Tayswift

Admins
  • Content Count

    590
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

192 Excellent

3 Followers

About Tayswift

  • Rank
    Senior Regular

Personal Information

  • Byond Account
    Tayi

Recent Profile Visitors

1423 profile views
  1. pAIs are a mostly flavor + RP role because we're still an MRP server and there's still room for that kind of thing. When people put themselves up for pAI, they're not necessarily looking to be holoparasite lite. Lavaland ghost roles are cordoned off in Lavaland, so unless you want pAIs to have additional restrictions (restricted to Lavaland, capped number, or something like that), I don't see why they should become capable of combat.
  2. Unless things changed recently, we already have this. It's the little white crates. I think they're called freezers and each OR has one.
  3. I think this could be done in a more interesting way than this. The lead poisoning from a bullet would only be over long term, and having to remove the bullet is just an overdone hollywood cliche.
  4. There is plenty of room for discussion as well as gut reactions on Github and Discord. Why's it crucial that players must democratically decide each PR? There's already a lot of emerging complexity in distinguishing between "small" and "big" PRs coming up in this thread. No, designing and developing a reliable online voting system is far from trivial and not "quite easy", especially now that we're bringing various in game statistics into it to determine who can vote. tg has a democratically elected headmin and the farthest they go is informal polls on what PRs the players would be interested in further test merging. There have been plenty of frustrations with the Github system in the past, but never has the solution been yeah, let's just throw everything out the window and operate on majority rule. We can work on increasing transparency and communication without needing to do "twitch plays design ss13". For example, the #changes-wanted channel in discord is an improvement that allows us to know better what the people in charge of the direction of the game would like, which can help guide your contributions and lower the risk of your PR being denied.
  5. This absolutely will not work. I can't think of a single game that's designed democratically, and trying to design a system that will result in good game design is an impossible task. Take a look at any other repos on Github. I'm not sure you can find a single large repo where the users vote on changes. That just doesn't work because each voting player cannot realistically devote the time, effort, and expertise the maintainers have. Most of the time, it'll be just a gut feeling on whether a feature is cool or not. This is not going to result in great decisions. What do the maintainers get out of it if they're just glorified code reviewers? It's already exhausting to review PRs, and you want to take away their agency as well? What even are the concerns you want headmins and maintainers to acknowledge? You don't state what you're trying to solve at all. Edit: remove stuff that's redundant with neca's comment
  6. On the topic of bullets not breaking bones, maybe it would be a good idea to expand this to other damage types. Maybe blunt weapons have a higher chance of breaking bones, but things like bullets and scalpels maybe not so much.
  7. Tayswift

    Wages

    I really like this idea, because it keeps credits non-persistent and as flavor. I think to make things a little more lore friendly, it should be framed as a "performance bonus" instead of as wages (many NT employees are probably more like indentured servants than salaried workers). Instead of a time based system, we could also allow heads to grant performance bonuses from their computer. The time the crew member has spent on the station determines the max amount of performance bonus they can award each individual crew member. That way if you haven't been doing your job, you still won't get the money.
  8. The main purpose of bans isn't to punish individual players or turn them into better payers. It's preventative, to ensure that other people can play and have fun in the environment laid out by the rules. So "sorry" isn't enough, because if you keep getting warned and banned for the same thing, then we can't just let you back on to reoffend, get banned again, force you to write an essay, repeat. It affects others to have a constant rule breaker on the server. Locking this thread because further conversation will just turn into ban appeal-lite.
  9. Imo, we should not rely on OOC factors to ensure an interesting play experience. Right now, telescience's power is only offset by the fact that it's obscure and not many people bother with it. But like with telecomms, we reduced the complexity and also its power to make it more accessible and less frustrating to deal with when someone who knows the system too well comes along. There definitely have to be IC limits for instant teleportation from anywhere. Maybe it costs resources and has a cooldown or it can't teleport alive mobs or things above a certain mass or size. Maybe only pocket size items can be teleported. Teleporting a GPS in and then using the BSA is frustrating for the AI player but it also seems kind of creative and potentially interesting, as it's using resources that aren't always available. However, teleporting in a player into a wall behind the AI is kind of boring and gamey. It might be nice to find a way to limit telescience enough so that we can get rid of the frustrating parts but keep some of the more interesting uses, if possible. Nevertheless, "improve don't remove" is not always practical, and in my opinion, as it stands right now, telescience's removal seems like a net benefit to the gameplay experience. If we can't figure out a way to make telescience a fun mechanic, then it should be removed.
  10. Looking at the wiki, it seems like if execution is the sentence, borgification can be the method or post-processing after a different method, regardless of whether the prisoner wanted to. In fact, legal SOP says that you should consider borging after any execution: It's also listed as an option for disposal of the body under the other execution options.
  11. Thanks! I'm glad that you liked what I wrote. However, it's just my personal opinion and not representative of the staff or playerbase as a whole, and we don't have a "declined suggestion" section, so I will leave it up in case more peeps want to chime in ?
  12. tg did merge a system that would give you points for playing certain roles that would "increase" your chances of being antagonist. However, that system was extremely flawed and broken and was never enabled on tg. The key issue was that it would only increase your chances by reducing other people's chances to be antag. Assuming that we solved that problem though (in some rounds, we would simply have more antags than would usually be added. In that github thread I proposed a few suggestions that would fix the issue), there's a few reasons why I don't think such a system would fit with this server. I don't think we want to overvalue antagonist status. Some people already really like being antag, other people like being either, and some portion of players just don't like being antag. Obviously, I won't blame you if you prefer playing antag over normal crew member, but imo trying to develop your non-antag experiences a little further will help make your non-antag rounds a bit more enjoyable as opposed to just playing it out to roll for the next round. I think our server atmosphere would be negatively impacted if we were to focus heavily on antag status. That's why we have a karma system rather than an antag token system. There's also a lot of implementation issues, like how to count the playtime toward increasing your chances of being antagonist. tg's system put a point value on each job. If we didn't care about jobs, then there's still the weirdness of giving you antag% by the minute. Basically, it's a lot of work for no particular reason, since as bad as rng is sometimes, over the long run, it gives everyone a fair shot at being antag. And then there's round flow issues. Assuming we're not taking other people's antag% for your antag% to increase, in some rounds, we will have more shadowlings or cultists than usually prescribed. That could throw off the flow of the round significantly. Basically, while it would be nice to smooth out rng a little bit, there's a lot of complications that make it not really worth the time and effort.
  13. Instead of being toxic and salty toward Github contributors who are volunteering their time and effort to try to improve the server, why don't you instead either file an issue, or, better yet, update the wiki with the new shortcuts.
  14. It's also very disingenuous to categorize "retard" and "downie" with terms like "idiot" and "cretin". People generally aren't aware that the latter two words have ableist origins, and their ableist meanings are completely outdated. While "retard" probably won't get you banned because fighting the use of that word is likely a losing battle, "downie" almost certainly will because there are no doubts as to the meaning of that word. Personally, I think using "retard" just makes you sound childish. As with most other rules on the server, use common sense rather than something silly like "well, 'idiot' is allowed on this server so 'downie' must be allowed too".
  15. Prescanning being removed is great. It doesn't even make sense that the cloning machine somehow knows that you've died anyways. The "do not resuscitate" is a good UI change. Making being cloned an opt-out rather than an opt-in makes a lot more sense. If you accidentally forget to opt-out, you can always go cryo, but if you forget to opt-in, well, then you get stuck in the morgue for the rest of the round.