Appeal Reason:
While i take full blame for a potential Breach of Rule 1.3, I strongly Disagree with the potential breach of Rule 2, as I’ve always played in good faith without going over the top, meaning that i would’ve either kept the mech disabled or not built as stated in the ticket, while also being easly solvable in IC conditions. I would also say that i don’t think i was Argumentative in the tickets, rather i was confrontative asking if it was and quoting myself: “This is a rule 0 moment? Because the SOP has to be enforced by the heads, meaning this is RP solvable”, while also juggling between IC and admin ticket. Worth mentioning, the Durand wasn’t fully built yet.
Additional Information:
Before the ticket was closed, I quote once more myself and said “Really? Does it needs a direct note? Despite actually solving it IC wise?” while Szc was speeding trought the ticket saying and i quote: “you did what you did.” without listening to further reasoning and pretty much bombarding me with bwoinks instead of doing a packed PM (in fact i missed the last three PMs before getting the ticket closed and pretty much getting too busy with the game to really be able to recall them later).
Later in the round, to stay in tone to the Aftermentioned Ticket, I’ve done some smirks with the crew regarding the “upper gods” about the mech that has been voided in the ether while in game, when actually the need rose up for making the mechs due to in-game events (in this case, aliens), actually embraced the roleplay even more as a roboticist that was fearful of the gods that be (but still built the mechs at the end of the day).
Thing is, no matter how I look at it, the thing I’ve noted you for is a prime example of powergaming: You printed out parts of a durand and assembled it all the way to the last step without clearance, effectively bypassing any means of interference (blocking ore silo, destroying robotics APC) and effectively reducing your response to threat to a mere seconds instead of minutes.
That’s why i replied “I don’t care” in the ticket. It doesn’t really matter if it wasn’t built yet, if it was one step away from completion.
And I’ve already told You that subsection 3 of rule 1 is Follow Space Law and the Standard Operating Procedure.
I don’t imply You have to follow SOP all the time, but it is there for a reason. If You had followed it and asked for a clearance from heads, this note would never be applied (to You at least).
As far as I’ve gathered Captain and RD were made aware You were making a mech after a bwoink.
I get that you’re referring to: Good roleplay (emphasis on good) can be used to justify violating SOP or Space Law to an extent, but may still have IC consequences.
If you had created an IC situation before, to actually have a reason to make a combat mech without clearance, this ticket result could’ve been different.
So according to you, anything can be powergaming, from eating a warm donk pocket while sure to face combat to even carrying an item that is not supposed to be in your hands could be counted as such according to the rules.
Worth noting that the Durand was not entirely printed, it was partially printed as I salvaged two pieces from a wreck at roundstart, and also that the Durand Was NOT fully built, as I built it up to the power cell insertion, meaning I was missing the insertion of the 5 iron sheets and attaching the outer armor which negligible to the clearance.
Also that last statement about “effectively bypassing any means of interference” is completely irrelevant, as in a normal IC context, the RD, HoS, or even the Captain could’ve easily rolled in, told me to stop building it or confiscate it, or even better, attach a Mech beacon that would allows the lockdown of the mech from the RD console until it’s allowed to resume normal operations, solving the entire issue without any external intervention (but I’ll get back to this point later).
Aside the fact that sounds incredibly unprofessional going with the “I don’t care” in the ticket, it does matter as stated above. Is it more dangerous to face a fully built Durand or someone that drags an half built mech that could… use it as a shielding?
Not only that, but I feel you had to overstep and not only reprimand me for making an half built Durand that was inert at the moment of the ticket, but also Deleted the half built mech and armor, in fact, I even left a note that said: “I.O.U A mech in the future -Timandra”, you deleted everything but the note.
So you’re explicitly saying that if a janitor that doesn’t use wet floor signs is breaching the SoP and therefore, may get a negative note about it? Or that a chef is not allowed to repair or clean a microwave since those count as broken and therefore have to wait for a Station engineer? Or if we want to touch a more “at home” case, I am not allowed to hand to the miners a MK-III “firefighter” Ripley as I should hand it exclusively to the Atmos Techs? In fact, when was the last time a Roboticist applied to a mech a Tracking beacon to a mech, since the SoP mandate such thing.
And while it’s true that I might have breached the Rule 1 of the Roboticist SoP, what I had was a “Durand chassis” not a fully assembled Durand, meaning that IC wise, the HoS could have, as said before, confiscate the chassis (and it’s unattached armor) under the Space law with the accusation of “Conspiracy”, or if you want something more spicy, “Possession, Illegal Inherently Dangerous Equipment”; meaning that all of this could’ve been solved with a bit of banter between me and whatever was facing me, and if I in fact overstepped in the matter of escalation, then the whole ticket would have valid grounds.
What I am getting to is personally speaking R1.3 would be, for all intents and purposes, pretty much a guideline in 95% of the cases, and save for obvious Rule-SoP-Space law overlaps, they would be pretty much unenforceable in normal game conditions (unless you want to deal with endless player report per-round).
This statement sounds conflictual, as the first Head that saw the mech (if I recall right) was the HoS (or wardner, can’t recall 100% exactly), that *blink at the mech instead of taking action, meaning that they could have notified either security, science or command about the fact that i was building a combat mech.
Also according to you, both the Captain and RD were unaware that I was building it despite keeping all the windows open in the roboticist’s office (so much for keeping it a secret isn’t it?).
Roleplay wise, as mentioned before, I had two pieces already (Durand head and Durand Left arm), so I opted to build it, weak RP? Sure so I am gonna take the blame on the low effort roleplay.
And really, you could’ve just sent a pray message or sent yourself as “NT inspectorate of unregistered mechs” instead of escalating straight to a bwoink.
Now beside all of this, I have noticed you glossed over some stuff I wrote, first off the fact that I was “argumentative in the ticket”, well I have saved the history of the ticket:
(read from below to above due to how the tickets are sorted, also missed the last three PMs as closing the ticket automatically close the admin PM tab, nor there’s a real way to check as a non-admin the ticket history.)
Now I was completely cool headed, as I mentioned in the OP, you were just speeding trough the ticket and sent me a flurry of admin PMs instead of waiting for a reply, from my standpoint it looked like you wanted to close the ticket as soon as possible to hand me whatever punishment you had ready since the first message, which I strongly condemn.
Second off, I think that you completely misunderstood what “powergaming” is, so to extrapolate the meaning, according to the rules:
"Powergaming" is considered to be the act of prioritizing "winning" rather than sensible roleplaying. Good roleplaying means that you have to embrace the possibility of "losing" for the sake of roleplay and/or preserving immersion. You should not be seeking gear you have no roleplay justification for having, nor should you ever generally be rushing into danger unless it is part of your job. [...] Preemptively donning a hardsuit or acquiring a gun "just in case" is also considered powergaming.
to adress the elephant in the room, the last part where "preemtively donning X “just in case is also considered powergaming.” as a lone roboticist, i would have no proper use for it but to either hand it to the RD or security (what am I gonna do, punch shit and get banned for griefing instead?)
Instead, want an example of such thing? well let’s fast forward a bit in the same round, when later the aliens rolled by alongside some other antagonists, I was tasked by the Captain and HoS to build the beauty of three Durand and a Gygax, all fitted with drone repair system and later with whatever they wanted to fit from the Security tech fabricator.
In this case the aliens (and likeley any other antagonist) don’t even stand a chance against all of those mechs (the only way they could’ve destroyed those mechs was a coordinated melee assault attacking them from behind, as they take more damage from that point).
Yet here we are discussing if building an half-built Durand is actually powergaming instead of an obvious the actual obvious powergaming act.
And before this sounds like a guilty admission, if I refused to work on the mechs, this would’ve been a breach of rule 3 as I would not do my job instead and ignore my duty as a Roboticist (and also, be against the space law as “Insubordination”).
I recall it was blue alert, but it’s ultimately irrelevant since it mainly apply to Security and Command and there’s no special Alert related cases for Science or Roboticist.
Only things a mech tracking beacon does, It allow the person that is using the computer to Message the Pilot privately or remotely EMP the mech. There is no option to lock it you are thinking of how borgs work
Not part of the round or report, Just correcting something I saw wrong.
Valid correction, altought the console’s description is: “Used to remotely locate or lockdown exosuits.”, the ability to pulse an EMP against said mech is rightfully debilitating to it’s use (even if currently, I am not sure if a local EMP accounts for the capacitator and it’s EMP resistance chance).
Edit: had to check the code on the fly as i was looking over the wrong branch, in fact it emits an EMP on the mech rather than locking it down.
from Department Standard Operating Procedure: Science - BeeStation Wiki The Roboticist is not permitted to construct Combat Mechs without express permission from the Captain or Head of Security. This refers to the Durand, Gygax and Phazon. If permitted, the mechs are to be delivered to the Warden.
While SOP is a guideline it is good idea to follow it since it helps you avoid rule breaks on accident. In this case, it was powergaming.
Yes, they will confiscate it and any antags that have yet to spawn/come out will have to deal with a mech because of that + command bypassing any requests/interaction with science except of that one which ended up with seizing of said mech.
Well I sorry it sounded like that, but it did not matter that the durand “was not fully constructed yet” You were creating a combat mech with no IC reason (except of being the roboticist which is not enough).
Another slippery slope.
This one’s a strawman.
My point was You did not inform people who are expected to give you a clearance for building a combat mech.
Yes, You immediately jumped to “is this rule 0 moment” implying You’re not breaking the rules per se.
I don’t think I did though, your behaviour falls into that definition.
“I’m constructing a durand without telling command, to deliver it to security IF need arises, but for the time being I will keep it in robotics”
Well, you had a real IC reason to make them, good for You.
To summarize, I believe the note is depicting very accurately what You did and will remain as such, as a form of record keeping.
