Tayswift

If an admin has admonished you for something in error, then you can make an admin complaint/Pm a headmin about that. I'm not sure why you would have to appeal notes from the past? Why would you need to appeal something weeks after it's happened? Just recently there was an admin complaint where an admin made an error in rule enforcement/warning and the corresponding note was fixed to reflect that correction. If you're waiting weeks after the fact to appeal a simple warning, then your memory will be unreliable anyways and won't help in terms of appealing that note. There are not lots of notes. Talk to a headmin. I think you're really overestimating the number of notes you have. The only reason you would have lots of notes is if you're a problem player, and if you are, you would know from multiple warnings and bans. The players that tend to accrue a lot of notes are players who are immature, lack impulse control, have anger issues, or are too self centered to play a cooperative RP game. You will know if you are one of these because you will be the constant target of admin PMs. Keep in mind that for non-problem players like those of you chiming in on this thread, notes are rare or non-existent. But having to face constant rules lawyering and note appeals from the players that actually get notes? That's not a can of worms we want to open. This is called optimizing for the common case. The vast majority of the time, a note appeal is not going to be productive, and for those instances where an admin has actually made a mistake, we already have the means for appealing that.

People are starting to restate points that have already been addressed. Let's stop going in circles. Yes we can and yes we do. In game, admin judgements are final. Forums allow for these in game judgements to be overridden by headmins. This is how it's always worked. How does the former necessitate the latter? You aren't backing up your claims with any warrants or evidence. We ask the players to respect our decisions in game because disputes are better handled via the forums, since headmins aren't always on in game, and if they are, they aren't always available for dispute resolution. Once again, you just say our argument is false. We've given plenty of examples of when it's useful to have secret information. Because we have our own systems of oversight and they work. There's no reason player oversight would help. We've already pointed out how player oversight would cause unnecessary drama and rules lawyering over the tiniest things. As for the argument of "learning", which we've literally addressed multiple times throughout this thread, the rules are literally just one page. Most people in this thread don't even have multiple notes for the same thing. It's really not that bad. If you're a player who is here in good faith to try to have fun and help everyone else have fun, you won't have any problems. A note saying you were warned isn't going to help that much. If you really absolutely do need a record of every time an admin talked to you, you can open up the PMs panel and copy and paste the conversation into a file. If there was information you needed to know, we would've told you already.

You couldn't even take a minute to go read it again for yourself? Your admin app rejection literally says you had a warning "not even a month ago". Your most recent permanent ban at time of admin application was January 2019, not "2+ years" ago. Your mentor app rejection says that we saw improvement but wanted to see a little bit more, and even encouraged you to apply again in the future. Which is literally the exact opposite of "you have too many notes, you will never change, never apply again". I'm not sure why you've constructed this narrative in your head that the staff are out to get you, but it's entirely imaginary. We try our best to look for improvement in our players, because what is even the point of warnings and ban appeals if we're not willing to accept that people can improve? We might as well just ban you at first transgression and take down our appeals forum.

This is blatantly false. You have access to the reason your application was rejected. There's no excuse to be posting misinformation in this case. Notes do not magically become irrelevant after a set amount of time. Admins use their own judgement as to how long ago a note doesn't become a big factor. Plenty of admins have had a lot of notes and bans in their past and made it in.

It's a problem in the example I gave because it's nice to have the flexibility of noting that someone is good at RP without giving them the expectation that they will be chosen for an event in the future. The crux of everything I'm talking about is that things are different when they're being observed. If you do something wrong, we tell you. That's the first order of business. We never just note a rule break, and then don't tell you about it. Like I said, the primary role of admins is to try to create an environment where people are following the rules. If we don't tell you that you broke a rule, then that's completely counter to our purpose. The note is a thing we will often write down after the fact just for record keeping. It's helpful to other admins in recognizing a recurring issue. We are not here to secretly test your reading comprehension and then ambush you with the banhammer when you don't follow the rules. As for things that we aren't sure about, the whole point of that is not giving it away or potentially falsely accusing a player. Some issues don't surface from a single incident, but are a pattern across multiple incidents. If someone with bad intentions sees "this player may be trying to do x", then they will either A. get mad and make a note appeal because they weren't actually trying to do x or B. they were trying to do x and change it up to be sneakier in the future. It's much better to, for example in the case of antag fishing, just warn the player once you have enough evidence.

Notes are an internal tool used to track various things that need to persist across players, not just warnings and bans, such as good things ("this player did a good job in this event; consider picking them for RP heavy event roles in the future") or iffy things that might not be an issue but should be thought about in the future ("this player seems to quit early a lot. Look into further if you also notice this pattern"). It would be very limiting to make them be public, since we would be facing a note appeal any time anything negative appeared. This increases bureaucracy for no good reason at all and changes the way notes would be used. Any time a note becomes consequential, you'll know about it anyways, and can dispute it then. For example, an admin might cite previous occurrences of an issue in banning someone. It's not really that big of a deal. If you're not a player who's had repeated problems with following the rules, your notes are going to be extremely boring at best. You don't need to be worried about an invisible "downward spiral", because you will know it's happening due to repeated warnings from admins. We are not here to discipline you or turn you into a better person or parent you. We're just here to try to make sure people are following the rules, and if we don't tell you what rules you're breaking, then what's the point? To have a "gotcha!" moment as we surprise ban you forever? Almost everyone gets a 2nd chance after a ban here, anyways. If you believe an admin has warned you in mistake, we've got plenty of examples of admin complaints where an incorrect warning has been rescinded (and the corresponding note also revised/removed). I would be in favor of an optional private admin complaints forum. Not everyone is comfortable complaining about staff publicly. I'm not sure which admin said this to you, but if you have logs of this, please file an admin complaint. It's my personal experience that admins generally try to explain what rule you broke, especially if you're new. If this sort of thing is happening, it's a reason to file an admin complaint and let that admin know they aren't being detailed enough, not a reason to change the notes system.

Instead of a portable charger, we can just make all energy guns self-recharge, at a slow enough rate that it wouldn't really help you much in a single combat, but would make running around for a charger less important. Increasing the convenience and ease of use of energy weapons could help make their lack of damage feel better.

pAIs are a mostly flavor + RP role because we're still an MRP server and there's still room for that kind of thing. When people put themselves up for pAI, they're not necessarily looking to be holoparasite lite. Lavaland ghost roles are cordoned off in Lavaland, so unless you want pAIs to have additional restrictions (restricted to Lavaland, capped number, or something like that), I don't see why they should become capable of combat.

Unless things changed recently, we already have this. It's the little white crates. I think they're called freezers and each OR has one.

I think this could be done in a more interesting way than this. The lead poisoning from a bullet would only be over long term, and having to remove the bullet is just an overdone hollywood cliche.

On the topic of bullets not breaking bones, maybe it would be a good idea to expand this to other damage types. Maybe blunt weapons have a higher chance of breaking bones, but things like bullets and scalpels maybe not so much.

I really like this idea, because it keeps credits non-persistent and as flavor. I think to make things a little more lore friendly, it should be framed as a "performance bonus" instead of as wages (many NT employees are probably more like indentured servants than salaried workers). Instead of a time based system, we could also allow heads to grant performance bonuses from their computer. The time the crew member has spent on the station determines the max amount of performance bonus they can award each individual crew member. That way if you haven't been doing your job, you still won't get the money.

Imo, we should not rely on OOC factors to ensure an interesting play experience. Right now, telescience's power is only offset by the fact that it's obscure and not many people bother with it. But like with telecomms, we reduced the complexity and also its power to make it more accessible and less frustrating to deal with when someone who knows the system too well comes along. There definitely have to be IC limits for instant teleportation from anywhere. Maybe it costs resources and has a cooldown or it can't teleport alive mobs or things above a certain mass or size. Maybe only pocket size items can be teleported. Teleporting a GPS in and then using the BSA is frustrating for the AI player but it also seems kind of creative and potentially interesting, as it's using resources that aren't always available. However, teleporting in a player into a wall behind the AI is kind of boring and gamey. It might be nice to find a way to limit telescience enough so that we can get rid of the frustrating parts but keep some of the more interesting uses, if possible. Nevertheless, "improve don't remove" is not always practical, and in my opinion, as it stands right now, telescience's removal seems like a net benefit to the gameplay experience. If we can't figure out a way to make telescience a fun mechanic, then it should be removed.

Thanks! I'm glad that you liked what I wrote. However, it's just my personal opinion and not representative of the staff or playerbase as a whole, and we don't have a "declined suggestion" section, so I will leave it up in case more peeps want to chime in ?

tg did merge a system that would give you points for playing certain roles that would "increase" your chances of being antagonist. However, that system was extremely flawed and broken and was never enabled on tg. The key issue was that it would only increase your chances by reducing other people's chances to be antag. Assuming that we solved that problem though (in some rounds, we would simply have more antags than would usually be added. In that github thread I proposed a few suggestions that would fix the issue), there's a few reasons why I don't think such a system would fit with this server. I don't think we want to overvalue antagonist status. Some people already really like being antag, other people like being either, and some portion of players just don't like being antag. Obviously, I won't blame you if you prefer playing antag over normal crew member, but imo trying to develop your non-antag experiences a little further will help make your non-antag rounds a bit more enjoyable as opposed to just playing it out to roll for the next round. I think our server atmosphere would be negatively impacted if we were to focus heavily on antag status. That's why we have a karma system rather than an antag token system. There's also a lot of implementation issues, like how to count the playtime toward increasing your chances of being antagonist. tg's system put a point value on each job. If we didn't care about jobs, then there's still the weirdness of giving you antag% by the minute. Basically, it's a lot of work for no particular reason, since as bad as rng is sometimes, over the long run, it gives everyone a fair shot at being antag. And then there's round flow issues. Assuming we're not taking other people's antag% for your antag% to increase, in some rounds, we will have more shadowlings or cultists than usually prescribed. That could throw off the flow of the round significantly. Basically, while it would be nice to smooth out rng a little bit, there's a lot of complications that make it not really worth the time and effort.

Instead of being toxic and salty toward Github contributors who are volunteering their time and effort to try to improve the server, why don't you instead either file an issue, or, better yet, update the wiki with the new shortcuts.

I've seen nukies with more than 8000 hours of play time among them combined win a round in less than 30 minutes, but when we don't have any stats on the nukies teams and how often they win or lose I don't want to comment on the "balance". It seems like nukies already enjoy the challenge of declaring war. If they like the challenge, then I don't see what's wrong with it. They already get extra TC when there's more crew. If it's fun, why stress too much about balance? This isn't a competitive game and we're never going to achieve perfect balance unless we implement matchmaking. There are probably a few things we can do to make it easier for new nukies though. There's a lot of gotchas involved, like not using magboots properly or putting the jetpack in the wrong slot. Plenty of times even for stealth nukies someone doesn't figure out how to use the jetpack and blows the nukies' cover. We should think about the UI and UX of these items that many players may not be familiar with. Sometimes it just comes down to being plain unrobust (eg me). What we can also do is make the round more interesting if it's too boring due to lack of conflict. Reinforcements sounds like a good idea for this.

I agree with Rifter here. Magistrates are supposed to be impartial arbiters of the law. They aren't really supposed to try to get stuff under control or make announcements about space law or whatever; to borrow from current political discourse, they call the balls and strikes. I've already seen too many magistrates that take their power a little too far and go around yelling at people for random things and threatening people with sentences. There's no need for that to affect the whole crew as well. Part of judicial temperament is being neutral and staying out of current affairs. Note how none of the supreme Court justices said anything about Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearing, though I'm sure they had their own views. Likewise, the magistrate should be above the day to day affairs of the station.

Thought you were talking about the US for a second ? But yeah, persistent economy doesn't add enough for the inconvenience and the massive effort it would take. This is an LRP system meant for an LRP server.

Yup! Humanoid aliens are fine, but there's plenty of humanoid aliens that don't have to be anthropomorphic animals. We don't need to add any more new species unless that new species is especially compelling in some way. Drask, for example, were a really cool, unique concept.

Hi John! We're always excited to see new contributors. You can check out our github issues for some ideas on places you can start contributing. We also have a discord server where you can ask other coders questions in the coder_chat channel. Hope this helps!

What happens when you ask Alexa to play Despacito on Paradise Station? She gets an ion bolt to the chest ?

Murder requires intent. I feel like in your case, this would be, at worst, manslaughter, since you were honestly trying to perform a requested service for someone. Not having the paperwork makes this a little hard to prove, however, which is why you always have paperwork on hand for any borging. At that point, the person may have realized there was an error in communication, or they consent to the borging and you're good to go.

Because ICly, what happens is that the shuttle is called for auto transfer. Supposedly the crew's getting shipped off somewhere else to go work.

The vote isn't IC, it's an OOC vote. That's why dead people, observers, and even terror spiders can vote to end the shift.