Team antags doing things without majority team approval

[BeeSting12]

What are your opinions on team antagonists doing things that the majority of the team do not want and then team members killing them or otherwise retaliating?

For example, a nuke op team leader asking if anyone wants to declare war, then declaring it after finding out he's the only one who wants to do so. Are the team members allowed to shoot him? Is he able to be bwoinked/banned for this? Should the team members that retaliate be punished?

[CPTANT]

What are your opinions on team antagonists doing things that the majority of the team do not want and then team members killing them or otherwise retaliating?

For example, a nuke op team leader asking if anyone wants to declare war, then declaring it after finding out he's the only one who wants to do so. Are the team members allowed to shoot him? Is he able to be bwoinked/banned for this? Should the team members that retaliate be punished?

Nuke ops aren't a democracy, the leader is in charge.

[Arianya]

Also shooting your team-mates over minor disagreements in a team antag position is outrageously stupid.

Nuke Ops are like, a team of 5 max, killing one of your team members because he exercised his authority as leader is stupid.

If someone is being a more active sabotager/annoyance, maybe, but its really the kind of thing thats going to get you bwoinked every time and you need bulletproof logic.

[CPTANT]

There was this guy once who as leader hoarded like 70% of points to spent for himself though.

I came REALLY close to shooting him.

[Slignerd]

For example, a nuke op team leader asking if anyone wants to declare war, then declaring it after finding out he's the only one who wants to do so. Are the team members allowed to shoot him? Is he able to be bwoinked/banned for this? Should the team members that retaliate be punished?

I didn't think you of all people would support armed personnel shooting their commander roundstart because they disagreed with the operating procedure said commander decided on.

I mean, assuming that's your stance here.

[BeeSting12]

There was this guy once who as leader hoarded like 70% of points to spent for himself though.

I came REALLY close to shooting him.

These are the kinda situations I'm talking about. You should be able to shoot the leader if he's going to be a prick about the way he distributes TCs or declares war.

Also shooting your team-mates over minor disagreements in a team antag position is outrageously stupid.

Nuke Ops are like, a team of 5 max, killing one of your team members because he exercised his authority as leader is stupid.

If someone is being a more active sabotager/annoyance, maybe, but its really the kind of thing thats going to get you bwoinked every time and you need bulletproof logic.

Declaring war when noone wants to and everyone's already bought stuff for a nonwar playstyle seems pretty sabotagey to me.

I didn't think you of all people would support armed personnel shooting their commander roundstart because they disagreed with the operating procedure said commander decided on.

I mean, assuming that's your stance here.

I'm fine with shooting the commander roundstart if the commander's a fucking moron.

[Cobby]

Nuke ops aren't a democracy, the leader is in charge.

This includes TC distribution as well so long as there's rhyme and reason to it ( You only give one guy a few bombs because he's to break into the ai, NOT well you guys got a 9mm so here take an emag and I'll give the rest to myself )

Although honestly if they're formulating a 30 minute plan you know you're screwed anyways, just take it out on them in OOC after the round.

[cedarbridge]

Nuke ops aren't a democracy, the leader is in charge.

This is really all that needs be said. If you lost the lottery and your leader is a moron, you lost the lottery and your leader is a moron. Your antag rolls are not sacred.

[Wyzack]

Can we police every possible situation with admin guardrails so I never have to worry about game play influencing my round please?

[BeeSting12]

Can we police every possible situation with admin guardrails so I never have to worry about game play influencing my round please?

are you saying this in favour of allowing nuke op mutinies or against? because frankly i would think a mutiny against the nuke op leader is valid if everyone agrees, IC issue. if my antag roll isn't sacred than neither is his, why should I have to put up with his shit?

[BeeSting12]

let me put it this way. technically the captain is on charge but if he says "hey guys let's sell the whole armory to cargo and gas the liggers" then a mutiny will likely happen. somehow it's different if the nuke op team leader wants to do something dumb that noone else wants to do.

[Cobby]

You don't have an OOC obligation to listen to the captain, you do as a team antag to your leader.

Can we police every possible situation with admin guardrails so I never have to worry about game play influencing my round please?

are you saying this in favour of allowing nuke op mutinies or against? because frankly i would think a mutiny against the nuke op leader is valid if everyone agrees, IC issue. if my antag roll isn't sacred than neither is his, why should I have to put up with his shit?

Because as fate would have it, he's the leader.

[CPTANT]

You don't have an OOC obligation to listen to the captain, you do as a team antag to your leader.

Team antags have no obligation to their leader, they have an obligation to their objective.

[BeeSting12]

You don't have an OOC obligation to listen to the captain, you do as a team antag to your leader.

Team antags have no obligation to their leader, they have an obligation to their objective.

this really. if the leader is being a jackass and keeping all the TCs while leaving everyone else with a stetchkin and 3 TCs then they kinda deserve what comes to them.

but yeah as wyzack said god forbid gameplay come in the way of admins policing everything

[Cobby]

You don't have an OOC obligation to listen to the captain, you do as a team antag to your leader.

Team antags have no obligation to their leader, they have an obligation to their objective.

Yeah replace listen with "not kill" lol

[Cobby]

but yeah as wyzack said god forbid gameplay come in the way of admins policing everything

God forbid you can't do a cookiecutter tactic to greentext and the only way to personally right this transgression is to break one of the more explicit rules we have.

[BeeSting12]

but yeah as wyzack said god forbid gameplay come in the way of admins policing everything

God forbid you can't do a cookiecutter tactic to greentext and the only way to personally right this transgression is to break one of the more explicit rules we have.

I'm okay doing war. I even like it at times. But when the majority of the team doesn't want to do it, it seems like a dick move to declare war.

[Slignerd]

"hey guys let's sell the whole armory to cargo and gas the liggers"

How is that the same as declaring war exactly?

It's more comparable to shooting the captain because you dislike their station name. No benefit from doing so, and it just makes the round harder for your side in the long run.

I'm okay doing war. I even like it at times. But when the majority of the team doesn't want to do it, it seems like a dick move to declare war.

It's even more of a dick move to immediately kill your leader because you disagree with a decision their made, a decision that's well within their authority.

[cedarbridge]

"Guys, if <antag leader> does <thing to make the objective harder> can I do <thing to make the objective nearly impossible>?"

Why is this a question?

[Lazengann]

Cedar I'm not defending shooting the team leader but let's be real and admit nuke ops is easier when your team isn't around to blow your cover and shoot you in the back

[cedarbridge]

Cedar I'm not defending shooting the team leader but let's be real and admit nuke ops is easier when your team isn't around to blow your cover and shoot you in the back

I'm just sayin. If the complaint is "he hit the war button should get to shoot him" then we're just not putting the ol noggin to work.

[bandit]

Mutinying as nuke op is also really fucking stupid because nuke ops have explosive implants.

[lumipharon]

Why are people spouting shit about the nuke op leader having final say on anything?

They are literally 100% the same as the other ops except for two things:
1) They can choose the maymay last name for the team
2) Their ID card opens the door to the shuttle

With cult leader, you are explicitly told to serve them.
With rev, victory is directly based on keeping the head revs alive.
With nuke, the survival of any of the ops is irrelevent, your sole objective is to nuke the station.

Now I'm not saying 'kill the leader because you disagree with him durr hurr durr', but if ANY nuke op is doing shit that is obviously fucking dumb and going to make doing your objective significantly harder (without team approval), then why would you NOT go out of your way to stop them first through talking then violence if really needed?

Your antag roll isn't sacred, but neither is the chucklefucks. If some asshole is going to take all the tc, or run off on their own before the team is even ready, declare war when everyone else is all set for non-war, or any other dumb shit, then yes, if they're not going to listen to reason, at some point I would escalate this to shooting the idiot.
Yes this will make the round more difficult. Will it be more difficult than if you let them do dumb ass thing XYZ? if no, then go right ahead.

[BeeSting12]

Why are people spouting shit about the nuke op leader having final say on anything?

They are literally 100% the same as the other ops except for two things:
1) They can choose the maymay last name for the team
2) Their ID card opens the door to the shuttle

With cult leader, you are explicitly told to serve them.
With rev, victory is directly based on keeping the head revs alive.
With nuke, the survival of any of the ops is irrelevent, your sole objective is to nuke the station.

Now I'm not saying 'kill the leader because you disagree with him durr hurr durr', but if ANY nuke op is doing shit that is obviously fucking dumb and going to make doing your objective significantly harder (without team approval), then why would you NOT go out of your way to stop them first through talking then violence if really needed?

Your antag roll isn't sacred, but neither is the chucklefucks. If some asshole is going to take all the tc, or run off on their own before the team is even ready, declare war when everyone else is all set for non-war, or any other dumb shit, then yes, if they're not going to listen to reason, at some point I would escalate this to shooting the idiot.
Yes this will make the round more difficult. Will it be more difficult than if you let them do dumb ass thing XYZ? if no, then go right ahead.

this is my thoughts on the matter written out nonautistically

[Cobby]

He also gets the TC distribution console and the button to call for war though so he obviously is the designated person as set by the code to decide how to play it out.

[lumipharon]

Oh no, I can't climb over a table or press a button.

How is he 'designated to decide how things play out' in anything more than an IC way at best? If you want to make it that the team leader can do whatever retarded shit he wants and force everyone else to go along with it, then make it explicit like a cult leader.

Right now the only thing relevent is rule 4 which says team antags can do whatever, so long as it doesn't 'harm their team'. If you take this literally, then soloing the shuttle to station and spacing the nuke while the rest of your team is stuck at base is ok.
If you intepret this like a non autist, then a 'team leader', whether explicitly ooc or ic, they still can't do dumb shit that the rest of the team clearly doesn't want and is going to fuck them over.

Whether you argue that this should be resolved in an IC or OOC manner (ie: shoot them in the head or bannu them), I can't see how anyone can pose a rational argument for letting someone be a massive cunt. Which is basically where this comes under rule 1.

[Not-Dorsidarf]

Show me on the doll where your nuke leader wasted your telecrystal, lumi

[Nilons]

Telling nuke ops leaders its 100% acceptable to take their teams TCs and buy themself a mauler because they're the leader is not going ruin anyone's fun Im sure

[Arianya]

If your team leader is being a complete saboteur (throwing the nuke out of the ship, hoarding all the TC to himself, etc) then ahelp it and he'll get bwoinked.

If your team leader decides to do something that you don't necessarily agree with but which is a reasonable choice if not the most optimal one then suck it up and deal with it. There's always OOC and deadchat to taunt them over their stupid fucking choices when it all goes pear-shaped.

If you shoot your team leader for making a decision you will end up getting bwoinked for violating one of the few sacred tenets of team antag: don't murder your own team.

[CPTANT]

If your team leader is being a complete saboteur (throwing the nuke out of the ship, hoarding all the TC to himself, etc) then ahelp it and he'll get bwoinked.

If your team leader decides to do something that you don't necessarily agree with but which is a reasonable choice if not the most optimal one then suck it up and deal with it. There's always OOC and deadchat to taunt them over their stupid fucking choices when it all goes pear-shaped.

If you shoot your team leader for making a decision you will end up getting bwoinked for violating one of the few sacred tenets of team antag: don't murder your own team.

Once again, that is not a sacred tenet of team antags, the sacred tenet of team antags is complete your objective.

[Arianya]

If you don't consider the "Main Server Rules" sacred tenets then you may need to revisit them.

Team antagonists can do whatever they want as per lone antagonists, as long as it doesn’t harm their team

And yes, you can handwring about "b-but he declared war!!" but shooting one of your team-mates to death is far more harmful then making a questionable decision.

[imblyings]

Oh no, I can't climb over a table or press a button.

How is he 'designated to decide how things play out' in anything more than an IC way at best? If you want to make it that the team leader can do whatever retarded shit he wants and force everyone else to go along with it, then make it explicit like a cult leader.

Right now the only thing relevent is rule 4 which says team antags can do whatever, so long as it doesn't 'harm their team'. If you take this literally, then soloing the shuttle to station and spacing the nuke while the rest of your team is stuck at base is ok.
If you intepret this like a non autist, then a 'team leader', whether explicitly ooc or ic, they still can't do dumb shit that the rest of the team clearly doesn't want and is going to fuck them over.

Whether you argue that this should be resolved in an IC or OOC manner (ie: shoot them in the head or bannu them), I can't see how anyone can pose a rational argument for letting someone be a massive cunt. Which is basically where this comes under rule 1.

something like this actually happened once

a nuke op acted like a cunt and went off to solo but it turned out they were able to pull it off

[cedarbridge]

Oh no, I can't climb over a table or press a button.

How is he 'designated to decide how things play out' in anything more than an IC way at best? If you want to make it that the team leader can do whatever retarded shit he wants and force everyone else to go along with it, then make it explicit like a cult leader.

Right now the only thing relevent is rule 4 which says team antags can do whatever, so long as it doesn't 'harm their team'. If you take this literally, then soloing the shuttle to station and spacing the nuke while the rest of your team is stuck at base is ok.
If you intepret this like a non autist, then a 'team leader', whether explicitly ooc or ic, they still can't do dumb shit that the rest of the team clearly doesn't want and is going to fuck them over.

Whether you argue that this should be resolved in an IC or OOC manner (ie: shoot them in the head or bannu them), I can't see how anyone can pose a rational argument for letting someone be a massive cunt. Which is basically where this comes under rule 1.

something like this actually happened once

a nuke op acted like a cunt and went off to solo but it turned out they were able to pull it off

I seem to remember an admin yelling at them for being a tool though.

[lumipharon]

Oldman or some other memer used to do that EVERY. SINGLE. ROUND. They would fuck off with a parapen and maymay disguise and get the disk in 5 minutes for the greentext and say 'don't do anything until I set the nuke, then you can do whatever'.

Also last time I had a genuine cunt op leader, I critted them then they blew themselves up, and admins were fine with it because he was being a fucking ass cunt.

And to clarify, I am not arguing anywhere that we must do the ultimate powergamer efficient strat for le green text, or I'm going to spit the dummy. I am saying that if a team member is being such a cunt to the rest of the team and being an actual liability, then you'd have to be an idiot not to do something about them.
It's like back when we didn't have syndie pins, and some chucklefuck would get the SAW, run off on their own and get disarmed immediately, then the rest of the team gets mowed down by SAW spam.

[Arianya]

Oldman or some other memer used to do that EVERY. SINGLE. ROUND. They would fuck off with a parapen and maymay disguise and get the disk in 5 minutes for the greentext and say 'don't do anything until I set the nuke, then you can do whatever'.

Also last time I had a genuine cunt op leader, I critted them then they blew themselves up, and admins were fine with it because he was being a fucking ass cunt.

And to clarify, I am not arguing anywhere that we must do the ultimate powergamer efficient strat for le green text, or I'm going to spit the dummy. I am saying that if a team member is being such a cunt to the rest of the team and being an actual liability, then you'd have to be an idiot not to do something about them.
It's like back when we didn't have syndie pins, and some chucklefuck would get the SAW, run off on their own and get disarmed immediately, then the rest of the team gets mowed down by SAW spam.

Sounds like theres nothing really to discuss then, since judging by your anecdote you killed a team-mate for legitimate cuntery and the admins were fine with it.

Declaring war is most likely not going to meet that barrier, per the OP.

[Gouty]

So I was adminning when this happened recently (it might have even been the event that lead to this post being made)

The situation was that the original leader told me they were lagging hard so wanted to have their role offered to ghosts, which I did. The team had been preparing for the mission without war, and had spent a fair amount of TC already. New leader comes in, holds a vote whether to go to war and gets outvoted 3/1 against, and still declares war anyway.

It wasn't one person that killed the leader it was 2 of them simultaneously, and the 3rd did not object. Their explosive implant did not cause any collateral damage.

I think I just heard everyone out and noted all involved (making sure to include the situation and that they were semi justified to kill them), spoke to both sides and toyed with the idea of adding the player back in as a different op so that they would not be down one player, the remaining ops were open to it but the killed leader just went "nah, they've made their bed" sort of thing.

I think each situation will be different, in this one I think there was no one clear person in the wrong. However I could see situations arising where the leader spends/wastes all the points, hoards the gear, is overly antagonistic with their team mates and probably deserves it. I would however prefer this to be ahelped before acted upon.