Jump to content

Coolrune206

Admins
  • Posts

    153
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Everything posted by Coolrune206

  1. Unfortunately from what I've heard these types of roles play very heavily into elitism.
  2. This AC is relevant and recent to your post. To summarise, all Command members should be expected to be able to communicate with their departments and with Command itself over radio.
  3. I personally feel this change has been beneficial to combat. However, if people dislike this PR's effects, I think there could be other options to consider as alternative implementations. For instance, what if dragging a large object like a locker needed your hands to be free to drag it, otherwise it would be slow? That fixes the dragging issue for people using it out of combat, and it also prevents people from comboing it with weapons like the e-bow or 357 as effectively. I'd also argue it makes sense - how the hell are you pulling a supposedly bulky locker or crate with your hands full of guns? However, I would like to note the current implementation does not entirely kill the environmental combat bonuses offered by lockers and especially crates. You can still run past a locker or crate, drag it a single tile just to be inbetween you and your target, and then release it so you keep running at full speed and there's now an obstacle inbetween yourself and your pursuer - they'll open it and run through if it's a locker, but it still blocks shots, and if it's a crate they'll have to move it or climb over to pursue.
  4. Another thing I heard from the Spriter-Man himself @McRamon was that any changes to screen size would require changes to things like cinematics, which play over the full screen - this means that if we did go for the "opt-in" wide-screen of 17x15 or 19x15, spriters would have to do thrice as much work to accommodate. It's less about lower resolution displays and more about aspect ratio. 1920x1080 and 1366x768 are both in 16:9 aspect ratio. This works well with the widescreen design. However, an aspect ratio of 16:10 has a slightly taller screen than a 16:9, and as such the window needs to stretch further to the side to accommodate this. With widescreen, this ends up with the chat box getting smooshed to the far right. For contrast with your images, this is how the widescreen TM appears on a 16:10 monitor: Not much space to work with, which is inconvenient for doing things like reading mentor tickets (I can only imagine the suffering admins will be having using a small window like this), and it also cuts off half the buttons in the top right. How am I supposed to see the beautiful Donate button like this
  5. I'll echo my thoughts from the Discord and Git here, I currently prefer the current implementation over the widescreen option, mostly due to my 16:10 monitor not playing as well with the Widescreen (either having large black bars if I resize the viewport or a severely squished chat/verbs tab otherwise). If the widescreen PR does get merged, I would sincerely appreciate it having a toggle back to 15x15 for folks with monitors like mine, but if I had the choice overall I'd rather just stick with the 15x15 option for everyone. There's a few reasons - tanking either a screwy UI or a vision malus doesn't feel great for a feature that doesn't really seem beneficial (at least to me), plus my bias towards the square viewport - it makes sense to see equal distance in each direction. The consensus I've heard from folks around is that this feels satisfying for combat, but less so for RP due to the squishing of the chat box. I personally lean more towards the RP side of things, so that may also affect my opinion.
  6. I know you said you don't want to make an admin complaint, but this still probably belongs in this section - you can use the "seeking clarification" tag if you'd like, as it seems you want some clarification about the events of the round. From my experience with the admins, it's unlikely you were deliberately singled out.
  7. 1. Sciencetist Scientist 2. JSON: 3. 26/02/2023 4. She's got no tail, cap'n!
  8. https://github.com/ParadiseSS13/Paradise/pull/20375 has been made with the intent to address some of the problems with Changeling Hivemind, please leave any feedback you may have there.
  9. I'm not a fan of the Hivemind in its current implementation at all, for a few reasons. The first and most importantly is its tendency to lead Clings into a team death-ball scenario, where they just group up and plow through any opponents (because several people who can revive any time you manage to take any down and can prevent you from perma-killing any if they fall is a massive pain to deal with for anyone). Secondly, Changelings already have a generally decent way to locate each other in a more natural way that requires them to actually do something, by stinging someone to no effect - similar to how Vampires can locate each other with ineffective glares. Thirdly, it just makes no sense at all - these creatures aren't actually hivemind entities, visible from how they act on entirely different objectives and quite frequently in opposition to each other. It's more like just chemical signaling but rangeless. My suggested alternative, if simply removing it (which I'm also down for) is off the table, would be a more limited hivemind where Changelings have to physically establish it with each other and it deteriorates over time or perhaps distance. A similar form of this already exists in the weird ability to jam someone into the Cling Hivemind, I think reworking this to be how the Hivemind works properly would be a decent way to do it code-wise, so you actually have to locate a fellow cling in the field then jack them into your own communications.
  10. Good news then, the PR to remove them went through a few weeks ago :)
  11. Funnily enough, I didn't even see this post before making https://github.com/ParadiseSS13/Paradise/pull/20106, but :)
  12. If we go down this route, perhaps we would tie the remains to the Revenant's natural essence regeneration instead. Right now it will regen up to its cap, perhaps this regeneration would only function with the remains placed, so crew could find and destroy it to cripple the revenant's regeneration. It could still re-gain essence after this by absorbing bodies, and perhaps eventually re-place its remains, but it would significantly impede progress.
  13. I do not think giving normal crew a "become antagonist" button is a good plan. It'd result in a lot of people seeking this out specifically to become an antag for free, or a whole host of other undesirable behaviour for an MRP environment.
  14. And I am going to be taking them in alive if I disabler them down excepting if they're a changeling or have anti-stuns, because sec is supposed to bring people in alive if possible. The other lad almost certainly won't be giving me the same treatment once he has me down.
  15. What I'm going to say here is that the general shift in Security's lethality to antags has come about as a response of the combat changes as of late. As things like Meth, CNS, and Stimulative Agent works on stamina now, and the officer's primary non-lethal arresting tools being based on stamina damage, they're not given that many options with how they interact with people on any form of anti-stun. Back in the days of instant stuns, if someone had CNS which made the Golden Bolt unable to stop them, you could swap to the disabler and still manage to arrest them (with some difficulty, granted). Nowadays, your only hope is either waiting out the antistun (not always an option), or hope that it's both a chemical that tranq darts works effectively on AND have Tranq darts on-site AND hit them with the darts. So I definitely believe you should continue to use lethals on individuals who use antistuns in combat. As for individuals with stun weaponry, the situation really depends. Sometimes it's easier to take them down nonlethally but you have to remember that frequently, security getting proper stunned is how they die, and stun weaponry is the opener to that. Not every situation with a hostile having a stun weapon calls for them to be shot but it's also something which should be open to security as an option for handling it. Remember - a disabler is more dangerous than most actual weapons, because if an antag gets you down with four shots of it they can kill you easily afterwards (and honestly usually do). I think a far better way to address this all would be stricter handling of armory weapons. Once the threat that caused them to be distributed is addressed, they should be recalled much sooner than they often are - as of present, if the armory is opened it's rare for all the guns to be back in it by the end of the round, let alone the end of the threat.
  16. Exactly as it says on the tin. The default ERT sent by admins seems to be the Red ERT, while I feel the Amber ERT serves as a better baseline for responses to most normal antagonists. I believe Red ERT would serve better as a response to entrenched threats, like an established cult or most biohazards. For your regular Joe Schmo Traitor who kills a few officers, Amber would be a much better base level response. Most of the time, the critical resource contributed by an ERT is simply more bodies rather than gear. This suggestion is really more about admin policy than anything else, but I do feel it would be a lovely change to see.
  17. My vote will shift from no to yes if the sprites become a little less busy (as stated by a lot of people, the dots are distracting), and if the common tiles were just the slightest bit brighter.
  18. Put down the pitchforks, I'm not advocating for a full return of Security Cyborg modules or anything. However, I believe that them being cut from ERT is strange. Most of people's complaints with Sec Borgs came from their nature of having AA or being particularly only designed for hunting antagonists as a synthetic - these complaints shouldn't really be much of a problem with the ERT variants of Cyborgs considering that the ERT has AA by default and is generally sent (Security ERT anyways) to deal with antagonists. Additionally, this does also mean Secborgs will only pop up whenever an admin deems that they're necessary, which should help a little bit more. It just genuinely feels weird that they were cut at the same time as crew Secborgs, when they suffered from very little of the same problems that crew Secborgs did by their inherent nature as a response. This would also hopefully make Red ERT Borgs slightly less useless, as right now they can only select Medical or Engineering which is most of the time not very useful choices for the ERT.
  19. Presently, the RD's Green SOP allows them to actively wear their reactive teleport armour, and their Red SOP allows them to arm themselves with a weapon from the lathe (with permission). This seems rather odd for someone who is otherwise a civilian, and presents a bit of an issue seeing as the Reactive Teleport Vest is one of the most powerful armor pieces in the game in most conditions. Thus, I propose a modification to their SOP such that: Current: Code Green 1. The Research Director must make sure Research is being done. Research must be completed by the end of the shift, assuming Science is provided the materials for it by Supply; 2. The Research Director is permitted to carry a telescopic baton and a flash; 3. The Research Director is not permitted to bring harmful chemicals outside of Science; 4. The Research Director is permitted to carry their Reactive Teleport Armour on their person. However, it is highly recommended they keep it inactive unless necessary, for personal safety; 5. The Research Director is not permitted to authorize the construction of AI Units without the Captain’s approval. An exception is made if the station was not provided with an AI Unit, or a previous AI Unit had to be destroyed. 6. The Research Director must keep the Communications Decryption Key on their person at all times, or at least somewhere safe and out of reach; 7. The Research Director is permitted to add beneficial scripts to Telecommunications; 8. The Research Director is permitted to change the AI Unit’s lawset, provided they receive general approval from the Captain and another Head of Staff. If there are no other Heads of Staff available, Captain approval will suffice; 9. The Research Director must work with Robotics to make sure all Cyborgs remain slaved to the station’s AI Unit, except in such a situation where the AI Unit has been subverted or is malfunctioning. Code Blue 1. All Guidelines carry over from Code Green. Code Red 1. Guidelines 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 carry over from Code Green; 2. In addition to the a telescopic baton and flash, the Research Director is permitted to carry a single weapon created in the Protolathe, provided they receive authorization from the Head of Security. Exception is made during extreme emergencies, such as Nuclear Operatives or Blob Organisms. 3. The Research Director is permitted to bring harmful chemicals outside of Science for delivery to security personnel, so long as either the Head of Security or Captain authorises it. Said chemicals must be for security-oriented purposes (thermite, controlled explosives, crowd control, biohazard containment, etc.). Modified: Code Green 1. The Research Director must make sure Research is being done. Research must be completed by the end of the shift, assuming Science is provided the materials for it by Supply; 2. The Research Director is permitted to carry a telescopic baton and a flash; 3. The Research Director is not permitted to bring harmful chemicals outside of Science; 4. The Research Director is not permitted to wear their Reactive Teleport Armour except in emergencies. 5. The Research Director is not permitted to authorize the construction of AI Units without the Captain’s approval. An exception is made if the station was not provided with an AI Unit, or a previous AI Unit had to be destroyed. 6. The Research Director must keep the Communications Decryption Key on their person at all times, or at least somewhere safe and out of reach; 7. The Research Director is permitted to change the AI Unit’s lawset, provided they receive general approval from the Captain and another Head of Staff. If there are no other Heads of Staff available, Captain approval will suffice; 8. The Research Director must work with Robotics to make sure all Cyborgs remain slaved to the station’s AI Unit, except in such a situation where the AI Unit has been subverted or is malfunctioning. Code Blue 1. All Guidelines carry over from Code Green. Code Red 1. Guidelines 1, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 carry over from Code Green; 3. The Research Director is permitted to bring harmful chemicals outside of Science for delivery to security personnel, so long as either the Head of Security or Captain authorises it. Said chemicals must be for security-oriented purposes (thermite, controlled explosives, crowd control, biohazard containment, etc.). 4. The Research Director is permitted to wear their Reactive Teleport Armour, though it is highly recommended they keep it inactive unless necessary, for personal safety; Changes: Article 4 of Code Green modified to prohibit wearing of Reactive Teleport Armour unless in emergencies, Article 4 added to Code Red allowing the Research Director to wear the Reactive Teleport Armour while on red alert. Article 2 of Code Red deleted, prohibiting the Research Director from arming within their SOP (Crew may still be armed as pertaining to other SOP, which would allow the Research Director to do so, as they are civilian crew). Article 7 of Code Green removed, as "Beneficial Scripts" are not really a thing that exist with the current implementation of telecommunications to my understanding. Articles 8 and 9 moved downwards accordingly.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Terms of Use