Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us $3,400 per month for bandwidth bills alone, and since we don't believe in shoving popup ads to our registered users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
«139 »
  • Post
  • Reply
Zamujasa
Oct 27, 2010





Bread Liar

Vengarr posted:

Fun fact: the original acronym was DUNG. Dan/tomís Universal Network Game.

Well, that explains why I saw that repeatedly when trying to reverse engineer some parts of it. I figured it was just a name along the lines of, say, libcaca

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Goons Are Great
Nov 24, 2013

Please drink responsibly



Methylethylaldehyde posted:

Too bad we were running a fever of 106 after dropping all that acid, but in the end, it all worked out, somehow.

Yeah, I remembered this post about it all working out after all when hearing that adventure zone fart song played over the radio last night with someone putting it back at the exact second he was able to.

Well, that, or it was just a mental breakdown with this running on loop in my head, at this point I don't know anymore.

monolithburger
Sep 7, 2011


Goons Are Great posted:

Space Station 13: Just a mental breakdown running on loop in my head

Vengarr
Jun 17, 2010

Smashed before noon


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k238XpMMn38

Reminds me of reading through Gooncode. One of the video comments mentioned that programmer comments sound like Dark Souls player messages. "Beware of Multithreading, therefore crash ahead"

ChickenHeart
Nov 28, 2007

Take me at your own risk.



Kiss From a Hog

Any goons interested in messing around on the Colonial Marines server? I've been digging the janky, friendly-fire-filled combat and the barely-functional teamwork as of late (also it looks like most of the creepy/fascist roleplay aspects have died off) and I'd love to play with some buddies.

catch me on steam if you're down: https://steamcommunity.com/id/ChickenHeart

monolithburger
Sep 7, 2011


monolithburger posted:

If we're being anecdotal, I've found that murderboners are usually a frequent flyer list of the same few names.

Justin Credible
Aug 27, 2003

happy cat

No don't worry, the same sorts who just do station depopulation when they roll antag certainly don't validhunt hard every chance they get to shut down any other antag's rounds, no matter how innocuous and non murderous the antag is. It's all fine and not a problem in the least.

monolithburger
Sep 7, 2011


Justin Credible posted:

No don't worry, the same sorts who just do station depopulation when they roll antag certainly don't validhunt hard every chance they get to shut down any other antag's rounds, no matter how innocuous and non murderous the antag is. It's all fine and not a problem in the least.

"They're just doing what the crew should be doing when said murderboner goes on a rampage for the 4th time today."

"It's their antag round, they were lucky and rolled antag, they should get to choose what to do with their round. Maybe if the crew actually fought back this wouldn't happen, it's so easy to stop!"


Love this game/server, but the refusal to take players seriously/being actively hostile to players who bring up the fact that the actions of one player in particular kills their enjoyment of the game is a seriously lovely and toxic attitude. It put the experience of an individual over the playerbase, and that is hosed.

Isaac
Aug 3, 2006



Fun Shoe

I think it became much more of a problem since the brute changes that make the csaber a guaranteed kill

Motherfucker
Jul 16, 2011



monolithburger posted:

Love this game/server, but the refusal to take players seriously/being actively hostile to players who bring up the fact that the actions of one player in particular kills their enjoyment of the game is a seriously lovely and toxic attitude. It put the experience of an individual over the playerbase, and that is hosed.

This is good in theory but the problem is policing it nets you bay station style 'antagonism rules' that basically fight against about a decade of mechanical development.

monolithburger
Sep 7, 2011


Motherfucker posted:

This is good in theory but the problem is policing it nets you bay station style 'antagonism rules' that basically fight against about a decade of mechanical development.

Nah, it's literally the one person running the same poo poo into the ground over and over.

Motherfucker
Jul 16, 2011



monolithburger posted:

Nah, it's literally the one person running the same poo poo into the ground over and over.

I'm telling you dawg its either you target that guy, accidentally ban someone important to one of the developers and wind up in a poo poo show where its like 'What even ARE the rules about this??' or you define those rules ahead of time and make antagonism a loving chore to meet whatever admins online at the times acceptable standard of 'fun and good' is.

Justin Credible
Aug 27, 2003

happy cat

monolithburger posted:

Nah, it's literally the one person running the same poo poo into the ground over and over.

Literally saw the guy who only murderbones and validhunts complaining on the server yesterday about the csaber. That they needed to do something else but the csaber was too good. Literally running it into the ground for themselves, imagine how the rest of the playerbase feels. But it seems to not matter at all, that individual does not seem to care about anyone else's experience, and apparently their experience should be the only thing matter to everyone else?

I mean, I hardly think an admin poking someone and going, 'Hey all you're really doing is ruining everyone else's fun when you depopulate the station, it's not really interesting or fun for anyone else when you do, please chill with it?' is rewriting server rules and having to make it into a big issue when it's literally a single player.

monolithburger
Sep 7, 2011


Justin Credible posted:

I mean, I hardly think an admin poking someone and going, 'Hey all you're really doing is ruining everyone else's fun when you depopulate the station, it's not really interesting or fun for anyone else when you do, please chill with it?' is rewriting server rules and having to make it into a big issue when it's literally a single player.

I agree entirely, it needn't be any more complicated than that. No nerfs, no rules changes. Just tone it down.

That being said they're a coder and the admins all bend over backwards to defend them and minimise legitimate complaints whenever this comes up.

EclecticTastes
Sep 17, 2012

"Most plans are critically flawed by their own logic. A failure at any step will ruin everything after it. That's just basic cause and effect. It's easy for a good plan to fall apart. Therefore, a plan that has no attachment to logic cannot be stopped."



I find a good response to murderboners is to be as patronizing as humanly possible. Make sure they see that nobody cares that they're kinda good at the farting spaceman game, and that their behavior constitutes, at worst, a mild annoyance. Like, they realize this isn't Xbox Live, there's no twelve-year-olds to enrage, just a bunch of grown-rear end adults who are just gonna shrug and move on with their lives when some idiot depopulates the station. I mean, I have to imagine they're doing it hoping for the validation of making people Mad Online or showing off their Farting Spaceman Skills, because the other possibilities are too sad to conceive of, so denying them that validation seems like a good way to disincentivize the behavior, since it doesn't seem like a fix is coming through official channels.

HerpicleOmnicron5
May 31, 2013

How did this smug dummkopf ever make general?


Alternatively, add some kind of system where you can rate an antag at round end. Give folks social incentive to be cool antags.

Isaac
Aug 3, 2006



Fun Shoe

Couldn't they just nerf the item that makes station wiping possible. Wouldnt that be a whole lot more straight-forward than implementing some kind of antag social credit system

Malachite_Dragon
Mar 31, 2010

Weaving Merry Christmas Magic


Fallen Rib

Isaac posted:

Couldn't they just nerf the item that makes station wiping possible. Wouldnt that be a whole lot more straight-forward than implementing some kind of antag social credit system
Sure, except:

monolithburger posted:

That being said they're a coder
and we already had a whole thing about a coder with a murderboner. I can understand the current team of devs not wanting to revisit the days of Mport, but they seem to have risen again whether you want it or not so maybe stop ignoring it.

UrsulaMajor
Nov 26, 2019

H


They aren't any more a coder than you are. Goonstation is open source: https://github.com/goonstation/goonstation

Isaac posted:

Couldn't they just nerf the item that makes station wiping possible. Wouldnt that be a whole lot more straight-forward than implementing some kind of antag social credit system

It's already been nerfed once, maybe even twice. Ironically, the PRs for those nerfs were submitted by the same guy everyone is complaining about.

UrsulaMajor fucked around with this message at 00:40 on May 24, 2020

I Said No
May 21, 2007

jesus dude ur gonna kill someone with that av

Cutting down on murderbone stuff was something I tried to suggest ages back but it got shouted down pretty hard.

Zamujasa
Oct 27, 2010





Bread Liar

the chances for an anti-murderboner strike force should increase as the number of deaths increases, clearly. wipe half the station and wuh-oh, Centcom sends in a handful of dead people.



Comedy option: spacebux bounties for special respawns

Clean Your Teeth
Jul 10, 2009



Zamujasa posted:

the chances for an anti-murderboner strike force should increase as the number of deaths increases, clearly. wipe half the station and wuh-oh, Centcom sends in a handful of dead people.

Somehow I feel that giving antags a "I'm good enough at murder that special forces needed to be called" target would increase the number of rampages rather than decrease them.

Inadequately
Oct 9, 2012


I get where the admins are coming from - you really don't want to make the conversation about one particular player who isn't technically breaking any rules, so you try to stamp out that kind of talk.

The issue is that they bend over way backwards to course-correct, which even to someone unfamiliar with the context, looks a lot like the admins are going out of their way to coddle and accommodate this one particular person. There have been pretty much daily conversation in which admins will yell 'stop being so horrible and toxic, you mean rampage victims, have you considered getting good at the game' while literally going at the same time 'yes, rampage man, your suggestions for changing these weapons are very reasonable, I see no issue with letting you code all the weapons that you use to kill people with on a nightly basis'.

As a result, when the dude rampages, people just throw up their hands and go 'why bother, he's the Golden Boy and can do no wrong, even complaining about him gets us banned for being toxic'.

I don't even have that much against the guy myself, but it's absolutely wild that the admins not only don't realize how much it looks like they're going out of their way to favor this guy, but are absolutely flabbergasted at the mere suggestion and confused about how people ever got that particular impression.

Kernel Monsoon
Jul 18, 2006


can confirm that coders were finding horrible poo poo in the codebase that mport had hardcoded to his advantage for several years. I don't even think hiding weapons in the walls was the worst of it. Also, welcome back mport!

Kernel Monsoon fucked around with this message at 10:47 on May 24, 2020

UrsulaMajor
Nov 26, 2019

H


Inadequately posted:

while literally going at the same time 'yes, rampage man, your suggestions for changing these weapons are very reasonable, I see no issue with letting you code all the weapons that you use to kill people with on a nightly basis'.

See, I don't get where peeps are getting things idea that there's favoritism being shown here, or even that this is unusual?

https://github.com/goonstation/goon...nce+is%3Aclosed

Of the 65ish merged balance changes, only 2 were submitted by them, and both of them were nerfs. Both of these nerfs were merged my popular demand by the community at large. A bunch of discussion was had in the discord, and these nerfs were highly popular in the community.

In other words, "I see no issue with letting you code all the weapons that you use to kill people with on a nightly basis" is skewed so far from the reality of the situation that it's almost comical.

Tosk
Feb 22, 2013

I am sorry. I have no vices for you to exploit.


I very much enjoyed playing SS13 several years ago until I stopped for whatever reason. I know there's a goonstation but is it particularly active? (I haven't been reading through the thread backlog, hope that discussing other stations isn't prohibited)

I also wanted to ask, I live in South America so I have some ping (200-250ms?) and I was very much not robust at all, is it possible to be robust despite ping or should I just focus on roleplaying because getting good is probably not going to happen?

UrsulaMajor
Nov 26, 2019

H


Tosk posted:

I very much enjoyed playing SS13 several years ago until I stopped for whatever reason. I know there's a goonstation but is it particularly active? (I haven't been reading through the thread backlog, hope that discussing other stations isn't prohibited)

I also wanted to ask, I live in South America so I have some ping (200-250ms?) and I was very much not robust at all, is it possible to be robust despite ping or should I just focus on roleplaying because getting good is probably not going to happen?

We're pretty active still! we drift between 20 and 80 players depending on timezone and weekday. As of this post we have 40 players on our main server and 11 on our roleplay server.

It's definitely possible to be robust with high ping, but you might need to stick to "fighting dirty". Ping will be a big factor in a fair fight, but who says you need to fight fair, aye?

monolithburger
Sep 7, 2011


UrsulaMajor posted:

See, I don't get where peeps are getting things idea that there's favoritism being shown here, or even that this is unusual?

The shouting down of the numerous people who keep saying that the person in question is having a major effect on their game experience may not be deliberate favouritism, sure, but it's still lovely and looks really bad.

Inadequately puts it best:

Inadequately posted:

It's absolutely wild that the admins not only don't realize how much it looks like they're going out of their way to favor this guy, but are absolutely flabbergasted at the mere suggestion and confused about how people ever got that particular impression.

SnotGrumble
Jun 4, 2003

All men live in fear of him and his Moxie.


Why not implement some sort of post-round rating system for the antagonists? It can slowly influence the probability of a particular player rolling antagonist. If they are complete poo poo heads, it could theoretically shadow-ban them from antagonist roles for a few days. Perhaps every round as non-antagonist played "evens out" the probability over time towards the general population?

UrsulaMajor
Nov 26, 2019

H


monolithburger, there's a reason why I quoted a specific part of that post; I was specifically talking about the idea of there being favoritism or something underhanded going on with respect to coding contributions, which is demonstrably false. I'm confused because I have no idea where that idea has come from.

It's a bit harder to examine the discord arguments between players about the issue, but at least in the case of the public repo we can literally open up the history and prove that nothing out of the ordinary has occurred

neogeo0823
Jul 4, 2007

NO THAT'S NOT ME!!


Personally, I've always enjoyed the idea that antags should be more like powered-up miscreants instead of just given free reign. Like, discourage rampaging and depopulating the station, and encourage more destruction of specific things and places. Yeah, people will die, but that's collateral damage, not the win condition. Get rid of most of the traitor items that are made for blatantly and swiftly killing people and introduce more odd gadgets and gizmos that do new and weird stuff. The idea being something like that being a traitor should be a pseudo-stealth thing, where you might kill people, but you were really only trying to destroy the cloning pods. The fact that genetics blew up and killed all the geneticists and the guys they were reviving is just a means to an end.

Queering Wheel
Jun 18, 2011



SnotGrumble posted:

Why not implement some sort of post-round rating system for the antagonists? It can slowly influence the probability of a particular player rolling antagonist. If they are complete poo poo heads, it could theoretically shadow-ban them from antagonist roles for a few days. Perhaps every round as non-antagonist played "evens out" the probability over time towards the general population?

I think that it would be a horrible idea. As long as antags are obeying the game's rules, how do you truly quantify whether or not they're shitheads? They have every right to go on a rampage, or set up clever death traps, or do some bombing, or run some other gimmick that the crew may or may not be entertained by. You can't please everyone. Let's say the antag has their cover blown early, and they're killed or otherwise rendered unable to make much impact on the round. Do they deserve to be rated poorly? poo poo happens. I don't think it's a good road to go down.

Iretep
Nov 10, 2009


No idea what goon station has these days but I never was fan of for example the saber. Having tools to kill a few people is fine but infinite use murder i dont see the point of for a traitor. While killing the entire crew is fine, id consider it more interesting if its done using some form of sabotage like bombs or recruiting borgs on your side. Basically a bit more effort and risk over spawn saber and go play sith lord.
Plus wizards already had the whole kill the whole crew niche going for them. Syndicates too.

Zamujasa
Oct 27, 2010





Bread Liar

Clean Your Teeth posted:

Somehow I feel that giving antags a "I'm good enough at murder that special forces needed to be called" target would increase the number of rampages rather than decrease them.

Indeed, though at least it'd give the dead something to look forward to.

Queering Wheel posted:

I think that it would be a horrible idea. As long as antags are obeying the game's rules, how do you truly quantify whether or not they're shitheads? They have every right to go on a rampage, or set up clever death traps, or do some bombing, or run some other gimmick that the crew may or may not be entertained by. You can't please everyone. Let's say the antag has their cover blown early, and they're killed or otherwise rendered unable to make much impact on the round. Do they deserve to be rated poorly? poo poo happens. I don't think it's a good road to go down.

Ratings in general are always a farce because (as people have pointed out many times) the player notes system, a form of this, is almost always full of negative comments. "Wait," I can hear someone already screaming, "we do put positive notes in there!"

Well, yes, rarely. It's a far from automatic thing. If you see someone being poo poo, it's almost instinct to note it down. The inverse isn't true; being good doesn't trigger that same "I should put a note in" thing. From what I remember this is a pretty common thing, where 'bad' experiences are a lot more powerful and have more staying power than good ones.

As the other poster noted, too, there's a lot of reasons that could cause a round to be considered 'un-fun', and pegging this to any particular player would be a nightmare.

neogeo0823 posted:

Personally, I've always enjoyed the idea that antags should be more like powered-up miscreants instead of just given free reign. Like, discourage rampaging and depopulating the station, and encourage more destruction of specific things and places. Yeah, people will die, but that's collateral damage, not the win condition. Get rid of most of the traitor items that are made for blatantly and swiftly killing people and introduce more odd gadgets and gizmos that do new and weird stuff. The idea being something like that being a traitor should be a pseudo-stealth thing, where you might kill people, but you were really only trying to destroy the cloning pods. The fact that genetics blew up and killed all the geneticists and the guys they were reviving is just a means to an end.

I think the idea has always been that, as an antagonist, you're free to do whatever you find fun (within some loose rules). Outright removing the more murdery tools removes a lot of those options. The traitor items are also far from the only way to cause death and chaos, as anyone who has ever looked at Chemistry knows.



I've always felt that the best solution was creating more ways for people to get back into the game if they died; either by expanding cloning options or having some respawn mechanic come into play.

Neddy Seagoon
Oct 12, 2012

Hi, Everybody!


Sending in backup for really rampage-y antags is a good idea I think, but it should be tempered SS13 style by sending in incompentent backup. For example; don't send in TURD's (so-to-speak), send in a shuttle full of Clowns because the circus was in the area and they were available for CENTCOM to hire; armed with pies and bike horns and more likely to trip over eachother than fully defeat the rampager. But it might buy time for the crew to escape or actually do something to stop the antagonist themselves. Or a ship full of Cluwnes. Or Spiders, or... etc, etc.

Dieting Hippo
Jan 5, 2006

THIS IS NOT A PROPER DIET FOR A HIPPO



Neddy Seagoon posted:

Sending in backup for really rampage-y antags is a good idea I think, but it should be tempered SS13 style by sending in incompentent backup. For example; don't send in TURD's (so-to-speak), send in a shuttle full of Clowns because the circus was in the area and they were available for CENTCOM to hire; armed with pies and bike horns and more likely to trip over eachother than fully defeat the rampager. But it might buy time for the crew to escape or actually do something to stop the antagonist themselves. Or a ship full of Cluwnes. Or Spiders, or... etc, etc.

I can see it now. The shuttle call is triggered due to too many dead crew members. This also triggers the HONK taskforce to spawn, bringing back each ghost player as a tactical clown outfitted with the most high-tech pie and banana weaponry. The full squad spawns in at the arrivals shuttle...

...where the antag has been waiting with a TTV, splattering clown all over the shuttle. A staff assistant then latejoins into the clown carnage, wondering what the gently caress just happened.

Bring on the clown taskforce, I'm ready

Poland Spring
Sep 11, 2005


Send in the cluwnes

EclecticTastes
Sep 17, 2012

"Most plans are critically flawed by their own logic. A failure at any step will ruin everything after it. That's just basic cause and effect. It's easy for a good plan to fall apart. Therefore, a plan that has no attachment to logic cannot be stopped."



You realize that that's just going to encourage people to rampage more, right? Like, that's literally the opposite of what basically anyone wants. I think the best solution is to adjust the shuttle auto-call to trigger if there are a large number of deaths in a very short span of time, outside of a nuke round, on top of its normal trigger of the station population falling below a certain threshold. This would have the secondary benefit of making the other boring and annoying antag behavior pattern (guys who just make massive TTV bombs and make the station impossible to play on) less fun, as well. Also, make it so that if the shuttle is auto-called due to excessive deaths, it can't be recalled (unless that change has already been made in the months since I last played). I'd also set it so that if literally everyone on the station except the antag has died (requiring at least one non-antag death to trigger, since there are some lowpop rounds where the only players are all antags at roundstart), the round ends instantly.

It's the only real way to deal with rampagers. Nerfs will only go so far when someone's determined to be a jerk, and social consequences don't work if the goal is to generate a negative social reaction. So, make it so that rampaging or otherwise playing in a way that's not fun for anyone but yourself directly results in you having less time to be the antag, with the round ending early. It's also better for the victims of the rampage, as they get to hop into a new round more quickly.

Neddy Seagoon
Oct 12, 2012

Hi, Everybody!


EclecticTastes posted:

You realize that that's just going to encourage people to rampage more, right? Like, that's literally the opposite of what basically anyone wants. I think the best solution is to adjust the shuttle auto-call to trigger if there are a large number of deaths in a very short span of time, outside of a nuke round, on top of its normal trigger of the station population falling below a certain threshold. This would have the secondary benefit of making the other boring and annoying antag behavior pattern (guys who just make massive TTV bombs and make the station impossible to play on) less fun, as well. Also, make it so that if the shuttle is auto-called due to excessive deaths, it can't be recalled (unless that change has already been made in the months since I last played). I'd also set it so that if literally everyone on the station except the antag has died (requiring at least one non-antag death to trigger, since there are some lowpop rounds where the only players are all antags at roundstart), the round ends instantly.

It's the only real way to deal with rampagers. Nerfs will only go so far when someone's determined to be a jerk, and social consequences don't work if the goal is to generate a negative social reaction. So, make it so that rampaging or otherwise playing in a way that's not fun for anyone but yourself directly results in you having less time to be the antag, with the round ending early. It's also better for the victims of the rampage, as they get to hop into a new round more quickly.

No, the root problem is everyone's dead so they can't keep playing. You are never ever going to stamp out rampagers in the way you want without some really awful "NO FUN ALLOWED" rules in place.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

EclecticTastes
Sep 17, 2012

"Most plans are critically flawed by their own logic. A failure at any step will ruin everything after it. That's just basic cause and effect. It's easy for a good plan to fall apart. Therefore, a plan that has no attachment to logic cannot be stopped."



Neddy Seagoon posted:

No, the root problem is everyone's dead so they can't keep playing. You are never ever going to stamp out rampagers in the way you want without some really awful "NO FUN ALLOWED" rules in place.

The solution I proposed would fix people being dead and not getting to play, by going into a new round. If someone decides to make the round unfun by murdering everyone, any adjustment you make to the content of that round will be a band-aid at best. The optimal solution is to just go to the next round and hope the next antag sucks less.

Like, most people play with some sort of idea of what they want to do in mind, and that may not include "reincarnate as worthless cannon fodder for the rampager to murder a second time while the round lasts a full hour past the point where anyone but said rampager is having anything resembling a good time". Having the round end early ensures that everyone gets back in the game and that there's at least a reasonable chance that the same thing won't immediately happen again.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply
«139 »