Regular Joe

Members
  • Content Count

    110
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Regular Joe last won the day on March 4

Regular Joe had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

37 Excellent

About Regular Joe

  • Rank
    Average

Personal Information

  • Byond Account
    RegularJoe

Recent Profile Visitors

638 profile views
  1. Sad to read of you leaving. You're among the persons which I remember from the very beginning of my nerd-being here. Specially as a player that doesn't speak code I'm thankful for the time you've invested to our adventures in space. Best of luck to you!
  2. Probably for oldcrit races are straight-forward to treat. Not saying, that treating newcrit is hard, but doing so requires the reagents and the handheld defib, if it’s bad, anyway. Medbay being capable of doing the tricks isn’t that sure, and if you’re alone you’ve got to got the chems. So it’s a buff, that way, in certain situations - like when medbay hasn’t much time. Yet prolonged death is certainly a buff (more a buff than the previous, if you ask me, referring to Coul’s maths) for newcrit when you are fighting something, as it’s been said. Like, took five revolver shots and still was able to tase and cuff the syndie as a partner shook me up before he got hit. Then epi and I lived enough to walk to the hallway from the maint to be dragged to medbay from there. And so on with that kind of examples. I like it from the doctor’s perspective, over the old system. The other side would need tinkering, but exactly how to do it? There’s such many things to consider so it does not seem easy. Initially, this setup was considered very deadly as of defibs didn’t revive. Even then the ability to stand after excessive damage was there, though. TDS’s PR to alter the rolling for crit effects seem interesting. Threshold for the initial brute damage whether it kicks the crit effects in, and threshold of health to enter with certainty to crit effects - it could solve the issue of not getting down and dying after extreme violence.
  3. You could only imagine how a shift could end up so, that a syndie, as here seen, is inside the Central Command, driving his sports car - in DeathSquad suit... after he had killed half the DS back in the station, while wearing an ERT armor... ...and after having finished the rest of DS off at CC, along with a Spec Ops officer, by sneaking in there camoflaged as a DS commando.
  4. Earlier that shift, when everything was still as-usual, IAA's were doing IAA things as-usual.
  5. I agree, given the population it would be really neat to have more departmental job slots. And assistants thought this way makes, as I see it, good sense. For I remember, being a new to the station last summer, wondering that ”hey I’m an assistant, but nobody actually wants me to help or to go try learning their jobs”, so that I wandered in maints and got thralled by Slith until I had enough courage to try actual jobs. With this, civilians would remain as a such choice, while some, up to some 10 slots (1-2 assistants per department?), could take the departmental assistant jobs and do actual space work. So this implemented would be noobfriendly in general, endorsing ones who don’t know the jobs to try and learn them with less responsibility (and hopefully drifting these people away from pure tiding). As an experienced player I could also go and take it for a less stress yet working shift, or, if all other slots are taken. Jobs to the people, so. As said above - the old discussion there say the downsides of the idea well, for me, it seems the positives are greater.
  6. Oh, too bad. It seemed a definite possibility. Given the amount of the work sec has to do, not to forget highening population, the department would really do with a buff to it’s organization to make it go more smoothly, more often. It’s getting heavy for now. Hope we’ll get this or something else rethought with sec, some other day. Thanks for taking it up! edit: on more smoothly - just to underline it - not to catch baddies more quickly, but to reduce the misconduct, that takes the time of the player in the receiving end and, presently, HoS’s time to deal with it, as per usual, there is no one else to actively (that is, this being their ic duty) look after and instruct their goons’ doings.
  7. On what Ralta said (trying to be short now, excuse me being a writing machine about every time I get interested to write) I'd read what Furasian wrote as a draft of guidelines for the new role so, that they actually cover the both, training and being a veteran officer. While instructing is a primary mission, if there is no need for it - or, there are more priority things, like during code red, the instructor would act like "a veteran officer." So not just a trainer or just a veteran, but both blended as a security instructor/field training officer/sergeant - to answer both calls. On lore, it seems FTO's that train/supervise in field are a thing in law enforcement - and such work definitely is a thing in militaries, so that duties of training and actual stuff are carried by a same person. So the intention, as I read it from Furasian's draft, is to have both a trainer and a veteran there, with some openess for the style on how players will comply with the role, so that it will accommodate to different shifts; not all shifts have any need for teaching, while other times that would be great if it was available and same on roles that could be thought for a veteran officer. Though whether or whether not instructors are things irl-wise, we of course play here with associations, which sure depends on culture, and we're here from all around the world. So it's indeed a question how to get the intended impression for the new role, like, not too narrow but still giving out the idea what's this for.
  8. I wish I could have back those moments I tried it first on, it was... hilarious, for the amount of stuff there is to get used to. Hope you'll enjoy it! Here for beginner's highlights of the wiki: for controls: https://nanotrasen.se/wiki/index.php/Keyboard_Shortcuts for radio usage: https://nanotrasen.se/wiki/index.php/Guide_for_beginners#How_to_operate_your_headset And here at forums, in the Guide board, there are indepth guides on a number of topics: https://nanotrasen.se/forum/63-guides/ I had to alt-tab a lot to these back in the day.
  9. You’re doing great to manage the process Furasian, thanks.
  10. Security seem not very police, in the other hand, that’s point of the drill instructor option. On the logic there, sec is not army but it isn’t state police either, and, moreover the gap between police and military are not that black and white as one could think of. As in ss13, we are mixing present and known scifi fables, sec seem to me to be a kind of... mixture of the both, turning more into military when the threats become more harsh. Just saying, as I was here previously speaking of instructor role so, that I drew examples from the military side. By doing so I was not to suggest an yelling kind of instructor. People read things differently. To feel a military-twisted instructor as an yelling recruit driller is kinda US only thing. Same might apply in thinking of military in general to be just about intense warfare aka killing. Most of the western military operations present are about de-escalation, stabilization and peacekeeping, while threats for that are usually NGO’s, instead of fighting states. I’ve reflected that kind of military to my character’s backstory, as it is what presently happens and lore-wise seem to fit the spess way future. Those, namely operations, are that way much different to movies, been there done that, in a level enough to see it from a range. Even if national military training where I’m coming from is foremost about combat, on foreign service, it’s all in for peace keeping, which means, that telebatons are more preffered than guns, and greatly, greatly over the both, every time when it’s possible, talking. That in conjuction with the readiness to highen the threat level, which makes gearing, attitude and preferred decisions on tensioned situationsä more ”military”, and, in face of sudden violence, the ability to self-defence. I’ll hardly believe that most of the US stuff, even, in last ten years have been that much about warfare, even in it’s low intensity form. So for, I’ve happened to reflect the security as both police and military, namely, the lone keeper of space peace, security and maximum workspace efficiency on the corner of the space in which Cyberiad lies, and that way felt sec as a paramilitary-corporate security force. But that’s just an opinion along others we MRP around there. If people feel a military style instructor as a loss for immersion, or even as an excuse for unintented playstyle, better not choose that even if it’s liked, for that’s just about visuals. I actually didn’t know anything about police FTO’s prior this thread so couldn’t think about that beforehand. So, on second thought, giving that a drill instructor look could give people those kind of impressions, a FTO look would be more reasonable then. On military and instructors there, can’t help myself to say, though, that instructors in military, either way, are not just a boot camp thing, even if the campaign hat in the vote points to US bootcamps. It’s a job to do among professionals on field aswell, as of in (at least) European militaries the distinction between field and academy isn’t very big any more, for readiness’ sake. After initial training, year or so, the unit enters service and it’s continously trained during that. Instructing there is not about yelling or drilling, but overseeing and practising. On staff or basic unit level, the title is instructor, an officer who usually has another job somewhere in the unit; inside a basic unit it’s among the duties of a commanding officer and-or a sergeant either in a platoon or a squad - this for reference of some options of mil themes other to drill instructors. Out of these I’d personally flag for a sergeant. All in all I’m just full in for the idea, and on visuals, it’s reasonable for the role to stand out but not too specifically - so, that the visuals support the role to fit as much as possible our present brig. Count my vote for sec officer style cool beret and an attitude that is seen most fitting for there, be it military or police inspirated.
  11. I'm not into sci, so got not much to say on the topic concerning mechanics, but I do however find telescience a positive thing. Antag and crew-side, too. Crewside, namely, during mass casualty events, xenos, spiders, blob, as mentioned there. When the crew really start to be in the receiving end, the evils have already gained the upper hand and then telesci is an one way to keep on fighting. That is, mind you, probably the point when the one who would do such thing becomes aware of what's happening, unless they're very keenly monitoring the crewmonitor. I've seen Crangus to do telesaving (not many else, lately, around my times to play); it isn't that OP as the ones saved that way have a good delay before they can go back into the fight, because of their injuries. Otherwise they'd just die. Though spiders and xeno need their toll to reproduce, but then in other hand, there are prey with no sensors on, and I'd say things are already bad for the crew when a telescientist becomes aware of it - and when that point has been reached it's going to be anyway tough time for the crew to survive. And moreover, even if some Crangus then telesaves people, it needs a chain of other things to be present, to be an actual threat for those antags, namely, a working medbay. And then, it's an odd game mechanism. More mechanisms mean more fun for the nerds who want to explore their usage in different situations. Also, as a mechanism, it is only available for the people who make effort into learning it and who then, during the shift, spend their time to make the machines and work around. That's so one viable strategy to be used, then. You could do big bad or big good things otherwise, not to mention genetics, well, many things if you know what you're doing. Few days ago xenobiologist made a ton of alienqueens, hivelords and spacebears to fight blitz nukies. Crew won, though not only thanks-to them. Then again, that kind of stuff happens once in a blue moon, as a telemaster scientist is quite rare, after all. Maybe it could be, as a first aid, nerfed the way Jazz suggests it, by making teleporting just less powerful by reducing the calibration interval from the twenty shots. So that you just couldn't teleport hordes of people rapidly, but rather you had to decide on which you use it, on which you don't. More cool way to do nerfs would concern the math side of it, but that might be hard to do so, that it reasonably adds to the difficulty, though as I'm not playing sci I've really got nothing to say on that topic. Just wanted to say that imo telesci is quite cool. Nerfing instead of removing, if you'd like that, personally I'm fine with it as is.
  12. I say more yes for an officer-instructor, compared to a VIP-instructor, though I like both ways of the idea. With the officer version, it feels like more minor, and thus, adequate, change, for as officer they will do officer if there is no need for their specific profession. The instructor/advisor VIP, in the other hand, could have some more things on them, along with those thought on an officer-instructor. I'll write here about an officer-instructor as I happen to have more ideas on that one. Either way, I see the job would have its best value in the duty to supervise and correct, that is, to prevent bad security action. That is now the sole responsibility of HoS and is too much for them, if the flow of the events was past certain level. That for, I agree that reasonable newsec will ask veterans and not-so reasonable won't care. But the instructor would be dealing with this fact happening anyway, by making HoS aware of the problem cases in case they're hopeless, else, correcting and teaching those - if the latter is possible per the attitude of the receiving end. Most of the things, that would fall to the instructor to care about, are nevertheless small - small enough to disappear from the eyes of HoS or other, busy officers, but which will feed the known snowball effect of (angry greytiding <--> shitcuriting), or at least, will be uselessly dull experience for the receiving end. Then, in the other hand, if sec happen to be a great one, so that there are no need to watch over their doings, the instructor would do officer as an officer per usual, so the job would not be an useless one. Though I'd say there are more shifts in which it would be great if sec had extra attention to their conduct. So not so much for just instructing, but more to have an eye whether some person needs that, or needs to get rid of, which, if you ask me, is the need that this role would fill. As distinct to IAA, instructor being in the field is to prevent, as IAA is to deal with the malpractice done. As distinct to mentors and vet sec as usual, the role would have an IC duty to be an eye on those things, which is in my opinion the neat thing there. Thoughts on the practical questions here. On distinct equipment, I'd say cool beret, aswell, not much else would be needed as clothing. Maybe an armband or stripes of similar colour theme as the beret, whatever it would be? On gear, sec officer equipment as usual would do - I'm thinking here quite same as Christasmurf on the top there, about access, bit elevated, possibly. On SOP, authority and what-if they do it bad - I'd suggest, in SOP, giving a distinction about in which instructor is officer is an officer, and in which they have their specific job. That could be described as something like - sketching it for a start: "1.The instructor is to focus on either of their primary mission: a. supervising the conduct of the officers in common, correcting possible mishaps, and endorsing good conduct in accordance with Security and Legal SoP and the space law, b. to instruct specific officers, by their call to do so, or per such order by the HoS. 2.The instructor is permitted to do officer's regular duties, under the condition that doing so will not obstruct their primary mission, that is, the conduct of the department leave nothing to be attended with, in terms of acting in accordance of Security and Legal SoP and the space law. 3. The instructor must not occupy themselves with officer's regular duties so, that they fail to complete their primary mission. 4. The instructor perfoming officer's regular duties, under all circumstances, must follow the SoP guidelines of Security Officers. Or then copy the officer guidelines to the end, as they are done with the pod pilot's guidelines. 5. The instructor holds no authority to other officers, but are considered to be an officer among officers. Explicitly stated, so that the instructor won't start bossing around, or if doing so can be ignored, noted by IAA/HoS or get rid of if that gets annoying. Don't know whether the method on the function of "correcting" of 1a should be explicated here somehow, to like, be done in field privately, NOT via radio in public, so avoiding the threat of sec-arguing. - That isn't as dumb to be written out as it might seem, or it seems to me while I write this, as for even military conduct guidelines do state that ("correct specific personnel privately, not in public; latter is considered ashaming and correcting the unit instead of a specific person is reserved for the commander of the unit", or something like that. While the reasons for such aren't that far of what we might consider as such in a video game... nobody really wants that kind of acting.) 6. The instructor has an authority and responsibility over a specific officer, should the HoS order so, in the purpose of drilling a junior officer or supervising a misconducting officer. Concerning authority, am suggesting them to have a specific authority, but being locked behind the HoS. So for no powertripping (or if that should happen, the instructor does a SOP breach themselves and are, at first, to be noted, then to be considered whether to be kept or not, by either HoS or IAA, if present ). Yet this kind of authority would be in place, for dealing with the borderline unruly cases, and, in the other hand, giving the HoS a specific, concrete use of their instructor: "hey fillmoore so we have concerns on this officer Batonhonkers, take them to your drill, make papers for demote and proceed with that, if it's all useless"/"hey again fillmoore so some grayson wants to join sec as a trainee, you'll take care of them right? 7. The instructor must address, in first, the HoS privately, the IAA in second, or the Captain in third, should they have objections, in accordance with Security and Legal SoP and the space law, against the conduct of the HoS. " This in case of the HoS is the problem, what I'm trying to give out, is to either note them privately, then, if the subject matter is something gross, turn it to the IAA as an IAA case to deal with, if IAA is unable and it's really gross a thing, to the Captain. Also, of course this is about SoP breaches or misforcing the space law, for breaking the space law is an officer job to solve, as usual. So I'd say instructor's functions, in priority, as supervise, correct, instruct, take responsibility on newsec or badsec officer if ordered so, be an officer. More on the number 6 there, that way, in the case of the "harmbaton" officer, if the case isn't clear at first hand, having them mandatorially paired up with the instructor, would be a stage before just firing the officer in question. The good in that, is that it will become quickly clear whether a suspicious officer needs treatment by the boot or will they benefit of some guidance. That's a plus for an hurry HoS either way, as they could forward the problem for an another person to care about, be it just some extra attention or force-firing. So far some sketching, if it's of any help for the case, I like it a lot.
  13. Was not meaning to distract the conversation - take my previous as looking the issues sec has from an another viewpoint. Being a closed system, they are connected together. Like this: organization --> communication -> badsec by inexperience or nobody caring, or know to care, and badsec there is a modifier which can be either nil, minor issues or a result of complete disorganization, and that depends on the prequisitions. Now the instructor role would tackle badseccing, as having a person with that as their job, is a less dependant on the prequisitions (comms, that officers know what's happening, and that is result of organization) as the present situation is - which is, vet sec corrects and teaches when they happen to spot something, if they happen. The underlying issue is, however, the cluster fun that sec will become after some point; organization that suffers from the overflow of events. Wrote that stuff as an example of other way to deal with it, tackling organization directly. As you can read from it, anything like that is way more grave change to the department. So that is an argument for instructors, since it could actually be kinda small change and thus easy to implement. That for, it's meant to deal with the results of an underlying issue, not to root it out. Rooting the disorganization out - like the way I sketched on my previous - would probably be out of boundaries as a change. For, it's also very positive that sec is a sandbox in terms of how you play it. It's a game, so people want to play it the way they like to - in accordance with the rules, and then the IC SoP, that describe the boundaries for playstyles. So someone might say sec is not a team but in very special conditions only, and some might say it's every shift up to them for how they become a team, for example, and so on. That way, having just instructors that have keeping-eye as their job along with being officers - as pod pilot is an officer with specific mission - could help the cause of improving sec's conduct with being a rather minimal change to the department itself, which is good. Yet, that could, in theory at least.