MattTheFicus

It’s not too hard to learn DM, so I wouldn’t toss ideas on the spot! Like I said, plenty of contributors can help us get your feet under ya to start contributing. It all boils down to having the drive, effort, and dedication to wanting your ideas in the game!

Heya! Just as a heads up, if you want to get a lot more feedback/input for Design Docs/Project Ideas I highly suggest making a thread in #project-discussion on the Discord! The forums are sadly a bit outdated and cumbersome for collaborative work, even if it is good for archival tracking. You can even interface with the Development Team a bit easier there as many of us don’t really check the forums for Dev-related things. Take a look around then other posted threads or ask around for the best way to format a proper Design Document too! That being said, if you really want this idea to be added/applied, I suggest looking into programming it yourself. There’s a bit of a stigma for “Ideas Guying” in general, which means if ya really want something to be added to the codebase you’re gonna have to buckle down and learn to do it yourself! You’re free to ask around in #coding-chat if ya need assistance, plenty of people are willing to help teach new contributors if you’re willing to learn!

This is what was originally thought of for the High Risk QM item. However, it comes with the truly massive "WYCI" moment.

Balance-wise, absolutely not. You already have the ability to be fairly lethal in your Rules of Engagement. They dont need more things to fight people with.

WYCI :^)

Hobo-ing is its own issue. Assistants as a fine are whole. If Paradise wants to make being a Bridge Hobo a LRP thing and enforce it, then it would need to be brought up as a Rule.

Its a non-issue IMO. If people have an issue with Bridge Hobos due to it making antagging around the Bridge hard, ahelp to bomb them. Most Staff love giving permission to bomb the local Station homeless

As always: When You Code It.

I can attest that pepperspray does not require anything but a functional face to hurt like a BITCH. Never want it to happen again. Flashes make sense, but man oh man does pepperspray fuck you up.

It turns out locking does not stop the spam-hide/unhiding of posts. If youre going to call people out for what you suppose is non-transparency and issues, please kindly dont hide the post yourself afterwards and make it look like we could have possibly hid it. It doesnt look good on us and it DEFINITELY doesnt look good on you. If you want us to be more transparent for issues, lets not hide the replies okay?

This is because the issue IS nuanced. No balance issue is a simple one-dimensional thing. There's a reason these changes are discussed and voted on for nearly a month before the PR was merged. 1. This is anecdotal on both sides. If you don't feel you need a lethal to deal with locker dragging, that's your opinion. Given Balance and Design votes are done off the experienced opinions of its Members, that's just how it is. 2. Disengaging is not the catch-all solution to this "tech". Nor is numbers. Nor are lethals. I see an issue with a mechanic, someone made a PR that "fixes" this issue in my eyes in a realistic and non-intrusive way that has ways for non-combatants to get around the "downsides", and I support the idea. It really aint deeper than that. The new LWAP was literally designed with this in mind. So. That's kinda out the window. Yes, its nerfing the idea of using a basic Station tool to Benny Hill chase Security around the Station. I dont see that as healthy gameplay and it also happens to encourage other ways of problem solving for roles that DO have to drag stuff around. The end-all of this also comes down to "if you think this is a bad change, make a PR to revert/change it and see if it passes a vote".

The open hand thing is nice, and would make it better for people who drag things about. However, I still think making players think of different ways to do their job that might be more "optimal" is good. That, and nothing stops you from getting a holster to quickly drop your weapon into and basically negate the whole "you need open hands" idea.

This is my main issue with it. If I see a locker dragger, Im FORCED to get a lethal cause I need ANY possible hit to slow them down. That, or I need to shoot the locker open. This just means I'm now escalating for a literal box made of metal. This likely wont matter to the robusto locker dragging, but it WILL effect everyone else.

I can see how a lot of people might see this as a "hitting more skilled players at the detriment of all" but my main issue is the people making that argument seem to BE the people who are more likely to use the tech than not. The average 200h Security player isnt going to flank anyone and if they ARE left alone against this tech theyre gonna get bodied (which was likely either way). The issue then drops to "well how else can you make the system work?". Well, shooting the locker to open it just means they close it right after. Destroying the locker could work, but then youre going to have a reason to grab lethals for someone literally grabbing a locker - which is bad. Delay on open when dragging would be even worse of a change feel-wise and also doesnt really make sense from a logical standpoint. A "stamina" system will be even more detrimental overall IMO as we dont have it in any other movement system currently. Nah I understand, I came off a bit heated, but its a tad bit disheartening to see people assume that this wasnt discussed at all and just got railroaded through. The PR was up for a month and had comments placed on it and some discussion when it was opened as well. But, as always, if a change is bad it CAN be reverted. I simply just haven't had enough data to prove it IS a bad change yet other than peoples' personal takes being used as "community sentiment".

These "ways of getting around the new system" were discussed by the Balance Team (pushing things, MULEs, Ambulance, etc) and part of the reason people approved of the change. We're not going to point out every one of these reason because players have to LEARN how to deal with downsides on their own. Just like the Belt/Tool PR, people are going to moan about changes and call them poor when in reality it opens up other opportunities for gameplay. Change your behavior and adapt. This PR had minimal approval within the Balance Team if I recall. We wanted it tested because most of us already were teetering on disapproval and simply wanted to confirm that. In comparison, the discussions about the pulling PR led to a bit more of a "well, there's a bunch of other systems that allows/could allow for you to get around this in non-combat situations already so it effects the overall game less so" kind of take. Just like the Belt/Tool PR, people complained about it a bunch but now simply use other ways to get around this limitation. You can do so with this PR as well. A large majority of the locker dragging was coupled with an E-bow (anecdotal, sure). But, as I said above - You are a terrorist on a NT-owned Station. You are not supposed to be able to Benny Hill your way around the halls because "haha funny locker/crate goes brrrrt". There are PLENTY of ways to surgically execute your fights for theft items/assasinations that dont require you to be in all-out combat with Security for the full shift. IMO, the only time you should be FULL LOUD UNGA fighting Security is with Hijack or with Die a Glorious. Anyone who adheres to the "but I HAVE to pay the adrenals/meth tax" needs to reevaluate their playstyle and consider that youre CHOOSING the hard path to play if you want to unga fight Security all shift.