Nakhi

This came to mind just a few minutes before posting. This has been a minor annoyance for me. I like making nice, formatted records for the characters. With that in mind, on character set up, it shows the line breaks when you enter the text, but in-game it results in a giant text block with no formatting, at least not in the terms of separate lines and paragraphs. So, with that in mind, is there any way to make that happen in-game, at least line breaks within the computer records? Alternatively, tell me if I am wrong in seeing any of this. I may be alone in wanting such formatting since I am the only person that ever does records it seems.

Having played HoS in the past (never again) and seeing the state of Security many rounds when I play pilot or Rep, it's sad just how accurate that picture is. And therefore, it's actually pretty damn funny.

Name: Azukhannja Tulrikvah Preferred Name(s): Azu, Azuk, Han Age: 23 Gender: Male Race: Tajaran Ethnicity: Njarir'Akhan Blood Type: O+ Home System: S'randarr Citizenship: Adhomai Faction: Unknown Religion: None Listed Mental Status: Stable Physical Status: Active Background: [Pending] Employment Records: Qualifications and Certifications: - Certified Pod Pilot Operator - Certified Pod Pilot Mechanic - Trained in Firearms - Trained in Close Combat Employment Records: Azukhannja is a relatively new employee. He was picked up only a couple months ago from an Adhomai based mercenary group. Despite a mercenary background, he has relatively little actual combat experience. His selection to fly the station based combat pods was due mostly in part to failing most of his Security exams but still meeting minimum requirements. If he is ever assigned as a mechanic, please ensure that he never gets a security transfer. Security Records: No criminal records exist, however this employee is known to have a bit of an attitude when dealing with those that can't or won't follow the law, particularly if that's security. Medical Records:\ Overall, Azukhannja is a very health Tajaran specimen. Everything about him appears to be in order, with no mechanical parts or other issues showing up. Mental Evaluation: He appears to be a very optimistic, relatively friendly sort. This is a bit of a change from the norm out on the frontier. With that in mind, anything that may deviate from that norm without a reason behind it may be worth looking into. Commendations [only to be added by admin]: Reprimands [only to be added by admin]:

At least you weren't a changeling. But yes, never trust the blue coat. They'll either suck out your fluids absorb you or turn you into an abomination. Or just saw your head off because 'LOOC: How do surgery work?'. Huzzah for at least somewhat gender ambiguous names. I think. Finally, i am relevant. Even through the implied censor.

Morphs were on the station. I happened into the bar and they all took my form. What's worse than one uptight bureaucrat? Four of them. If only there was time to embark on adventures of tormenting people with SOP and Law.

Edited to make it fit into a single image.

I don't think it really calls for more code, but a clarification on the discrepancy between the in-game red alert and the wiki red alert would be greatly useful. As for the extra codes, Gamma is basically what Black is. Perhaps, instead, do what Unbound Travels did. If the discussion was regarding code levels, Black could be for a Central Command ordered quarantine. In other words, virus gets loose via virology or random event. If it gets too widespread and is deadly, the code would be an IC quarantine of the station. Yellow on the other hand could be useful but, again, Red Alert can fit it if there's proper clarification.

This may be a personal issue with the wording, or maybe it's intentional. It may also fit Tully's SOP things, but I am putting it here just as a general, separate thing. Anyway, my issue stems from the SOP wiki page, and the in-game text of the red alert, and in particular one part of it. SOP page says that Red Alert is for "the threat is confirmed". However, in game, there's: It feels off to have the two different definitions. As one person said one round, "If you're on red alert all the time, you're on red alert none of the time". Every time an antagonist is found, it would be a required red alert under the SOP page, but the red alert text in game says "immediate and serious threat", and rarely do the standard antagonists (Traitor, Changeling, other crew antags) pose that threat all the time. This, coupled with the blue alert wording: This allows no step between red and blue, where you know the threat and what it is, but it's not so severe that the alert needs to go to maximum (Gamma not counted since it's a non-standard alert). I guess my issue boils down to the very binary alert system (green not counting, so effectively "we think there's something" and "oh god it's killing everyone"), and the contradiction between the SOP page and the in-game text. So, my suggestion is mostly to clarify which is to be followed, at least add a midway alert between the Blue and Red (if coding permits, since that sounds like it'd be a pain), or maybe just allow some interpretation. I don't know. As a personal opinion, I don't see why Code Red needs to be for confirmed threats, because then a station will be in red alert all round. Assuming Red Alert protocol was upheld all the time (good luck), you'd get a round where no one can leave their departments and security can reign over everyone almost unquestioningly. That's a hypothetical of course. I personally play Captain, as an example, as resorting to red alert only when there's the immediate and serious threat, and blue alert for confirmed (and suspected) antagonist activity.

I figure at this point there's no real reason to bang thus drum further, since it's been made somewhat clear by all parties, but here's my two uninvited cents: I am split on this. I can see both sides, having been on both sides - though proper staffing has been done elsewhere, granted. On one hand, I see the administrative opinion, and I agree heavily with it. If people are going to be shitheads constantly, they deserve to be treated as such. When you deal with too many over a time period, yeah, you grow weary of the bullshit. I myself have had moments where I just kind of have a "fuck it all" moment and get a bit harsh on someone that probably deserved the absolute bluntness and dickishness. Was it right? Arguable. Did it help relieve some stress? Yes. Personally I took the time to notice which ckeys were regular, and usually adjust my treatment toward that. Possible with everyone on a 50+ person round (god forbid a 100+)? No. Does it help at least knowing that some players aren't total shits just looking at the ckey? Absolutely. Ultimately I believe the admins are right in the way they handle most situations. When you deal with shit, all you see is shit. Metaphorically. On the other, there's the player opinion, which seems to be the unpopular opinion in large part. I would hazard to say that this ties in, in part, with the previous statement regarding the regulars and new players. When you've played on the server for months/years, and most staff at least know of you, it can get somewhat annoying when you have one approach you with a seemingly hostile tone over possibly a small infraction, usually a spawn of a mistake not usually made. That tone can definitely set the stage for future conversation. Maybe. I saw Tully mentioned the checklist, which is good to hear. I was unaware of that, and it can definitely be useful, but also that sensing of the person's responses. And the middle ground, a personal opinion here, looking at both sides from a slight distance. It goes without saying that there are players that come on just to piss off the admins, and then proceed to whine about it wherever they can to ruin a server reputation. I've dealt with those people when I moderated for Unbound Travels. But at the same time there's always admins that will have some sort of negative bias against player x. Is it right? Not always. I can say I've seen ckeys pop up and I just go "Great, it's that guy again", because you know he's going to do something wrong, or already has, and he's going to be a shit about it. Personally I would think if you see a ckey that you know as a regular, that maybe they don't need a... hostile tone. It's hard to have tone inflections over text, true, but you can sometimes tell by phrasing. At the same time, I do believe that the regular playerbase, in part (not even a large part), does have some attitude issues, and I do commend the staff for keeping a good hold on things and not banning indiscriminately. ------ Going beyond a bit here, addressing other posts, I think we can all agree that everyone, not just admins, could do with being nicer to each other if possible. So, as far as that goes as a suggestion, I think most of us can implement being nicer to each other. Or at least should, if only for a friendlier server all around. And ideally one with minimal forced cacti penetration over internet protocol.

If security ever makes used of the Wanted editions, it pops up on all newscasters, with a special alarm, and the newscasters themselves flash with a red at the top. The security newscasters are unique in that only they can censor news feeds and make the wanted issues, so they really don't need to be everywhere. On topic though, the photos would usually be useful. Usually, because I think most people that are wanted end up using something to obscure the face and hide their ID, particularly if they did enough to warrant the wanted edition being made for them. Either way, the photos themselves could be useful to supplement reports.

Actually the difference in the two is that the NT Rep stamp stamps green on a paper, and a Central Command fax stamp ends up grey. While on the paper you're reading they look the same, the item sprite is different. As I recall, they used to have a different stamp that just saying NT Representative, like the Captain's stamp and so on. So, yes, in a way they have a Central Command Stamp, but it doesn't mean much. No one listens to the representative anyway, and you can tell a normal paper and fax apart from a Central Command one. I think they have different fonts.

Here's what I am thinking, if people think the Blueshield should have a "unique" ballistic option: I recall the Colt .45 code being tossed around and possibly implemented. Why not give the Blueshield the Colt, leaving the revolver with the detective? The Colt at least would have ability to use different types of ammunition (i.e. rubber or lethals) without the possibility of failure like the .357 revolver modification. It gives the flexibility in armament, I think, since it's not innately lethal and still gets the job done.

I actually have to agree with Flat up here for once. For a while I have heard complaints about the revolver, from the instant stun (before instant stun was universal), to the fact it's ballistic. I wasn't aware that it did 15 damage per shot now, but I also don't think that's necessarily a bad thing. As many have said, it gives the less-lethal option to the Blueshield, while still having lethality if used as such. Compared to the non-lethal security guard, if referring to at least their initial equipment, less-lethal is probably a good thing; if someone is coming after heads, they probably intend to do serious damage and have serious equipment. When I play Blueshield, the revolver gets tucked into the holster, and my primary weapon is the taser. Why? Because the revolver has limited ammunition, I see it as an emergency weapon. Nuke/traitor/high-threat antag approaching? Pull the revolver and pop a shot while evacuating your VIPs, then call out the threat for Security. Those that use the revolver first off strike me as... off. Again, limited rounds (even if more can be made, good luck getting Cargo to do that), and now the damage it can cause. Good against actual threats, not good for the greytide that is just toolboxing the Captain because "lol imma griff u". In short: I think the Blueshield is fine, and people are making an issue of something that really isn't that major.

I've personally played Representative like this, sort of. The Blueshield does their own thing, I do my own thing, but if anything arises within the command structure (as stated earlier) deferring to the Rep would allow a sense of neutrality, instead of having to take orders from the Captain only, which can result in... well, rather questionable orders. I've seen, in the past, Blueshields that were pets of the Captain, effectively an enforcer that obeyed unquestioningly because that was their superior. In other words, they'd break the law, break SOP, and never listen to other heads let alone protect them most of the time. That's probably the exception now though at least. So yeah, I think the wording that they answer to the Rep is a good idea in this sense, but that paper needs updating. It's... well, default. I doubt it's changed since Blueshield was implemented.

Yes please. I think I've said this IC and OOC. The difference between the other offices is that rarely are they used for meetings. A good Rep will call people to their office if they are investigating something or they needed to personally discuss a matter. The door button seems more dignified.

What I think would be cool is if we had Bay's 'electrochromatic glass'. It's in a few heads offices, and basically you press a button and it turns the blue reinforced into tinted black windows you can't see into. Not quite the same as what you're proposing, but a fair slight cooler than shutters. Maybe not exactly what was in mind, but something I recalled that was interesting. Almost anything would be better than being able to awkwardly stand on the other side of two reinforced windows, a grille, behind an airlock, and still be able to hear the conversation up front. While I understand the utility, and the fact it's basically an SS13 staple and fact of the game, it feels a bit... off.

And then you break out of Perma with a rock hammer after crawling through 100 yards of disposals pipes. But I personally like the idea of, basically, a ghetto wall safe.

I'm not referring specifically to those, it's just what helped bring up the thought. By that happening every round, you would think a corporation would buckle down on such treatment. As for admin intervention, maybe for once we could lighten the workload on the staff by adding a law? I mean, sure, really bad stuff would still be looked at, but there's been times the sexual harassment isn't rule breaking, but still helps break down a department or even the command staff if it hits that level. This is largely just some thoughts that went through, as I could see ways the law would be useful, but I agree it can be a slippery slope in some ways. However if implemented and well explained, it could be used to, at least, curb some of the shittier, non-rule breaking behavior. Or maybe I am making it out to be bigger than it really is because I am not sure either way.

Personally I find the fact security arrests for "breaking into the assembly line" to be unfortunate. I've had several rounds when I used to play engineering and I completely restored the line and built mechs from it. Made a Durand one time, usually ripleys to assist engineering. Need to get science to help supply parts, CE to let you into tech storage for the boards, and science access for the computers, but it can be fun and rewarding to have uninterrupted restoration time with utility. Otherwise I kind of like the ideas. However a pressurized engine room, if running the singularity would be difficult, unless there's a surrounding area of windows. The field DOESN'T hold air. I've learned that the hard way.

This cropped up as part of a discussion on my part, and inspired mostly by the constant, every round phenomenon of "x crewmember's ass is nominal", and the AI usually playing along with it. While I don't want to be "that guy", the one that says we should constantly have higher RP, I would think if sexual assault is a crime (and server bannable), than the constant sexual remarks that come up, in AI laws and in the course of insulting people (or creepily flirting with people), sexual harassment should be at least a minor crime. I'd base it on the fact that, you know, it's an offense that, in a real workplace, could result in termination of employment. Before everyone jumps on the SS13 =/= RL bandwagon, I doubt a massive corporation would tolerate it for too long either. After all, it's supposed to be a professional research station. Supposed to be. And yes, I know such a law would only add a larger workload to Security, which is why it would, ideally, be for consistent, aggravating cases. Discuss, if anyone sees fit to, I suppose.