Modify the Antag RNGesus system.

[sdtwbaj]

 

How it is now:

It chooses the antag type(s)

It rolls all players who have that antag selected with even odds.

Those players are antags.

 

My suggested system:

Players have a 'percent' i.e 45%. This is less of a percent and more of a chance. Think of it like a hunger games drawing. Each percent is an entry, so you're more likely to get it if you have 45 entries versus 1 entry.

 

Each round a player plays and isn't antag, their counter goes up by some value based off of an algorithm that is TBD. This gives them a higher chance of being rolled for an Antag, and significantly reduces chances of being antag multiple times in a row, because once you roll antag, your counter resets to 1. However, this is open to abuse, so I propose that it be a baseline requirement that for it to count, you must either be present at round start, or be in the round for 30 minutes to have your counter added to.

 

Si? No? It'd resolve a lot of issues of people not having a antag in weeks.

 

[necaladun]

 

I like it in theory, but to flesh out exactly how it'd work would be complex. Apart from the coding side (pretty sure its doable), there's stuff like counting in job bans, if it would increase your chance if you aren't signed up to the specific antag type, abuse potential, etc.

 

All in all it sounds a bit too complex for something that isn't broken.

 

[sdtwbaj]

 

I like it in theory, but to flesh out exactly how it'd work would be complex. Apart from the coding side (pretty sure its doable), there's stuff like counting in job bans, if it would increase your chance if you aren't signed up to the specific antag type, abuse potential, etc.

 

All in all it sounds a bit too complex for something that isn't broken.

I'd argue that it's broken when people get antag multiple times in 3 days, but others don't get it in months.

 

That's an interesting thought, though. Maybe it increases your counter if you're in the roll for the particular antag of that round. Mid round can still be a concern, but it's doable. Maybe if you join mid round, it adds to your counter, but significantly less than if you're in the antag roll.

 

[Bigtimetripod]

 

Not to add fuel to the fire, but i have gotten Ling-tator-ling in one sitting and rounds were in a row... was a magnificent day of mayhem.

 

But yes, some kind of like a... favor system? If ye havent gotten antag in a long time (10 ingame hours, 1 favor point), ye should be in the "prefered" antag group. Cause i have had days go by without even an hope of being one... how i envy admins of ability to tator oneself...

 

[sdtwbaj]

 

Not to add fuel to the fire, but i have gotten Ling-tator-ling in one sitting and rounds were in a row... was a magnificent day of mayhem.

 

But yes, some kind of like a... favor system? If ye havent gotten antag in a long time (10 ingame hours, 1 favor point), ye should be in the "prefered" antag group. Cause i have had days go by without even an hope of being one... how i envy admins of ability to tator oneself...

Wat.

 

I was thinking something like it factors if you were in the roll for antag, and if you didn't get it you would gain maybe 2 or 3 more "entries".

 

So like, first round, you have one entry. Second round, two more entries.

 

We could also supplement this with the karma system. Maybe each karma gained adding 2 entries.

 

Meaning, if you play without being antag for 3 rounds where you were in the roll, and gain 4 karma, you would have something like 16-18 entries, increasing your odds of antaggery.

 

If you play in a round and aren't in the roll, you gain like, a single entry perhaps. It's a cycling system that still would reward good players.

 

[NTSAM]

stop suggesting to incorporate the karma system into antag purposes

[Keroman]

 

I would like to throw my support in for some sort of rework of the antagonist picking system. It may not actually be broken but it absolutely feels that way when I see the same players getting picked as roundstart cultists 2 or 3 rounds in a row. I recently turned on a few secret antag roles for my Vox character and after playing for a week I'd been picked as a changeling twice and a cultist once. Compare that to when I see someone get multiple antagonist roles in a single day and it's frustrating. I want to try these roles out so I can get better at them, but tough luck, the supposedly random picker chooses the person who's already played an antag twice in as many days.

 

I understand that there's an agreement among the Admins that anyone who asks to be an antagonist be turned into a crab. It's funny and I get why you don't want there to suddenly be twice as many antagonists in any given round, but what if there was a way to see when their last antagonist round was and allow one, maybe two extra people who ahelp and ask to get objectives. Hell there was a cult round a week or so back where we caught the original cultists within 20 minutes with 0 crew manning security and so 3 players were chosen by an Admin to be new cultists (the three best damn cultist players on the server, Cid Squishings, Neri Nalvi, and Colin Black) who then proceeded to steamroll the station with juggernauts.

 

[Dumbdumn5]

I just enjoy the random factors we have in the game already, praise complete RNGesus. It sucks to not get antag for a long time, but it also makes it more interesting in terms of who gets it or not. Assuming you could get an antag round out of it quickly, how many more rounds before you're on the top of the stack? How many people would it have to go through before you have one of the highest percentages for the pick? In addition to this, due to percentage changes, you could easily determine the likelihood of somebody becoming an antagonist if you kept track for a number of rounds. It's a meta way of thinking, but it'd be pretty easy to abuse if you wanted to.

[sdtwbaj]

 

I just enjoy the random factors we have in the game already, praise complete RNGesus. It sucks to not get antag for a long time, but it also makes it more interesting in terms of who gets it or not. Assuming you could get an antag round out of it quickly, how many more rounds before you're on the top of the stack? How many people would it have to go through before you have one of the highest percentages for the pick? In addition to this, due to percentage changes, you could easily determine the likelihood of somebody becoming an antagonist if you kept track for a number of rounds. It's a meta way of thinking, but it'd be pretty easy to abuse if you wanted to.

 

It doesn't make it more interesting, it makes it more annoying and frustrating when someone has been antag many times in a day or couple days, and you're left without antag for weeks upon weeks. And, it'd be considerably hard to figure out to a T who could or could not be antag.

 

Times are something interesting, I'd say that if it counts right, it maintains a randomness while giving players a higher chance the longer they've not been antag. It's a cycle, not based off of other players, but based off of the number of entries you have in the system of RNGeesus. Again, think hunger games drawing.

 

[unmovedmover]

This system would give players a lot more control over when they can be an antag, which I like. However, it would do so at the expense of people who don't play as much. Less frequent players would not accumulate as many "tickets" as frequent ones, and thus be at a disadvantage in the lottery.

[Kyet]

 

Each round a player plays and isn't antag, their counter goes up by some value based off of an algorithm that is TBD.

 

Over the long haul, a completely random system seems to be pretty fair.

Sure, there will be times when your luck is worse than average, and there will be times when it is better than average.

Over the long haul, though, it should all even out.

 

I would like to throw my support in for some sort of rework of the antagonist picking system. It may not actually be broken but it absolutely feels that way when I see the same players getting picked as roundstart cultists 2 or 3 rounds in a row.

 

Perhaps lucky results (like that, in their case) are simply more obvious/memorable than unlucky results (how often do you notice the fact someone is NOT an antag for a few days?).

 

what if there was a way to see when their last antagonist round was and allow one, maybe two extra people who ahelp and ask to get objectives.

 

If the admins did this, they might have a lot more "plz let me be antag it has been 3 days!!!" ahelps.

 

the three best damn cultist players on the server, Cid Squishings, Neri Nalvi, and Colin Black)

 

<3

 

[sdtwbaj]

 

Each round a player plays and isn't antag, their counter goes up by some value based off of an algorithm that is TBD.

 

Over the long haul, a completely random system seems to be pretty fair.

Sure, there will be times when your luck is worse than average, and there will be times when it is better than average.

Over the long haul, though, it should all even out.

 

I would like to throw my support in for some sort of rework of the antagonist picking system. It may not actually be broken but it absolutely feels that way when I see the same players getting picked as roundstart cultists 2 or 3 rounds in a row.

 

Perhaps lucky results (like that, in their case) are simply more obvious/memorable than unlucky results (how often do you notice the fact someone is NOT an antag for a few days?).

 

what if there was a way to see when their last antagonist round was and allow one, maybe two extra people who ahelp and ask to get objectives.

 

If the admins did this, they might have a lot more "plz let me be antag it has been 3 days!!!" ahelps.

 

the three best damn cultist players on the server, Cid Squishings, Neri Nalvi, and Colin Black)

 

<3

It isn't necessarily a worthwhile "long haul" if someone has to wait weeks to play antag. In that time they don't get an opportunity to do anything interesting, they could exhaust options that they enjoy and leave for somewhere else or just stop finding it fun and leaving entirely.

 

The server focuses on making it fun for players, yes? It isn't fun, in my opinion, to watch everyone but yourself get antag, which can lead to becoming disillusioned to "why do I play here, I'll never get antag"

 

[Coldflame]

 

You don't need to be an antag to enjoy the game or do interesting things. If somebody is honestly only playing the game for the sake of their antag rounds, the problem isn't with the selection system- it's with them.

 

The system's fine as it is- though, as an alternative to increasing antag frequency over time, limiting the amount of antags a player can opt into would mean players are more likely to get to play the antags they want to play more regularly without weighting things.

 

[Spacemanspark]

 

You don't need to be an antag to enjoy the game or do interesting things.

True, but people want to play something different from time to time.

It's not a crime to want to play an antag position.

 

[HereticChurch]

I like the current system as-is. If we were to change anything, I'd probably want people who had just played an antag be barred from playing as other roundstart antags for a couple rounds, to give others a chance and not let the RNG favour them too hard.

[Keroman]

 

I like the current system as-is. If we were to change anything, I'd probably want people who had just played an antag be barred from playing as other roundstart antags for a couple rounds, to give others a chance and not let the RNG favour them too hard.

 

My only issue with that compared to the "weighted" system sdtwbaj is proposing is that preventing them from being an round-start antag for even 1 round after an antag round is extremely easy to meta. If their name shows up in the antag list at the end of a round you know 100% that they're not an antag at the next round's start. There are absolutely people who will take advantage of that.

 

[sdtwbaj]

 

I like the current system as-is. If we were to change anything, I'd probably want people who had just played an antag be barred from playing as other roundstart antags for a couple rounds, to give others a chance and not let the RNG favour them too hard.

 

My only issue with that compared to the "weighted" system sdtwbaj is proposing is that preventing them from being an round-start antag for even 1 round after an antag round is extremely easy to meta. If their name shows up in the antag list at the end of a round you know 100% that they're not an antag at the next round's start. There are absolutely people who will take advantage of that.

You never know 100%, it just reduces their odds. It could easily happen if their single entry is rolled.

 

[Keroman]

sdtwbaj I was referring to HereticChurch's idea of barring someone from round-start antag after an antag round. I prefer your idea where the chance of being an antag goes up over time until you are selected as one.

[sdtwbaj]

 

sdtwbaj I was referring to HereticChurch's idea of barring someone from round-start antag after an antag round. I prefer your idea where the chance of being an antag goes up over time until you are selected as one.

ah.

 

I took that system from a server that I play Murder on in gmod. They have a similar system where every round you aren't murderer, your chances go up until you get selected and then they're back to 1 after your murderer round.