Github changes people should know about

After reading your posts, I have to say that I would find it very hard to not immediately be either terrified or outraged. In fact only my previous experience with you counters this.

I’ll write a small wall about the reasons, but they’re actually really simple, just easy to elaborate on.

A lot of QoL changes cut down on pointless mechanics or eliminate pointless interactions. I’ll repeat what I stated many times before - one organic player interaction is worth more than 100 bland, system-enforced ones. When the majority of forced crew interactions are just asking for a thing or getting let in somewhere, you know they aren’t worth dealing with. Many jobs have these interactions right now and are for the worse of it. There is no RP in asking a scientist for a scanner, for example.

So, when going about dealing with QoL, if you don’t strike precisely, you just end up making gameplay more annoying, potentially even frustrating all-around. You have to hit what’s removing organic interactions instead of hitting what’s removing routine ones. Anyone who threatens to bring so much potential negativity to the game will trigger active players.

As a word of advice, the best way to make organic interactions is to make jobs less about power and more about doing interesting things. A job that can perform many unique actions instead of simply providing the same things every round is already more fun. When a job’s basic providence is neutered, the job turns sour, but when the additional, interesting things they can do are locked behind cooperation, players may actually work together for them. While it’s the best way to handle this, it also requires the most unique code and effort which is why you seldom see it.

I will provide 3 example changes for those who need them to understand what I’m going at here.

Example 1 - Doing it right

Botany is very self-sufficient. We will add a plant that normalizes the atmosphere surrounding the tray to botany, but mutating into this plant will require specific chemicals gained from science or engineering (atmos).

(repeat this change for several unique plants and unique methods of getting them without removing what we have)

Expected result: These plants can be very useful in certain scenarios so botanists may ask for cooperation if the round calls for it, or if they want to prepare them just in case.

Example 2 - Doing it wrong

Botany is very self-sufficient. We will remove all mutagen including plant mutagen chemicals and lock them behind chemistry.

Expected result: Botanists have a soulless, routine interaction with chemists every round. Meta eventually shifts to tiding botanists and mutagen factories made by chemists who give a fuck, all for the sake of skipping the pointless and repetitive interaction.

Example 3 - Technically Correct

Xenobiology and Virology are removed.

These jobs do not have any crew interaction beyond ocassionally giving their produce to them. Even ignoring power levels, this makes them bad. We remove the jobs.

Expected result: People have to play other, more active jobs. Several people might be mad over losing their jobs though. (In my opinion, this direct removal hurts less than keeping a “limping” job around)

Actually, the person working on botany right now is removing reliance on chems entirely, though I know this was just an example.

That said, I disagree with the notion of this being a soulless interaction unless one or both players involved are making it so. The point of playing the server isn’t to finish a job as quickly and efficiently as possible, it’s to RP with others. Being outside of your department is where this will happen 90% of the time, but forced bar RP isn’t the right way to do it either. Forcing interactions, reliance on others and the conflicts and interactions that arise from failing to meet the needs of each other is. Naturally occurring conflict without requiring antagonist interaction is what keeps slower times interesting. Currently players feel a need to force this conflict in unnatural ways out of boredom because the natural conflicts have been optimized out.

As long as someone fosters the player mentalities of “I must be able to work alone as efficiently as possible” or “I’ll just push them aside and make what I want myself because this newbie is ruining my round by taking longer than I would” there will never be room for good RP with that person because they view player interaction as nothing but an obstacle to their efficiency instead of the god damn point of an RP server

3 Likes

So we don’t have a super formal agenda but if you go far back into the channel(if you have access you know which one), you can find some changes that we want to bring about. Very few are player facing, and mostly optimizing certain expensive operations, but there are some changes discussed, like singleton species.

But yeah to say we have super coordinated agenda focused on large innovations is flat out untrue. Also our “agenda” is largely unordered/unprioritized. Stuff happens when it does.

Kinda just the nature of open source + unpaid.

2 Likes

oh boy
I wonder where this playerbase came from

2 Likes

(TG Station)
1515151

2 Likes

I must be able to work alone as efficiently as possible

It’s not as simple as that, I’m afraid.

Tie a job’s efficiency behind another job? They can deal with it. In fact, they deal with it already every round. Upgrades exist.

Tie a job’s basic features behind another job, meanwhile? Well, you can consider it ruined in that case.

When you make ties, the disctinction between putrid swamp shit and actual gameplay/rp improvement lies in what you’re gating off. If the job is unable to function, or function at a reasonable pace, without assistance, people WILL disregard the law or even the rules to get there. See: pre-dispenser botany (admittedly the worst case of this that we ever had).

If only certain features of the job are gated off, it might be iffy, but not to the point of causing the average player to act out against it. See: Getting a trashbag as a miner - massively helpful, but completely unecessary to do your job.

If you gate off specific features (and especially if the gated-off features are very notable), no one ever gets mad and the interactions are meaningful. See: giving botany strange seeds and cactus.

Or, in short:

  • Having to put in effort just to get reasonable gameplay = putrid garbage dumb toxic sludge trash fire
  • Having to put in effort to create something actually noteworthy = people will actually bother*

*In an ideal world, these kinds of interactions benefit both jobs. This is rarely seen even with our best examples.

oh no

3 Likes

While we are arguing here coders yet again stealthily push their salt code because they got robusted by a game mechanic

3 Likes

A lot of coders seem to think that crew being as helpless as possible against threats is a great idea.

RP or not, “dying is part of the game” has been a bullshit excuse for bad design from the start. The sooner people stop treating it seriously the better.

I mean, ask yourself. Would you rather have gameplay. Any gameplay. Or would you rather die instantly as soon as you see an antag?

Fun fact btw. The focus on death also kills RP.

Smh…

2 Likes

kate…? do you realise that @Ruko made a post about this and asking for feedback, right…?

1 Like

ignore my clickbait title, point still stands

1 Like

I still think you’re misrepresenting Ruko’s opinion.
Framing the whole discussion this was is very cheap, i don’t agree with how you portrayed them and their argument.
There is a valid reason behind what they are doing, even if i personally disagree with them.
I guess I don’t really understand what you’re trying to say that’s all

I know I make myself sound like an asshole but,
giving an illusion that you are asking for an opinion while actually actively working and pushing the PR and ignoring every opinion is not actually asking for an opinion.

People should be aware about these kind of things and that they are actually being pushed forward

PS: I have nothing against Ruko directly so stop portraying it as a personal attack, please

PPS: Please continue posting new PRs that people should know about

1 Like

Closing at Crossed’s request due to the thread devolving into personal attacks against the author.

2 Likes