What is needed to justify an early shuttle launch?

[Constellado]

I realised that I had no idea what is actually needed to justify an early shuttle launch.

Apparently launching the shuttle early due to pirates invading the shuttle is not enough of a justification to launch it.

What exactly is needed to launch a shuttle early? I was told that it had to be a nukie, meteors, or other delta level threat, but not pirates or other hostile antagonists running/breaking in. It would be good to get this written down so that others don't make the same mistake, as I thought that any hostile threat breaking into the shuttle was enough.

If I missed this policy somewhere, that is my bad.

[iansdoor]

As much as I enjoy that you tagged the topic as [MRP] only.

This has been a ruling on all servers. 2019, 2020, varies cases throughout the years of folks getting noted or rolebanned for non-antag command that early launch.
viewtopic.php?f=85&t=23038&p=500634&hil ... ng#p500634

Also I'm going to say that asking for it to be "officially valid" is kinda weird - if someone does something like launch the shuttle early nearly leaving you on station/actually leaving your colleagues on station/etc for no good reason then I feel like it's pretty intuitive that you might be mad at them and kick their ass? Not everything needs to be a black/white "valid or not" thing. by Arianya

This is already enforced, unless there's no one around, or they haven't noticed. We encourage you to ahelp it if you see it, because yes, it's extremely in bad faith to early launch because unga my antag roll faster. By Wubii

viewtopic.php?f=34&t=30322&p=620330&hil ... ng#p620330

Early launch reasons are existential station threats or immediate threats to the shuttle, people killing themselves do not fall under either of those. Same with the explosives, i saw no bombs on the shuttle before it launched. Early launching ended up leaving behind crew and over all really rude to do if you are not an antag with hijack. by Justicegoat

Like other admins have stated, you must have a good in game reason to early shuttle, otherwise situation is discourteous to folks that you left behind, folks that were wrapping up their greentext, or folks that coming from the other side of the station or lavaland. A in-game reason of, meteorites are striking the shuttle, a nuclear device is armed and going off, Active nuclear operatives that are coming for the disk, even halos cult that are out of control are some solid good reasoning.

Otherwise, the launch itself nullifies any more interactions with the station crew. Looking at folks reasoning to click the button, it's getting to the next round to do whatever or roll antagonist. This is not good outlook, be patient as other folks have been patient with you as well. Other reasoning I have heard is that I just bandwagonned in. This is also not good either, bandwagonning to launch early has the same issue as the first one. There are tons more situations that aren't so intuitive. but I will cite that rule 1 is do excellent to each other and rule 10. Losing is part of the game.

[Jacquerel]

I figure if you've pre-warned everyone that the plan is for the heads to launch it early so that people can be there when it arrives rather than treating that as their time to arrive it isn't sufficient on its own but it will probably help a lot when it comes to an admin asking what was going on
Also means they have time to argue, object, or intervene which removes the concern about it "not being interactive"

[Constellado]

Hmm, one problem I have with those forum threads is it doesnt really give me personally a good line on what is acceptable.

Is having a band of pirates breaking into a shuttle acceptable or not? I was told by iansdoor no, but part of me still thinks it could be valid within the rulings of those threads. Especially when people are yelling "pirates!" behind the cockpit doors. And yelling that windows are being broken.

Would an antag with a dsword on the outside of the ship smashing a window to the cockpit be good for an early shuttle launch?
How about people screaming that there is a dangerous mech shooting a window from space?

These scenarios are not the same as
>"Antag exists I want to leave."
It is instead:
>"Oh fuck an antag is breaking into the shuttle from the outside right now and the crew could get hurt by the antag running inside or die from getting spaced. Maybe sending it could save the crew from getting hurt by these antags."

In these scenarios, there is no time to tell people: "We are early launching!"
And also in these scenarios, it is not a "Delta level threat". And would be cheap to that antag, however it makes sense IC to be calling it.

I can accept if it is not allowed to send it, but those policy threads do not really tell me if that is the case. Apart from, "it's not a delta level threat or meteors", but I think its a little silly IC wise cand could do well with some good clarification.

I would say it counts as "immediate threats to the shuttle". does it?

[Timberpoes]

The way I've always ruled it and preferred it being ruled is either:

1. Existential threat to the station, or
2. Existential threat to the shuttle or its occupants, or
3. It just makes IC sense based on the unique factors of the shift.

That usually boils down to launch early or there'll be nobody left alive (on the station and/or on the shuttle) by the time the shuttle launches naturally, or a risk of the shuttle being rendered inhospitable to life if it's not launched early.

You'll never get an answer more specific than that. Points 1 and 2 have edge cases where different admins will feel differently, and point 3 is basically just any admin's vibe.

To give some context, I searched our notes database for early launch notes over the past 12 months. The vast majority of notes (and yes, in some rare cases bans) actually eminate from Terry, but each quote block below has the server tagged.

Spoiler:

[...] early launched the shuttle using an emag as a non-antag. Please don't do this unless you have a very good reason to do so (the crew is in imminent danger). If you did have a good reason, please appeal this note on the forums.

Asked to only early launch the shuttle (as non antag) if there is an imminent serious threat to the safety of the shuttle.

Spoken to about early launching the shuttle without much of a reason.

Advised not to early launch without an imminent threat to the shuttle/occupants ; and should not simply be a mindless auto approval of another persons request.

Early launched the shuttle without any pre-emptive threat, claiming that they did so because the other heads were authorizing early launching. Warned to exercise their own autonomy when playing head and to not authorize early shuttle launches unless there's an immediate threat to the shuttle.

Banned from the server for 3 hours - As a non-antag engineer with two command ID, early launched the shuttle with 2:40 left, reason being "i don't want to stay five minutes on shuttle." Has been talked to about early shuttles and their reasons.

Early launched shuttle because of heretic running rampant somewhere on the station and direct orders of captain. Explained that you need a direct and immediate threat, for example a wave of zombies approaching to early launch the shuttle.

Early launched the shuttle, partial citing people telling them to (use your own autonomy here, immediate threat to the shuttle or dont early launch), eventually went on about how the station was on fire and people had died. Great, but still not a reason for you to leave more people behind just because you are ready to.

As a security officer, emagged the escape shuttle to early launch it. Warned for this behaviour.

Early launched shuttle despite there being no active threats towards the shuttle. Claimed that there was a bomber and that they didn't want the shuttle to be detonated, but all antagonists were dead (by the point the launch was authorized), and the hypothetical situation of the shuttle being bombed isn't a good enough reason to launch the shuttle. There needs to be an active threat, like a singularity, nukies or even a group of murderboning traitors, for an early launch to be valid.

Warned not to early launch the shuttle for no reason/when the shuttle is not in immediate danger.

Was warned about early launching the shuttle without an immediate danger.

As non antag cook, triple authed shuttle early launch as a non antag after revs (failed) and other mess because "cant take this round any fucking longer". This isn't good enough, feel free to suicide out in most cases but early launch should only be done if there is an imminent threat to the shuttle, for the sake of the rest of the players.

Has been warned not to early launch the shuttle without a valid reason.

[...] early launched the shuttle FNR. They fessed up to their ignorance about the rule and was very apologetic in ahelps. Thank you for your understanding, don't let it happen again.

[Constellado]

My bad with the MRP tag, I have been playing MRP and not LRP for so long I misjudged it.

I will remove the tag for people.

[PapaMichael]

uh the notes timber posted are really weird!

most of them are like "hey man you can't just early launch fnr just because you want the round to end" which i'm fully on-board with, but then we have:

Early launched shuttle because of heretic running rampant somewhere on the station and direct orders of captain. Explained that you need a direct and immediate threat, for example a wave of zombies approaching to early launch the shuttle.

note the captain instead then? if the captain says "hey hop this heretic is really bad, early launch it" i really don't think i should be noted for that.

Early launched shuttle despite there being no active threats towards the shuttle. Claimed that there was a bomber and that they didn't want the shuttle to be detonated, but all antagonists were dead (by the point the launch was authorized), and the hypothetical situation of the shuttle being bombed isn't a good enough reason to launch the shuttle. There needs to be an active threat, like a singularity, nukies or even a group of murderboning traitors, for an early launch to be valid.

how is a player ever supposed to know that "all antags are dead" at any point in time? if i have some ic reason to think the shuttle is about to be maxcapped, that should be the archetypal reason for an early launch imo

making imperfect decisions with the imperfect information you have IS this game, and punishing players who make the wrong decisions doesn't sit well with me at all. yes, this necessarily includes some good-faith mistakes where a shuttle is early-launched and a dozen people are stranded when there actually isn't any threat. (insert rule about how losing is part of the game here)
if this is how this rule is enforced, i think it should be MUCH more lenient.

[Fatal]

Is the shuttle going to be severely fucked up or are people going to die if you DON'T early launch?

If the answer is no to both of these questions, then don't early launch


Most of the early launches on terry are just command being dinguses and leaving people behind because one person swiped and the pack mentality of people being unable to think for themselves takes over and another two people swipe without considering why

[Vekter]

I have always ruled it as only a necessity if there's a good chance everyone on the shuttle will die if it stays there.

Timber made most of my points for me so I'll just gesture vaguely to his post.

[Constellado]

-snip-

making imperfect decisions with the imperfect information you have IS this game, and punishing players who make the wrong decisions doesn't sit well with me at all. yes, this necessarily includes some good-faith mistakes where a shuttle is early-launched and a dozen people are stranded when there actually isn't any threat. (insert rule about how losing is part of the game here)
if this is how this rule is enforced, i think it should be MUCH more lenient.

I fully agree with this sentiment. I can see why it is so harsh but man does it stand out above other rulings where most other rulings just need a reasonable IC justification. From what I can tell, this ruling needs an IC justification that is not just reasonable, but it HAS to be a big dangerous threat that will kill everybody. Players also don't get infinite knowledge, and as a result are more likely to play up things that they hear from players. If multiple people are screaming that the shuttle is invaded, a player should be allowed to make the decision ICly to fast send the shuttle in my opinion, even if they don't see the threat Infront of them.

I think the ruling is not intuitive at all.

[DrAmazing343]

I’m 100% for “someone is going to kill a bunch of people on the shuttle” even if they would be put down eventually as a good reason to launch. I think this should be far more lenient in any cases except those where it was a boredlaunch.

Like, seriously, in what world do I want to wait two more minutes when a pirate with a cutlass is smashing through the window? Very, very few.

[RedBaronFlyer]

As others have said, if something is about to get onto the shuttle and kill crew, the station itself is going to go boom, or some other specific thing seem to cover most of the ground when it comes to justifying an early shuttle launch. Pretty much one of the only things not converted is "I wanna end this round faster"

The issue with a lot of roleplay or more complicated stuff is that that there are two approaches regarding rules, one approach is to make a case by case basis (i.e. you can't early launch if it's, say, spiders), which often leads to incredibly long and tedious rulings with biblical length that make it more likely that someone goofs up down the line. The other approach is a "use your brain dummy" approach, which has it's limits because some people are quite stupid, they don't care, or they have a differing sense of what they interpret something as. The gung-ho HOS may not want to launch early in order to buy a larger window of time for crew to board the shuttle and feels like security + armed crew are sufficient to prevent any boarding action, while the captain, HOP, and CE would prefer to launch early to prevent all these crewmember's huddled in a small space from getting killed. I imagine most players are familiar with those instances of the command crew panic launching because the nukies/pirates just parked right outside the shuttle or xenos are trying to break through the boarding doors.

One thing I've appreciated with TG is that it tends to incorporate both. Most rules fall under common sense but there are a few examples of specific instances to avoid as well. Granted, even this middle ground has an issue because you will have player or even admin disagreements on certain policies. This is how you get situations like, say, a named server static that has existed for months getting in trouble with an admin because of naming policy falling under interpretation when they've gone for months now with the same name. (this has happened like three to five times now that I directly know of)

It reminds me a lot of this exchange from the movie Tora! Tora! Tora!, a movie about the lead up to and the attack of Pearl Harbor, where one adrmial is asking another what he should do if he sees a Japanese ship as they aren't officially at war yet but war is looking very, very likely.

Admiral Halsey: Kim, level with me. I want a clear directive... If I run into a Jap ship, what action do I take?
Admiral Kimmel: Use your common sense.
Admiral Halsey: That's the best damn order I ever had.

[Roadto3k]

I fully agree with this sentiment. I can see why it is so harsh but man does it stand out above other rulings where most other rulings just need a reasonable IC justification. From what I can tell, this ruling needs an IC justification that is not just reasonable, but it HAS to be a big dangerous threat that will kill everybody. Players also don't get infinite knowledge, and as a result are more likely to play up things that they hear from players. If multiple people are screaming that the shuttle is invaded, a player should be allowed to make the decision ICly to fast send the shuttle in my opinion, even if they don't see the threat Infront of them.

I think the ruling is not intuitive at all.

You should remember that IC you are putting anyone who is not on the shuttle to death most likely, it is an "emergency" shuttle, the last chance to leave.
If it is a situation where you would risk hurting or killing a lot of innocents only to stop a threat, as with a bomb or chem smoke or something, then that is a similar situation to when you might early launch.
What I mean is that you would not bomb cargo only because an assistant said a cult is in there, but maybe you will if you can see a crowd of robed people with glowing eyes and constructs in the bay.
In the same way you should not launch a shuttle because of a threat you have only heard of and don't know detail about, if you consider who you are leaving to die.

I don't think you will get a line drawn about this anyway, so if you aren't sure about early launches, you should not do them ever, same with using a bomb, it is smartest to never use them, if you are trying to not be banned. It just means you will have to accept losing because you made the safe choice OOC sometimes, even if it not really how a character would respond to that kind of situation.

Since I see the post above mine, "common sense" is more like "sense you have in common." Well, if you have that with who makes and enforces rules, you are lucky, for anyone else these things ask for a lot of thought. Many people have sense common to criminals, or the mentally ill, or you they just from a different country.

[TheLoLSwat]

I don't think you will get a line drawn about this anyway, so if you aren't sure about early launches, you should not do them ever, same with using a bomb, it is smartest to never use them, if you are trying to not be banned. It just means you will have to accept losing because you made the safe choice OOC sometimes, even if it not really how a character would respond to that kind of situation.

This, even if it makes perfect sense IC to launch its not worth the headache of explaining it 99% of the time when at any point you can get hit with a "erm technically the desword wielding traitor off stims with 18 kills is actually at 60 health instead of 90 so he wasnt enough of a threat"

[britgrenadier1]

I realised that I had no idea what is actually needed to justify an early shuttle launch.

Apparently launching the shuttle early due to pirates invading the shuttle is not enough of a justification to launch it.

If I missed this policy somewhere, that is my bad.

If you got noted for this please appeal it. Outside threats assaulting the shuttle with the intent to kidnap people off of it or kill people is 300% valid to early launch. I think that’s easily justifiable IC reasoning.

I believe the early launch ruling as it exists currently comes from 2021 era launches where people were just trying to go next faster.

[MooCow12]

Is beacon on shuttle a mitigating factor

[Constellado]

I realised that I had no idea what is actually needed to justify an early shuttle launch.

Apparently launching the shuttle early due to pirates invading the shuttle is not enough of a justification to launch it.

If I missed this policy somewhere, that is my bad.

If you got noted for this please appeal it. Outside threats assaulting the shuttle with the intent to kidnap people off of it or kill people is 300% valid to early launch. I think that’s easily justifiable IC reasoning.

I believe the early launch ruling as it exists currently comes from 2021 era launches where people were just trying to go next faster.

I was not, but the other person who launched it did.

I don't think here is the place to discuss somebody else's notes in detail, and is why I only why I gave situation examples instead of a moment by moment account.

This is about clarifying and cementing (or even updating)a ruling, not nessiscarily an appeal.

[Higgin]

Short answer: an ICly responsible reason.

Long answer: I don't tend to second-guess this too much. If you've got trouble on or coming to the shuttle, or the reasonable perception that there was, and think it's the best call to get out of there sooner rather than later? That's your call. People might get salty, but you're not obliged to make the brave call or the one that always makes people happy - just an IC one with a minimum of effort put into playing the role.

"We had a near miss with a lone op during the call, so I sent it as soon as we had enough heads aboard to do it." Cowardly? Perhaps. Leaving a bunch of people behind? Probably. Something a person carrying the disk might do under pressure? For sure. This, as stated above, complies with justice's ruling.

"The SM was about to go, we don't want to get caught up in that. This shift has been a world of shit, man." We both know this is unlikely to affect departures, the whole station, or a shuttle launch in any meaningful way. This does not meet the standard in justice's ruling.

There are IC arguments against early-calling being the most responsible thing to do in either of these cases. There are IC reasons somebody might still do it.

Personally, I think IC should trump the OOC consideration of your round only ending (or ending to your satisfaction) if you get to hop off at Centcom for your greentext/EORG.

Personally, I'm of the mind that if you want to be sure you're getting on that shuttle, be there when it arrives and get your ass in a seat. I'd rather we were more open to IC reasoning here, but the danger is people making a fundamentally OOC call with IC only as a fig leaf.

In a perfect world, you'd be entitled to think less of the people that early call for less responsible IC reasons, but if they're still ultimately IC reasons, even if they go unavenged by dint of the round ending, they'd ultimately be IC issues. I would be inclined to not hold somebody trying to stop an IC but perceived irresponsible early launch in any sort of jeopardy for interrupting it either if, for instance, it might very well mean getting a lot of people stranded in a bad situation.

It's a site of drama that I think we'd be better off not applying such strict scrutiny to, but the history of how it's been treated unfortunately asks for some sort of standard that makes early calling only the subject of things that affect the shuttle directly.

[kieth4]

We think that timber made a good post here;

"Existential threat to the station, or
Existential threat to the shuttle or its occupants, or
It just makes IC sense based on the unique factors of the shift."

but we would also like to add that; it should be based on what the current command who are early calling believe, sometimes threats can feel huge and you're panicking in the moment so you early launch it, and this should be understood.
The goal is not to kill people launching in good faith- but blatant antag rollers.