I actually somewhat support this proposed concept, except for the immunity to knockdown afterwards. Further wall shoves should still knock you down, just not stun you again. Also, paralyze() makes you drop your items whether you like it or not, so you’d have to change how that works.
Though, if you are gonna do this, make it a toggle, even for sec and heads of staff. Maybe an action button?
Instead of having it be innate, I believe it should be akin to a spell book, which heads of staff/security spawn with. Hell, you might as well give heads of staff special abilities within their department, we still don’t want validhunters, after all. Somewhat akin to the chef having CQC in the kitchen.
Nowhere in there did I say disarm. The intent was to still maintain handling of the weapon and a knockdown does not prevent movement
I also think you are overestimating the strength of a single second stun which can only happen once every eight seconds. This isn’t enough time to swipe a weapon via stripping.
However if this is true it’s a pretty major snag so I would probably opt for ditching any form of stun entirely because I don’t want to change what paralyze does for all of its other applications.
I am, as always, bad at being clear. 8 seconds would be running concurrently with the 6 second knockdown. There would only be a two second gap for moving around normally again specifically to allow normal movement away from a wall and prevent chaining knockdowns back to back.
If you’re still against it though I think we’re just in disagreement. With no stun or item drop a simple knockdown isn’t really that bad either though, so I might just be wanting to prevent chain shoving because I associate it with chaining 4 second stuns.
Yeah this is how it would be done.
If it’s going to be learnable via a book, it will start in security’s possession, but I’m definitely keeping the ability for heads of staff as innate if they’re getting it rather than making said book easy access for tiders.
Book code would be using code from bartender book rather than spell book, so not single use.
This does raise a question about whether you feel heads of staff qualify as “combat trained” or not. I was under the impression they were, they just aren’t expected to do more than defend.
Wallshoves in of themself I dont really have an issue with… Hardstun shove looting however goes against what you seem to ask of the player base… which I explained elsewhere but…
-ided
-skill issue
-makes crew too weak (in their own words, skill issue?)
-player base wont want that
Not 100% on board with your ideas but its better than what it is currently
It kinda does in the hands of the portion of the crew that is not supposed to be combat experienced.
I am both not good at combat and yet rarely upset when I die, so long as I’m dying to a person who I believe should be attempting to kill me. When I play antagonist, I often go the route of speaking first - making threats or otherwise, and whether it’s good luck or some divine blessing, I am rarely the person who ends up facing these bloodthirsty valid-hunters.
To give a recent example that did upset me - I’m observing a heretic who gets spotted by a botanist. Heretic tries talking and botanist doesn’t even give them the chance before running up and shoving, stunning and then calling to the over comms “HERETIC!! HELP BOTANY MAINTS” after they’re stunned and starts beating them. Other botanist arrives, Chef arrives, the lot of them force him into botany where he is beaten in to crit. HoS and… I think it was brig physician or detective arrive. HoS demands the lynch mob stops and doesn’t kill him, eventually resorts to force and gets called shitsec because “HE’S A HERETIC, KILL HIM NOT US”. HoS ends up embroiled in conflict with chef and one botanist while the other botanist drags the crit heretic to departures and spaces them, also critting themselves in the process.
Admin dealt with situation afterwards, but yes, I do in fact think these crew members should have been much more helpless than they were and also believe this to be true for everyone else in that category. Heretic could have fought back if they weren’t immediately disarmed and stunned for being spotted in a bad location they didn’t even realistically have a chance of moving from.
I’m interested in hashing out a compromise as this was my actual goal in kickstarting this thread with what I knew was an extremely controversial topic. However, to those who see themselves regularly using and now losing this ability because they aren’t one of the designated combat-trained personell: I don’t care and you can fuck right off with your valid-hunting
I will never treat this as a valid point unless Beestation staff decides that skill-based combat is a primary focus of the server. Skill should play some factor in combat, but it should not be the primary deciding factor of combat outcomes.
Beestation is not supposed to be a skill based combat server. It is a newbie friendly roleplaying server.
Paralyze() is often treated as a stand-in for stun. It is not the only form of stun though I did have to break open the code to verify because almost always the one used.
Stun() is nearly identical to Paralyze() but does not include the item drop.
thread is TLDR but making combat less stun-based and more stamina based (like goon) or uh … not sure how to adjective it, but like bay has it
would be good
God I wish, I want bones to break, lungs to pop from being exposed to high/low pressure, braindamage from head wounds and organ damage from torso shots. Don’t forget shrapnel, it makes combat a lot more fun.
I very much implore you to look at Contractors PR and the pushback it got then. Because I feel that removing the stun is a negligible difference when playing in good faith while leaving it in enables acts like this:
It’s really demoralizing, you’d be thrown out in any major open source project for behaving like that. Probably scares off a lot of potential contributors. Nobody wants to deal with snarky kids remarking with “ided lol” “skill issue” when they are spending their free time trying to develop a game they like.
Additionally, that PR was opened more or less as a result of a public channel comment by our head coder during the talks in discord:
I’m still going to make my own PR in the end, but even if it doesn’t get merged this would still be a dramatic improvement. Stunlocking is the worst kind of mechanic imaginable. Stuns across the board were severely nerfed as time went on because of this, and yet we kept the ability for an unarmed player to borderline stunlock.
Before PR (or anything else) I’m keeping my promise to finish medical draft first and popping back over to that.
Skill issue or ided is not a valid argument and does nothing to move the conversation forward. Keep seething over anything that removes skill issues, especially if you use the phrases “Skill Issue” or “ided” as a crux of your argument.
Moderated by RPG-style skill sheets? Or you mean something else.
and we wonder why we lack coders who try to make changes.
In the end I decided that the “combat trained” check and ability was too much for the scope of the PR. The point of the PR is to make unarmed combat less powerful and reduce the impact of (without invalidating) player skill in combat situations.
Some sort of “combat trained” check would be better off as a part of total skills system or otherwise.
Although this is a better proposition, I don’t agree with your reasoning in the PR:
You can call it a “skill issue” all you want, but Beestation is not supposed to be a skill based combat server. It is a newbie friendly roleplaying server where players are expected to act appropriately in the face of a threat.
Mostly regarding the “newbie friendly” part. Making the game dumber or easier for newer players doesn’t make sense at all as you’re robbing people of the opportunity to get better at certain parts of the game. There’s a learning curve to all games, and even with wallstuns removed, new players will get outplayed by older players, and that’s OK. You can’t stop being a newbie without overcoming a game’s challenges. I feel like further down the line, changing code in this manner will result in everybody walking and fighting like the same NPC, where players will be just as bad as when they started out since they never had a chance to get better.
Also,I don’t get this sentiment that combat has to be a hugbox in order for roleplay to occur, as it’s really far away from the truth. You can be robust and good at roleplay at the same time. In fact, most of the people who I’ve seen that were capable of creating interesting roleplay situations were also really good at combat. This is not to say that all people who are good at combat are interested in roleplay, but rules are there to prevent people from being shitters anyways.
Alright, someone is gonna have to finally define hugbox for me because it seems to be a go-to hyperbole to shoot down trying to make the game more accessible in any way.
“Because I had to learn the hard way, so should you.” instead of accepting that maybe the curve shouldn’t be so steep, or have such a high skill ceiling that makes SS13 so hard to pick up in the first place.
Edit: The tone of this post is far more aggressive than I intended, but the point I’m trying to make remains. I don’t see how making one extremely punishing (basically instant-lose) and relatively difficult to avoid (more than two thirds of all tiles on every map are against a solid obstacle) combat mechanic less so is worth calling it a hugbox change.
and we wonder why we lack coders who try to make changes.