/tg/Station 13

Bottom post of the previous page:

Stickymayhem wrote:Act like security get treated like security.

If you're arming up as a non-antag you get the responsibilities that come with that power whether you like it or not.

I'd like to discuss this. I feel like simply by virtue of being outfitted like security does not and should not make you more responsible for your actions.

I dislike the idea that in a situation in which an assistant wearing a riot suit is more responsible for their actions than an assistant wearing an orange vest. Lots of scenarios happen where someone gets gear.

Not to be "that guy" but from my experience of 10 rounds yesterday those rules don't stop sec getting fucked with.

Heres the thing. These "do this unless this except for this otherwise this" policies everybody bitches about?

Its called precedence, These policies got made in to such because people who got banned or people who didn't get their ban request approved asked for clear lines and rulings.

So what is it? What one do you fucking want?

If the rules are vague, people bitch about how admins have too much wiggle room, or that they couldn't know blah blah blah.

So we started to work on fixing that, hashing out the policies based on current trends at the time on how admins have ruled on those things.

and now what? That wasn't fucking good enough? Apparently giving the players what they wanted makes us fucking bay teir?

The point here really should be how conscientious you are as a validhunter in terms of sportsmanship. A validhunter who randomly stun/strip/searches people to find antags with antag items on them each round might cross the line but someone gearing themselves up with security tools to kill mcspace a murderer should have full rights to absolutely remove said murderer from the round even if they get them subdued and stripped.

Making it depend on what gear you have doesn't seem right, a validhunter with a spray bottle and cable cuffs can validhunt just as hard as a validhunter with the armoury.

Also in cases like this you have to remember the pissed off party is usually the loudest. The people who want more rules and the people who want less are very likely not the same people

imblyings wrote:but someone gearing themselves up with security tools to kill mcspace a murderer should have full rights to absolutely remove said murderer from the round

Then why even bother playing a security officer if any greyshit can do your job without restrictions?
Welcome to the point of the thread.

Because you get access to better equipment, a team of like minded people, and a reasonable expectation from everybody of what you're doing right from roundstart, instead of just pissing off everyone.

Some greyshirt can get this stuff eventually, but if all you want to do is chase criminals, then you might as well just try and start on the team that's full of people doing that, who incidentally you can trust.

MrStonedOne wrote:Heres the thing. These "do this unless this except for this otherwise this" policies everybody bitches about?

Its called precedence, These policies got made in to such because people who got banned or people who didn't get their ban request approved asked for clear lines and rulings.

So what is it? What one do you fucking want?

If the rules are vague, people bitch about how admins have too much wiggle room, or that they couldn't know blah blah blah.

So we started to work on fixing that, hashing out the policies based on current trends at the time on how admins have ruled on those things.

and now what? That wasn't fucking good enough? Apparently giving the players what they wanted makes us fucking bay teir?

The problem isn't that there are too many policies, its that too many of the policies are arse backwards and retarded.

And do you remember what happened after we went from the simple five rules to the Legislation of TG-Station?
I remember getting in a big argument with Intigricy not one week after the new rules went live because they were arguing for a ban to remain in place which went against established precedent, and their reasoning was solely by wielding the new rules around like a big grotesque anime sword. They kept arguing with rule zero and rule one (which still remains one of the most ambiguous up to interpretation rules), whilst I was arguing that rule two still states that "shits gonna go bad for you, man up and deal with it" and that the established precedent was that what the accused did was not bannable.

And that was just the start of the slippery slope, I'm pretty sure the perversion of the new rules was what made TLE lock the old forum with no warning before closing it down and washing his hands of the community.

So the problems are that dumb rules get made and then admins blindly follow them and go "well its against the rules".
I mean for fuck sake, it was only the other month where Sticky banned someone even though they were hesitant about it but still did it anyway because "rules say ban, me ban! BAN!!"

We don't elect headmins to be mindless drones that parrot the written rules, we elect admins in the hope that they're smart enough to go "You know what... this old rule is dumb, I'm gonna ask people if maybe we should get rid of it".
And thats why people have been saying that Kor's done an infinitely more impressive job as an interim headmin in the past couple of weeks than the last three sets of headmins.

Hell I'd even say that things were better when appealing to a headmin consisted of PMing XSI and then hoping that he'd descend from Mount Olympus long enough to make a decree to us dirt eating mortals.
Atleast he practically never made bans himself, so there was a lot less "Well... you're banned by a headmin, hard luck kid - your only option is to appeal to the host"

Actually I banned the geneticist because I was outvoted on it.

We aren't mindless drones but when every minor action is torn apart by a bunch of angry people it's hard to expect huge sweeping changes are going to go particularly well.

They go pretty well for Kor.

Saegrimr wrote:

imblyings wrote:but someone gearing themselves up with security tools to kill mcspace a murderer should have full rights to absolutely remove said murderer from the round

Then why even bother playing a security officer if any greyshit can do your job without restrictions?
Welcome to the point of the thread.

krav maga (soon), round-start gear, occasional competent officers who have your back, some people actually do enjoy/are masochists enough to enjoy working in that certain team mindset

I still don't see the problem though. If the problem is sec not being allowed to valid a murderer/antag who has fucked shit up, then why not just let sec do just that. I'll say right now that I'm not going to ban security for killing off a confirmed antag who has killed people or done serious shit like flood plasma or subvert the silicons, even if they are completely subdued.

I never understood security not being able to kill antags.

You end up in perma anyway, which is a fate worse than death.

imblyings wrote:I still don't see the problem though. If the problem is sec not being allowed to valid a murderer/antag who has fucked shit up, then why not just let sec do just that. I'll say right now that I'm not going to ban security for killing off a confirmed antag who has killed people or done serious shit like flood plasma or subvert the silicons, even if they are completely subdued.

Is the "confirmed antag" part that important? For a lubing chemist or wire-cutting cargo tech, the joy of tossing them out the airlock would probably be the only enjoyable thing they contribute to the round.

What you have to look out for are:

1) People joining sec just to fuck with others.

This is nothing new. Some idiots will see "Sec can beat people up in self defense/have lax'er standards for briggings and such" and jump immediately to trying to grey-tide as sec or assault folks who legitimately didn't do anything. Taking the leash off isn't an encouragement for sec to immediately start playing like garbage. It's permission to enforce the law with some balls. If you aren't actually enforcing the law and just being shit you should be treated just as harshly. This is a standard across most servers.

2) People immediately assuming sec is out to kill them over anything/everything and so they can murder sec officers the instant they see them in pursuit.

This is also not new. Sec officers doing their job doesn't make them valid. Sec officers cannot be traitors (though other people can still get job transfers in, and loyalty implants don't do dick to remove a traitor). If you see a sec officer doing something "unjust" (like curb-stomping a random person in the halls for no reason) I would suggest you allow players to treat them the same as they would any other random person doing the same thing. But unless someone is a legitimate antag, running away from security should not involve murdering them directly or indirectly. None of this is new either, but bears reiterating.

Example 1: I see sec officers escorting the clown to the brig. Nobody has said anything about the clown doing anything wrong all shift. I run in and help the clown escape. Later on we are caught by security and have both of our asses brought into the brig and the shit kicked out of us. This is all valid IC fine.

Example 2: I see sec officers escorting the clown to the brig. Nobody has said anything about the clown doing anything wrong all shift. I pull out a laser I stole and murder the officer to free the clown, because I randomly assumed he was going to murder the clown later. I get banned for 24 hours for this. This is deserved.

Example 3: I see a sec officer standing over the clown in the hall, harmbaton'ing him into a thick red paste. Nobody has said anything about the clown doing anything wrong all shift. I pull out a laser I stole and murder the officer to free the clown. This is valid IC.

Example 4: I'm a sec officer and I walk into escape and to see a clown using the Captain as a sheathe for his esword. I taser the Clown, beat him into crit, and toss him out the airlock on the spot. This is valid IC.

Sounds reasonable to me.

Decently yeah.

An0n3 wrote:

Example 3: I see a sec officer standing over the clown in the hall, harmbaton'ing him into a thick red paste. Nobody has said anything about the clown doing anything wrong all shift. I pull out a laser I stole and murder the officer to free the clown. This is valid IC.

Further context on Example 3: Clown is a ling and has been eating people. Detective has gained definitive proof through forensic scans of victims and informs the rest of sec over sec radio. All of sec is now on the lookout for the clown but do not make any announcements over general because A. it is not the rest of the crews business and B. the clown might go into hiding or change identities. Sec officer sees the clown and starts beating it into a pulp while requesting someone with access to come so they can gib the ling. Random greytide who stole a lazer walks up and see the sec officer killing the clown but doesn't know why... takes out lazer gun and kills the officer, saving the ling.

Not cool.

Better would be: greytider with stolen lazer sees clown being pasted and asks the officer "WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU DOING?!" at which point the officer says "ling".

If you open fire on a sec officer without a word then I would say you are not immune to admin action because you really aren't justified in assuming sec is up to no good. You should be assuming sec has a reason for what they are doing, you can and sometimes should follow up on what they are doing just to make sure they aren't being a shitter but opening fire on them without even talking to them first is pure shit. Also, if the sec officer is killing the clown for slipping him or something stupid, then that officer is very much open to being sec (or just flat out) banned for being shit.

An0n3 wrote:-snip-

Most of these examples are terrible.

Example 1 allows for antags to be released by non-antags which gives security much more problems, What happens if the antag doesnt get caught again and goes of murderboning or blowing shit up, or if the non-antag doesnt get caught again and uses the excuse to the admins as "If I got caught it would be valid but security didnt care enough to catch me :^)" then make a habit of doing this every round knowing they can mostly get away with it.

Example 3 was explained above pretty well, context is important and so is communication. as well as security doesnt use general radio to call out the antags they find since they want to keep the upper hand and let the antag think they are safe. Also if a non-antag steals a gun from the armoury FNR then later in the round happens to kill a traitor is this behaviour now valid? because that sounds like powergaming

Example 4 is terrible, with this playstyle in mind you might as well turn the perma brig into a mass driver, as well as you still dont know the context. The clown might have saved the captains life and was rewarded all access and the traitors items. This is why we have the interrogation room it isnt just for RP and should be used to process prisoners who you are thinking of putting in perma.

Arete wrote:

imblyings wrote:I still don't see the problem though. If the problem is sec not being allowed to valid a murderer/antag who has fucked shit up, then why not just let sec do just that. I'll say right now that I'm not going to ban security for killing off a confirmed antag who has killed people or done serious shit like flood plasma or subvert the silicons, even if they are completely subdued.

Is the "confirmed antag" part that important? For a lubing chemist or wire-cutting cargo tech, the joy of tossing them out the airlock would probably be the only enjoyable thing they contribute to the round.

Personally, antags have always been on a two-way street of valids barring factors of sportsmanship, regardless of job. I think the server has kinda moved away from that, in an attempt to compensate for a perceived lack of sportsmanship, so re-affirming that was pretty important.

As for the 'confirmed antag' part, it depends on severity. Stealing the RCD and rendering entire hallways unusable due to lube are both antag-like but I'd only find lynching the latter acceptable. If they haven't reached the threshold of doing completely antag stuff like killing people or doing grand sabotage, then it's important to remember that you can valid them it's just that less lethal methods of validing people exist, like drawn-out demotions, gulag sentences with the beepsky turned on, giving them to medical or xenobio, etc. I mean it's a case by case thing where players need to keep their lynching proportionate to the grief.

imblyings wrote:As for the 'confirmed antag' part, it depends on severity. Stealing the RCD and rendering entire hallways unusable due to lube are both antag-like but I'd only find lynching the latter acceptable. If they haven't reached the threshold of doing completely antag stuff like killing people or doing grand sabotage, then it's important to remember that you can valid them it's just that less lethal methods of validing people exist, like drawn-out demotions, gulag sentences with the beepsky turned on, giving them to medical or xenobio, etc. I mean it's a case by case thing where players need to keep their lynching proportionate to the grief.

No argument from me here. If an antag objective isn't serious enough in its own right to warrant a life-or-death struggle, that's an issue with the coded objective, not the policy. And on the other hand, persistently annoying people in ways that don't immediately serve antag objectives (hallway lubing, radio spam) should be grounds for in-character retribution at the very least.

Mongke wrote:

An0n3 wrote:-snip-

Most of these examples are terrible.

Example 1 allows for antags to be released by non-antags which gives security much more problems, What happens if the antag doesnt get caught again and goes of murderboning or blowing shit up, or if the non-antag doesnt get caught again and uses the excuse to the admins as "If I got caught it would be valid but security didnt care enough to catch me :^)" then make a habit of doing this every round knowing they can mostly get away with it.
.

May be so, but in all honesty if someone snatches a prisoner from me then they've made a personal enemy out of me, and seeing as aiding and abetting a criminal gives you the same sentence as the criminal you assisted, I have zero qualms about hunting the shitler down and then shoving them against the bulkhead before I ventilate their skull.

Eventually the shitler might learn not to do this, but if it becomes a thing they do all the time (like Baconator) then we could look at issuing bans.

imblyings wrote:gulag sentences with the beepsky turned on

I really need to do this more often.

Set your perp to Wanted, the Prison Ofitser to Detain, and disable its 'report arrests' function. It will stroll right up to them and baton them forever (barring external interference or EMP shriek/implant), and it won't even clog up Security comms.

(Come back in ten minutes, see if they've gone catatonic.)

Also, can we please just make 'Don't interfere with an arrest if you're a non-antag' a policy...

Is it really that hard for people to not beat the shit out of everyone even hinting at valid and bring them to the brig for a change?

Seriously, if there is no other threat (which there is quite often of course) and you can detain someone I see zero reason to not bring them to the brig.

Not that I want this to be rule enforced, but why is this so fucking difficult for you people?

CPTANT wrote:Is it really that hard for people to not beat the shit out of everyone even hinting at valid and bring them to the brig for a change?

Seriously, if there is no other threat (which there is quite often of course) and you can detain someone I see zero reason to not bring them to the brig.

Not that I want this to be rule enforced, but why is this so fucking difficult for you people?

Because being a shitter is the new meta.

Folks, the whole game is supposed to be based on paranoia and suspicion.
Metacommunication is banned because the idea is you want people to not know things, misinterpret situations, etc.

If you come across a sec officer beating a clown to death and you grab the clown and run away, and it turns out he was a ling and stings you and starts eating you

CONGRATULATIONS YOU ARE PLAYING SPESSMENS. THAT IS A GREAT STORY YOU NOW HAVE.

THIS IS FUCKING EMERGENT GAMEPLAY/ROLEPLAY. THIS IS HOW IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE.

Many times I tried to take the short/fast route to justice by mercilessly slaughtering an antagonist, only to have someone who has no idea what is going on stumble across the situation and suddenly I'm getting arrested while they're getting dragged off to be cloned and I'm screaming the truth of what just happened while nobody wants to listen.

THAT IS THIS GAME. UNCERTAIN SITUATIONS ARE THE BREAD AND BUTTER OF ROLEPLAY.

Yeah, but shitlers grabbing the people from security is annoying as fuck.

Kelenius wrote:Yeah, but shitlers grabbing the people from security is annoying as fuck.

If you're doing your job to the letter and being safe-curity carefully marching someone to the brig people shouldn't be running up to you to free your prisoners in the first place. Anyone who touches a prisoner you're escorting that way is now an accomplice and should share their sentencing. If someone does this all the fucking time, just exists to try to harass security every round and steal prisoners, it's grey-tiding and we've had rules for that kind of shittery for years.

If you're standing around in a circle beating the shit out of someone in the halls you probnably deserve to have that prisoner taken away from you. Or at least yell to the crew "Hey we're stomping a traitor outside the bar, bring an extinguisher and join in!"

Sec should retrieve their balls from the bowels of rules-hell. But they should also be aware that people are going to view them strangely when they use them, and they should probably learn to communicate a lot more if they don't want these kinds of misconceptions going on.

Or don't communicate and enjoy the ridiculousness that occurs.

People will march up to you and free their buddies all the time, even if you're being as nicecurity as it gets. Someone screams ";HALP SECURITY GRIFFON ME" when arrested, and it's like every Assistant in a five-mile radius gets their valid radar pinging, we've all seen it happen. Yes, they're an accomplice, but can you catch both them and the original criminal before they do anything else? Probably not. The rules about these things aren't stringent enough, if someone can say "I heard ;HALP over the radio and freed this innocent man from the foul clutches of Badcurity!" and get away with it.

So anyway, on the subject of the topuc.

I don't think that sec or anyone with weapons need any sort of special policy that covers personal interactions. If they're dealing with an assistant who broke into robotics, security rules apply, the moment he grabs a toolbox to bash you with it, usual escalation rules should apply.

I also think that people who fuck with sec just to fuck with sec such as stealing cuffed prisoners should get slapped harder. "Only if it happens all the time" is shit because who the fuck is going to keep track of how often this particular assistant does it? "Yeah I'm going to fuck with security because lel valid I don't do it all the time can't ban me lolololol." That's a matter of another thread though.

TheNightingale wrote:People will march up to you and free their buddies all the time, even if you're being as nicecurity as it gets. Someone screams ";HALP SECURITY GRIFFON ME" when arrested, and it's like every Assistant in a five-mile radius gets their valid radar pinging, we've all seen it happen. Yes, they're an accomplice, but can you catch both them and the original criminal before they do anything else? Probably not. The rules about these things aren't stringent enough, if someone can say "I heard ;HALP over the radio and freed this innocent man from the foul clutches of Badcurity!" and get away with it.

If someone does that repeatedly you should point it out to the administration when you're on the server and see it happen.

People appearing out of nowhere at just the right moment to save their friend from danger is one of the signs people look for when rooting out metacommunicators. Like I said before if it's the same person (or group of people) doing it time and time again it's possible they're just shitty grey-tiders

...or if you notice people are constantly running up and taking prisoners away from you it's a possible sign you're a shitty sec officer and the crew is rebelling against you for a reason. Or maybe you're just not robust enough to keep people away from you, and you deserve to have this stuff taken from you.

Kelenius wrote: "Only if it happens all the time" is shit because who the fuck is going to keep track of how often this particular assistant does it?

This is what notes are for. We have a whole system for people to record things like this.

Even if someone is valid this is why admins would sometimes note it anyway. Because if you do something over and over again it stops being valid.

CPTANT wrote:Is it really that hard for people to not beat the shit out of everyone even hinting at valid and bring them to the brig for a change?

Seriously, if there is no other threat (which there is quite often of course) and you can detain someone I see zero reason to not bring them to the brig.

Not that I want this to be rule enforced, but why is this so fucking difficult for you people?

I actually try to do this on occasion. Three times I immediately remember. Talking instead of just TAZE, CUFF, BRIG. Because the latter happens to me often e-fucking-nough. Nothing is more annoying than some redshirt just rolling up, bam-taze, and having to spend five minutes hanging out in the brig explaining myself or waiting for the HoS to get there. I don't mind if I actually murdered someone or did some severe shit, but more often than not, it's just confusion or dumbshits misreading something and telling sec I'm a traitor.

Normally it doesn't work out. They'll run, robust me, not cooperate so I end up tazing them anyways. The last time I remember is me trying to talk a guy with a couple guns on him out of a locker and to just hand them over, then he's on his way. I think they got spawned in by an admin or some shit. Anyways, he hadn't actually used them on anyone or anything. Didn't seem keen on getting ziptied though so he ran, que normal procedure.

But one day, maybe... Maybe someone will be cool.

I talk to people if they have no set arrest reason no direct order to arrest them on the sec channel and no response to the question "what is XXXX set to arrest for?".

Then I would talk to them, after this entire process the actual innocents are probably the only one that wouldn't have run off while I did all that so it sorts it fine enough for me. Sometimes a total palooka just accesses records and those are the main cases that need to be RPed and cleared up.

It was much easier with standard issue sec hailers a lot of the people squirming away when you try to talk to them don't realize you are typing shit out as they zoom from point A to point B on the station. Now coders want to make noise cues set you on fire because a delay would make too much sense. Sec hailer is actually a great way to start people chatting in IC.

There is already a delay, it's just set only so that's it's long enough prevent overlap

Higgins McGee wrote:

CPTANT wrote:Is it really that hard for people to not beat the shit out of everyone even hinting at valid and bring them to the brig for a change?

Seriously, if there is no other threat (which there is quite often of course) and you can detain someone I see zero reason to not bring them to the brig.

Not that I want this to be rule enforced, but why is this so fucking difficult for you people?

I actually try to do this on occasion. Three times I immediately remember. Talking instead of just TAZE, CUFF, BRIG. Because the latter happens to me often e-fucking-nough. Nothing is more annoying than some redshirt just rolling up, bam-taze, and having to spend five minutes hanging out in the brig explaining myself or waiting for the HoS to get there. I don't mind if I actually murdered someone or did some severe shit, but more often than not, it's just confusion or dumbshits misreading something and telling sec I'm a traitor.

Normally it doesn't work out. They'll run, robust me, not cooperate so I end up tazing them anyways. The last time I remember is me trying to talk a guy with a couple guns on him out of a locker and to just hand them over, then he's on his way. I think they got spawned in by an admin or some shit. Anyways, he hadn't actually used them on anyone or anything. Didn't seem keen on getting ziptied though so he ran, que normal procedure.

But one day, maybe... Maybe someone will be cool.

I have had a lot of people who are cool enough to just allow me to search them, or accompany me to brig or explain things without me needing to taze or cuff them. Of course ive also had some run away and then kill hordes of people or pull a gun on me.

So basically security wants to get their valids back but don't want to have to suffer the ic consequences?

oranges wrote:So basically security wants to get their valids back but don't want to have to suffer the ic consequences?

Please tell me how security doesn't suffer the IC consequences.

oranges wrote:So basically security wants to get their valids back but don't want to have to suffer the ic consequences?

A player who messes sec every bloody round isn't an IC consequence. We often apply meta to the front of grudge for a reason they join with being a greytider pain in the ass as their primary objective.

Lets be serious,

Since 2012 maybe two people have ever actually ever stuck around to talk, let alone allow me to search.

It's super easy to spot who is guilty because they fucking zoom off the second they see you even if you didn't know about them before.

Tornadium wrote:Lets be serious,

Since 2012 maybe two people have ever actually ever stuck around to talk, let alone allow me to search.

It's super easy to spot who is guilty because they fucking zoom off the second they see you even if you didn't know about them before.

I really don't know why everyone always runs from security when they're just greyshitting it up. Some of the best roleplay I've had was with arresting officers.

newfren wrote:

Tornadium wrote:Lets be serious,

Since 2012 maybe two people have ever actually ever stuck around to talk, let alone allow me to search.

It's super easy to spot who is guilty because they fucking zoom off the second they see you even if you didn't know about them before.

I really don't know why everyone always runs from security when they're just greyshitting it up. Some of the best roleplay I've had was with arresting officers.

Most people who play this game are shitheads, that's why.