clear you're trying to communicate and they're bailing on you.chocolate_bickie wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 11:56 pmAnd I'm saying this rule only protects the people who flee everytime you try to talk to them, then claim you never told them why they were being arrested.Vekter wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 6:17 pm
Bro, this isn't fucking Bay, alright? I'm not saying you have to have a long, drawn-out conversation about something. I'm saying you can do the bare minimum of telling someone you're arresting them before doing it.
If someone beats your skull in because you didn't tell them you were taking them in, I'm not helping you.
I literally always tell people they are wanted before I arrest. But there is a notable group of players who use your type bubble as an excuse to flee.
Even before this ruling I have taken to pointing at arrestees, then chatting out why I am arresting them after they fled the room cos they say you never told them why they were being arrested, omitting the fact they never gave you a chance.
- blackdav123
- Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2021 10:04 pm
- Byond Username: Blackdav123
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
why are people so against manhunts that any time any security gameplay loops get brought up the very first counter argument is "what if they run away????"
manhunts are 99% of the time more interesting than whatever the hell you were going to do instead. there are countless ways to find the guy you are looking for. security tools are great for catching the guy running away. finding the perp is never hard even with a disguise, as it will always just be the next guy with a gasmask and no ID you see in the hall.
set a trap or do a sting operation or something. stop being boring with how you arrest people.
manhunts are 99% of the time more interesting than whatever the hell you were going to do instead. there are countless ways to find the guy you are looking for. security tools are great for catching the guy running away. finding the perp is never hard even with a disguise, as it will always just be the next guy with a gasmask and no ID you see in the hall.
set a trap or do a sting operation or something. stop being boring with how you arrest people.
Weston Echard on Sybil
- RedBaronFlyer
- Joined: Wed Jun 22, 2022 2:41 am
- Byond Username: RedBaronFlyer
- Location: SS13, Manuel Division, Cargo Bay
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
That does remind me of a good interaction I had with security a short while back. I had a shift where I found a stun baton lying on the ground. Around 30 seconds later, someone comes running up to me, yelling it was theirs. I hand it over to them, and they run off. Around ten minutes later, an officer walks into the cargo bay and tells me that my prints were found in relation to a crime. They ask me to come down to the brig with them and I accepted. They cuffed me and brought me to the brig, searched my satchel, asked a few questions, then sent me on my way when it was clear I had no involvement outside of holding the baton for a moment.sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 1:09 am All they have to do is stop and state like "yo your prints were on bridge" or anything and then they can't be retaliated against lethally. It doesn't seem like a big ask.
It's sort of failRP for an officer to just randomly tackle someone down and cuff them AND expect the admins to protect them in doing that IMO.
I do realize that LRP and Terry, in particular, are completely different beasts, though. I do not have enough hours on Sybil to say how well that would go there (I presume not great)
Basically, similar to how one really shouldn't bust out a bone saw or a knife in response to being shoved, security should (ideally) have a sort of escalation with arrest. If someone is known to be carrying around a revolver and they're wanted for mag dumping someone, then yeah, you should probably be ready to use maximum force just short of shooting them right in the face (unless command has signed off on such an action). If it's just a petty crime, then treat it as such.
I understand I'm basically just armchair policy discussing though. As I basically only play Cargo Tech.
Fair point, I didn't have a good RP reason. The only thing I really had was a feud with HR as I screamed "DOWN WITH THE MAN" after some heads of staff had been intruding into cargo, so yeah, it was admittedly just being a dickhead.BeeSting12 wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 9:41 pm Goes both ways though. What's his reason in a roleplay sense for smashing the windows? What's Joe Schmo's reason for shoving every sec officer. From a roleplay perspective, it doesn't make much sense to shove the corporate security.
I do think that there's a difference between extremely minor and petty vandalism, and griefing, though. I picture griefing more like throwing a firebomb to torch someone's workplace or spacing the room. Something that causes shitloads of damage and completely fucks their job up almost irreversibly. Like, busting into botany and smashing all their hydroponics for no reason would be griefing, in my opinion. If something can be fixed in ten seconds, then it's probably not griefing.
Insert Tyrion Lannister "Nothing someone says before the word "but" really counts" here.
I see IC conflicts all the time that start off because someone was just being annoying or whatnot. My previously mentioned story about security having a feud with medical was entirely spurred by IC conflict created by some people being dicks to each other ICly. In particular, the HOS that shift was a Manuel regular that is somewhat notorious for starting feuds ranging from a few guys to, in that instance, entire departments, due to the fact that their behavior tends to agitate some.
(also because some people 100% metagrudge them, unfortunately)
I didn't think a throwaway story would have this much discussion. My bad.
There's a tendency for certain players to view that if you're not 100% doing the meta at every waking instance, then you're doing the job wrong. I think it tends to be the most noticeable in security and antagonist mains.* For instance, almost every round there's a nightmare the security checkpoint at arrivals gets broken into, and at the very least, the headset is stolen.blackdav123 wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 1:30 am why are people so against manhunts that any time any security gameplay loops get brought up the very first counter argument is "what if they run away????"
manhunts are 99% of the time more interesting than whatever the hell you were going to do instead. there are countless ways to find the guy you are looking for. security tools are great for catching the guy running away. finding the perp is never hard even with a disguise, as it will always just be the next guy with a gasmask and no ID you see in the hall.
set a trap or do a sting operation or something. stop being boring with how you arrest people.
*yes, yes, I know you can't 'main' antagonist, but you basically can on Manuel. A fair portion of the people on Manuel seemingly don't have most, or any types, of antagonist enabled. I kind of wish we had statistics for that kind of thing.
WARNING, Prolonged exposure to my opinions can be mentally scarring or in some cases, FATAL
Stamper of papers, pusher of crates, and the cleaner of floors.
I'm Eugine Adrian Hynes on Manuel, I'm very uncool.
Stamper of papers, pusher of crates, and the cleaner of floors.
I'm Eugine Adrian Hynes on Manuel, I'm very uncool.
Super Aggro Crag wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2023 5:11 pm I assume he did it elsewhere because it's fucking goofball and he never half-asses his shitty ideas, he full asses them so both cheeks are absolutely slathered in shit
-
- Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2019 2:05 pm
- Byond Username: BlueMemesauce
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
Officer: "Not so fast! You stand before Gerrard, guardian of the treasure chest of the Mayan temple, and I will make sure to pr—hey!"Vekter wrote: ↑Thu May 25, 2023 9:25 pm Baron posted a very good example of a bad Sec interaction. Here's an example of a good one on LRP:
(An officer sees an assistant breaking a window.)
Officer: "Stop that or I'm arresting you."
Assistant: "No."
Officer: *Arrests the assistant.*
That's it. That's a completely valid interaction. It's that simple.
Assistant: *Shoves the officer.*
Detective: "Oh fuck this, I'm off!"
Officer: "Hey, what… What are you doing?! Hey, plea—he—"
Assistant: *Throws the officer into a pit of lava.*
- Archie700
- In-Game Admin
- Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2016 1:56 am
- Byond Username: Archie700
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
This is 100% the sort of policy that needs to be tested out before launching
-
- Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:02 pm
- Byond Username: Chocolate_bickie
Re: Security rules update peanut: I AM THE LAW until I'm not
I'm not saying arrests have to be optimal. I'm saying you can't tell some players why they are being arrested cos they flee as soon as they see you.sinfulbliss wrote: ↑Fri May 26, 2023 12:49 am Okay, so what? Why do you NEED to arrest the person who’s wanted for a minor crime (which this policy only applies to) in the most optimal possible way without giving them a chance to respond?
And how exactly does the policy protect them? You can STILL wordlessly arrest them. All it means is that they’re allowed to retaliate normally against you if you choose the wordless approach.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bepis, dragomagol, iwishforducks, Rhials