War-only Nuke Ops?

[FlattestGuitar]

Nuke Ops that don't declare war are in general pretty boring in my experience. By the time someone screams about them having boarded the station they can already have their hands on the disk and everyone wastes 30 minutes of their time and has to start over with whatever they were doing that shift.

I think it'd be a solid idea to make Nuke Ops /have/ to declare war. In my current pitch they'd get a five minute grace period to get a good pun going and declare war themselves (using the pun, of course) or, after the five minutes, the war would be declared automatically.

Ideally, this would go together with a rebalanced and pop-dependent amount of TC, which I'll be looking into regardless of whether this suggestion itself gets any traction.

I'll be implementing this myself if this gets enough support.

[Purpose2]

100%+ more fun.

Sneaky little operations can be fun, but not for a massive round ending event... Stealth ops is just giving 5 traitors who start off station one objective, and told to work together on it... And really when they fail they have only themselves to blame because its the easiest thing.

Nuclear Operations should always be war in my opinion... it enables the crew to form a militia and all the fun things associated with that.

Edited July 19, 2017 by Purpose2

[ZN23X]

I've been nuke ops 5 times, all 5 times we went "stealth", and all 5 times we got discovered way too early and the hell beaten out of us.

[Anticept]

Suggestion:

Nuke ops always war.

SIT becomes its own gamemode for stealth ops, but instead of one single objective, they have a set of high profile objectives. What's the difference between this and normal traitor rounds? The cooperation is expected from the beginning. Only part that I'm not sure about is is this enough to hype the crew up? Is there enough interesting things for SIT players to do, and enough for the station to fear for their lives and hunt for them if they are discovered? SHOULD they even be hunted by crew?

Lots of things to think about.

Edited July 19, 2017 by Anticept

[ZN23X]

36 minutes ago, Anticept said:

Suggestion:

Nuke ops always war.

SIT becomes its own gamemode for stealth ops, but instead of one single objective, they have a set of high profile objectives. What's the difference between this and normal traitor rounds? The cooperation is expected from the beginning. Only part that I'm not sure about is is this enough to hype the crew up? Is there enough interesting things for SIT players to do, and enough for the station to fear for their lives and hunt for them if they are discovered? SHOULD they even be hunted by crew?

Lots of things to think about.

So SIT would sorta be like vox raiders except they wouldn't be as...visible? Sounds like it'd be a nice add-in antag to mix up other game modes.

I like it. Was honestly sorta thinking do saying something like this myself but you worded it better than I would have ???

Edited July 20, 2017 by ZN23X

[Mikierpg]

Huh ive never seen stealth ops, it has always been a wish of mine to infiltrate into the station, assassinate a few people and take their identities via chameleon gear. The next step would be -to assimilate the heads. Then corner the captain and get the disk. The wonderful aspect of this is that it would also be possible to do nonlethal-y. Just build a small space box and lock people in it, they wont be able to do anything and you can play as the people rather than killing them. You could even just stunbaton the captain, take the disk and arm the nuke without anyone ever knowing it was nuke ops. The closest thing I've done to nuke ops was when we teleported onto the bridge and blitzed the captain.

Most of the time stealth is suggested (By me or another) it gets shot down because people don't think they can pull it off.

[WingedYordle]

I’ve gotten both and it's nice to be surprised and nice to have them declare war and everyone goes cryo

[embracetheducc]

On 7/19/2017 at 7:41 PM, Anticept said:

Suggestion:

Nuke ops always war.

SIT becomes its own gamemode for stealth ops, but instead of one single objective, they have a set of high profile objectives. What's the difference between this and normal traitor rounds? The cooperation is expected from the beginning. Only part that I'm not sure about is is this enough to hype the crew up? Is there enough interesting things for SIT players to do, and enough for the station to fear for their lives and hunt for them if they are discovered? SHOULD they even be hunted by crew?

Lots of things to think about.

This

[Corocan]

Well first we gotta define 'stealth ops'.

Presumably, the objective of a stealth operation is to secure the disk, arm the nuke, and escape without alerting the crew. I don't think I've ever actually seen this go down. The crew almost always gets alerted there's nukies on the station but, like you mentioned, it's far too late. A legitimate stealth op isn't a bad thing, the thing I think most people really hate are Blitz Ops, which is what most 'stealth ops' tend to devolve into because someone, naturally, gets caught so it just turns into four or five bloodsuits storming the woefully unprepared bridge and murderizing anyone in sight right before arming the nuke and escaping.

 

I think a better option would be to severely limit the equipment that nukies can purchase without declaring war. Maybe only limit it to things that would be genuinely useful for a stealth operation and open up the more devastating equipment for those that actually declare war. This way, even if nukies decide to do a blitz op, they're not as heavily armed for a full scale blitz and have to deal with the fallout of a security team that is actually readily equipped to deal with them.

Edited September 24, 2018 by Corocan

[Mikierpg]

41 minutes ago, Corocan said:

I think a better option would be to severely limit the equipment that nukies can purchase without declaring war. Maybe only limit it to things that would be genuinely useful for a stealth operation and open up the more devastating equipment for those that actually declare war. This way, even if nukies decide to do a blitz op, they're not as heavily armed for a full scale blitz and have to deal with the fallout of a security team that is actually readily equipped to deal with them.

That makes a lot of sense. It would force people to use the foam weapons if they didnt want to actually go in guns ablazing, or they would be using weaker bulldogs and stetckins. You could remove a lot of options from non-war and that would get people doing more creative things.

[Rurik]

As a note; when I mention stealth ops here, I mean nukies that don't declare war, not nukies that stuff all their stuff in a backpack and try to walk around like normal civilians.

I'd be inclined to agree that stealth ops is relatively easy (compared to war), and usually ends in the nukies storming the bridge, having the disk, and on their way out before sec even reaches the bridge. That is boring, no sec are able to respond, if they do its likely they don't have the needed equipment to take a nukie down (unless the nukies took their time murdering people). However I seen plenty stealth rounds where everything goes wrong, and the nuke ops die a horrible death before they even reach the bridge. Why? Cause sometimes nuke ops are composed of newer players.

I can't speak for others, but I always considered stealth to be for those newer to the role or ss13 in general, to ease them in. War, on the other hand, for hardened veterans who know stealth would be too easy for them. I dislike the idea of newbies forced to go war and then die 5 mins within arriving on station, for a wasted 30 mins as the crew boards the shuttle or effectively extended if they do no damage and shuttle is not called. 

I'll admit, sometimes that still happens as newbies choose war. Or worse, if a competent group of players choose stealth and mop the floor with command before they even knew what hit them. In the end I am ambivalent about the idea, but I would still be willing to give it a try and see how its received, for sure. I just felt the need to mention stealth does have its use, and quite a good one if done by the newer folks. That being said, stealth ops on low pop? Yikes.

[Splgrk]

SIT sounds like a great idea. In general, I'd like to see more cooperative antags. Preferably ones that aren't as visible and/or apocalyptic as slings and cult.

[EvadableMoxie]

I hate it when Nukies just blitz the disk in stealth because if they are competent there is no way 2-3 sec armed with tasers because it's green alert is going to stop even one d-sword elite hard-suit nukie on adrenals.  It's an absolute waste of time for everyone involved.

That said, just because nukies don't war dec doesn't mean they always Blitz, and there is something to be said for the sudden "Oh fuck" factor of nukies charging the bridge.  The problem is it's only fun when the nukies are bad and decide to randomly murderbone the crew, giving the Captain and security time to regroup.

I think I like Anticept's idea of splitting it into two modes the best.  It gives us both stealth and loud but lets us better control the situation and gear, so stealth nukies get stealth equipment instead of blitz equipment.  

The problem is that SIT would have to be handled very carefully, lest it become something no one cares about.  What I mean is an SIT should be a pretty big deal, not something where the round ends with a crew transfer and at the end game screen everyone goes "Oh, there was an SIT?" because none of the goals actually impacted anyone.   SIT goals should be things that the crew is going to feel, not just "Steal the hand teleporter." Admins have run space pirate or SIT events before and generally it's pretty boring for everyone but the SIT when the SIT is good and doesn't get caught because no one really much cares if some items go missing. That's a problem that will need to be fixed.

[Birdtalon]

Wow that 1 year + necro.

[ZN23X]

29 minutes ago, Birdtalon said:

Wow that 1 year + necro.

I thought the same thing when I saw this come up again XD

[Mikierpg]

Hahah, ive been browsing old suggestions and saw this on the 8th page and thought i would add my comments to it.