necaladun

Head Admins
  • Content Count

    3660
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    44

necaladun last won the day on October 8

necaladun had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

587 Excellent

About necaladun

  • Rank
    Man Child Kindergarten Teacher

Personal Information

  • Byond Account
    necaladun

Recent Profile Visitors

2283 profile views
  1. We've discussed persistent economy many times, and there are some huge issues that are in the way of it ever occurring: 1: If money can give any form of in game advantage, than a persistent economy means that older players get more advantage, making things even harder on new players, in a game that's already hard on them 2: If it can't give any form of in game advantage, it becomes kinda useless and just there for looks 3: In the case of crashes, grief, etc, how people will be reimbursed etc for their money needs to be looked at. If the consequences of grief can now impact people over multiple rounds, it will hugely encourage said grief. Crashes and other bugs are annoying to deal with, but if they had repercussions for people over multiple rounds, it would be huge amounts more work for admins. People already get angry enough about crashes and grief - having long term repercussions would make this 10x worth. 4: Meta - both grudging and friends. If you're able to rob people, then targeting them over multiple shifts etc becomes a lot more of an issue with long term consequences, and friends giving each other money etc becomes an issue - especially because of how annoying that would be to track. 5: Antags. If I'm an antag HoP, can I rob station accounts for myself, and then benefit from that the next round? And a host of other problems involving antags... 6: Self-Antagging - is stealing $10 as a non antag ok? $20? $1,000,000? These are just a few of the things that have come up. All in all, SS13 and Paradise haven't been written in such a way that anything is persistent beyond the library, and to make such a change would be huge amount of work, that would also increase the current workload for admins, and make any future PRs with an impact on the economy incredibly touchy subjects. I'd much prefer if we look at making credits more useful and harder to get, before we look at any form of ability to take them from one round to the next. That would need to be done anyway, so should be done first.
  2. That's something we'll be looking into for sure, especially regarding command - likely the HoS/Cap's discretion, and/or the HoS to be the one to use it I don't see this as an issue for other channels unless they're talking about how to best raid the armoury, in which case...why they're doing that on open comms that the AI and Captain can hear is stupid. If they have the key, then there's confirmed syndicate activity aboard the station. If anyone else is talking on the channel, then it confirms other agents are on board, so it shouldn't be green. As for privacy laws - they don't exist.
  3. Protocol is to fax NT. Evidence needs to be kept as evidence (assume it's so that NT can do further investigation after the shift). Although it'd make sense if all evidence was to be brought to CC at the end of the shift, I'd be hesitant to force sec to bring a bunch of dangerous gear on the shuttle.
  4. The idea behind these is mainly that, if someone is found with them, then it means they're a traitor 99% of the time. The actual harm is secondary here. The main reasoning behind those was that, if sec catch someone with them, then they know you're an EoC - at least OOCly. Hence non-S class stuff (mostly) being things that could, potentially, be found as maint loot. We haven't changed much of that for quite awhile, and it really could use an overall review and some items shuffled around.
  5. And each will be judged on their own merits. That can be easily changed. The labeling there is to do with sentencing for people being caught with them, and whether or not the item could be found in maint. The label itself doesn't actually make it dangerous - you'd be hard pressed to kill anyone with an encryption key. We can of course look at moving it off of S class, making a new class for "acceptable with captain permission", etc. The idea of it not being acceptable to pick up the revolver/esword/etc that a syndicate just dropped when stunned to use against him is frankly ludicrous. It should be utterly acceptable to use a singulo beacon to stop a loose singulo from destroying the station. And again - we can just move the key (or other things) out of S class. S class simply means that, if caught with it, you can be considered EoC. You've made some strong statements about what should or shouldn't be acceptable, but not the reasoning behind it. Why should something that's S class never be able to be used by any loyal crew?
  6. Admins are used to players arguing many things. Currently they could already argue there is no IC reason they should be prevented from using syndicate comms as it is. Again, if we allow slippery slope arguments to sway us, next we'll be allowing ad-hominem arguments to sway us. Not sure what you mean by values here? Currently sec can already use things that normal crew get a brig sentence for having, such as...pretty much all sec gear.
  7. That'd still fall under abuse of confiscated equipment - namely the uplink itself. (ICly, I'd assume that NT want the uplink with all the TC in it for their own purposes).
  8. Already being worked on and pre-approved. We're looking at Agent (colour name). (because reservoir dogs). I'd like to review a lot of these moving forward. Each item has to be reviewed on it's own merits however, so we're looking at one of the ones that's easily the one we've most commonly had to bwoink over. Things like the adv pinpointer are incredibly powerful in sec hands. Some ideas have also surfaced about special cases - blob, nuke ops, etc - which would not only lift these restrictions on security, but make it clear that SoP in general is no longer to be applied station wide - or perhaps a seperate "delta" class of SoP. All still WIP. Ultimately we want to merge both the OOC reasons with IC reasons behind it, and let the code handle things as much as possible and...shit. Code language only syndies can speak might work....
  9. This was basically meant to go in first, but due to a fuckup in communication it got ok'd to be edited and put forward before that happened. Then figured, rather than reverting it (and causing confusion), see how much effect the change actually has...kinda a test merge but for space law. We'll see how this goes over the next few days/weeks. Re: Realism Realism is an awful term for this, hence immersion more commonly used. Consistency within the universe and all that. In this case, I really find that not being able to use said things due to fear of a bwoink really messes with my feeling of immershions. There are other weird cases where security could, technically, let a civilian use the headset, and then pardon them for the crime. Hell, they could have a traitor they've caught with one continue to use it to give security intel in exchange for not being executed...but it'd be against the rules for sec to do it themselves. That's just weirdly artificial and clearly being done for OOC reasons. Ultimately i'd like to find a way to merge IC reasons with the OOC reasons - such as possible self destruct measures, obfuscated names, etc. Re: Enforcement It's really not something we have to do often (compared to say, telling people not to harmbaton), however it's also something that's much harder for us to detect - we get a log for every attack, but not for every time someone puts on a headset (thank god). That's the real issue for enforcement - we either need people to report it, or to somehow notice it, which requires huge amounts of active admin work. When it comes to say, eswords, if sec uses them openly, then the crew is going to be very quick to notice this and kick up a fuss. But things like this won't be noticed by the crew at large. Re: Risk Not every item should have risk for sure, utterly agree there. Don't think anyone's saying otherwise. However, if something is both cheap and powerful, then it should have risk to balance those out. Re: It's too good This is more about the cost - how much benefit you get for 2tcs. A 2tc item that allows you to just listen to sec comms would often be worth that cost. Other options we're looking at are dividing it into two items (one for syndie communication, one for tapping into station comms). This isn't really removing it from being able to be used by traitors to co-ordinate - you just need to make sure to call out if you're about to have comms be compromised. If it's early in the round and no tators have been caught, then it's still risk free (assuming someone doesn't rat you out, which was always a risk.).
  10. If we start allowing slippery slope arguments to define policy, next we'll be allowing ad hominims. I have no intent to start allowing it on a large scale. It's not up for security to decide. Because it's using a chip for intel, vs killing multiple people - who may be syndicate agents themselves. Using a headset chip for intel and openly murdering people are vastly different situations. It also makes a lot of sense from an IC perspective. Police aren't going to use a murder weapon themselves to supplement their gear, but using the phones/etc of criminals to get more intel is routinely done. I'd love it if we could find a method to stop people openly murderboning that didn't require admin intervention, mind you! But I just don't see that as easily doable without losing a huge amount of the freedom antags have mechanically. Things like a self destruct, obfuscated names, etc, all seem like good ways to limit how much sec can use syndie comms without sacrificing much - obfuscated names like "Agent Pink" and "Agent Green" I think would actually add to the general atmosphere, and feeling that syndicate dont' trust each other.
  11. For the cost, not only does it give you access to all comms, but also comms with other traitors. It's in a weird place of traitor items that it gets better the more people using it. I can't think of any other item like that. Just sec access to sec comms alone I'd say is worth at least 1 tc. It's hard to say how consistently it's used, as it varies - but I know that for me, it's one of the default items I buy if I'm not looking at some specific plan. That'd imply it's fine for command to use then. That's why I'd like to look into other ways of protecting people from being busted (such as hiding names on it), rather than an incredibly heavy-handed OOC manner of intervention. People shouldn't be stopped from using it because of a bwoink.
  12. That it was just too, blatantly an OOC reason not to use it. It felt way too artificial. An invisible hand coming down and saying "no you can't do this". As it should be, IMO. How much so is...well, debatable and constantly changing (as it just has.). One of the big reasons is because, with said OOC protections on the item, it is insanely cheap for how good it is. The law stopping said usage makes it basically risk free. A lot of it is just how clearly OOC the law is there, and it's just odd for laws to be based around such an OOC balance related thing. Telling sec not to do something because it's making it hard on the antags is a bizarre IC situation. It'd be like if wiretapping laws were thrown out because it's unfair on criminals. What I/we would like/have talked about to follow this is making it so that headsets don't reveal the names of the people using it (ala changling chat)....I was under the impression this was going to be done before said space law change. NT equipment is superior. There is no need for our well equipped and highly trained security officers to use it. Syndicate equipment such as eswords has huge risks such as the overcharged cells exploding, and the energies used in it are a known cause of SSD.
  13. I'd be interested in this for sure, but I'm also quite worried about how people would interpret the data. There are just so many factors that can cause greentext/redtext, that it's not as simple as saying "traitors have an n% win rate" due to their greentexting. Whether it's going SSD, being taken out by another traitor, deciding to do something more interesting than making it to the shuttle, etc. A week could just have some incredibly robust people rolling antag a lot. I can picture now people pointing to increases/decreases in "winrate" for antags a week after a PR is merged With things like shadowlings and nukeops, it's a bit more useful to see if there's huge outliers (if either are winning 90% of the time, that'd be a problem), but I really don't want us to be aiming for a certain "winrate".
  14. Oh, and ether and morphine (and how to best use them against clowns.).
  15. ...only mistake I've found so far. This is incredibly well done. The only suggestion I can really think of is a section talking about the different damage types.