Small Addition to the YAML Sanitizer#1868
Conversation
|
Will the existing L6s and China Lakes (and maybe RPG-7s but I've never heard of that thing in my life) that were gained from expeditions be turned into worn ones when this PR is merged? And does this mean the worn versions of these weapons will still be stashable? |
|
I highly disagree with the L6 being blacklisted. The other items there are reasonable additions, but the L6 Saw is an obtainable item, that is a goal for many freelancers. If the L6 saw is to be blacklisted, it should not be kept in a state of limbo where it's a valuable loot on expeditions and xorg ships, and people who HAVE put in the effort it takes to get one of these should be reimbursed. (It'd also make hunting said ships even less appealing of a thing to do, making their already meager returns worse) It only being obtainable through the earlier listed means (aswell as prying it off a dead nukeop, but that's less likely), when someone DOES get it, what use will it be? It makes the weapon entirely pointless. and fourth statement, will this effect worn varients (if they are not blacklisted*)? If not, then many L6es will have to be replaced because MANY were replaced by admins with the normal varient due to the ammo mismatch. I really hope this doesn't get merged, it's gonna suck for alot of people :/ |
They mentioned that the borg module could remain savable, until more modules are created. And due to so little existing in the first place as is. |
|
I also hope this does not go through. it is simply removing more items from being able to be collected and coveted where end goals already lack. Not to mention the lack of replacements or similar. this is just going to delete a lot of stuff out of a lot of stashes, even if it wasn't used. |
|
How about actually elaborating on the balance reasoning? Talking about what the changes will result in for the current playerbase? Did the entire directorate agree on this? |
|
These are all high-end and coveted items to add to a collection, rarely collected and rarely used to the point of this mostly seeming to punish those that have these trophies.... and yet, this is also effectively 'lowering of the ceiling' as far as power that can persist between rounds. With that being said - I have to pose a questions about the direction of sanitizing things straight out of stashes: What is there to be coveted or collected that can, guaranteed, not be eventually 'sanitized' at a later date? Will the ceiling be lowered further then? I think it's a serious question to ask. Because an L6 is an L6 - just a gun. |
|
HOW IS THIS NOT WHAT PEOPLE WERE ARGUING ABOUT |
You doubt our unique autism. |
Yes, that is the case. It is now a 762x39 weapon, as it should have been. |
It is what prompted it, to me. just nobody was here to communicate with so we stayed in the other one. |
This Also to me this is fundamentally missing the forest for the trees. IC enforcement has and always will be the solution to these things. Want to use your fancy stashed weapons? That's perfectly fine but you are running the gauntlet to lose them. And that should be how things are. Not some handwavium blacklist. Make use of the framework the game provides instead. I legit do not think ANYONE has ever complained about rare gear stashing, far from it. It is beyond fucking dumb to seek to gut what is clealry the reason why people invest so much time and effort grinding for that ship. Also it is basically exclusively leveraged on expeds. Last I checked NPCs won't complain about getting shot with a good weapon. You really want to make station suffer during red? Knock out the C3 authorization when on red. That is a terrible idea that will lead to lancers avoiding the station even more than they already have to (contra turrets, meteors) but it makes more sense than a sanitizer who will just make people stop playing instead. |
I agree with most of this message, if not the language. If you want to discourage people using their c3 on station? simply do not permit them to. turn it into a seizable offence if you are found with them on any alert level and they will hopefully become much less present from station side, becoming relegated to useful equipment for expeditions where gear of this level is needed. (Looking at you, t5 xenos.) |
Yeah, I apologize in advance but of course RN the discourse is turning a bit less flowery (and that very much is universal) due to the fact the community is basically nearly unanimous about these changes being chasing a cause that does not exist. Hardlight works because it is a low stakes RPing sandbox. People are willing to RP and grind more than they are on other servers BECAUSE the stash exists. Becuase it let's them have a safe space for their trinkets and because it means you do NOT have a pressure to perform like, lets say, Monolith. Again is the issue is, somehow, that freelancers involve themselves in station security (which... is the point, I think), make C3 always contra on station ground and let command/security decide selectively if a given threat is worthy of allowing contra. |
|
See, I don't get the reliance on a single gun. The atreides, the MR-8C, and the Jackdaw are all better by a large margin. I am fine with having the worn ones be stashable on the condition the stats are adjusted down slightly. |
Intended. Needs to be done, either way. |
See, as you mentioned, it is low stakes. The combat is laughably easy. The L6 is overkill for people to always have. |
I can and would gladly reskin such weapons so that they're unique and visibly tied to Exped and Freelancer loot-hunting, and the stats could very handily be dropped down by directorate decision and balancing. Although i'd probably suggest my own ideas to balance on each thing individually to see if they made sense first as an option. |
it's not just a single gun, though. it is the list provided and the fact this is a pattern of mechanical blacklisting for what feels like a non issue. It feels like it's just... not wanting people to be able to keep rare loot. on a persistence server. |
Try T5 Xeno expeds with people ghosting in and see how that statement works out... Hardlight never was about balance. Otherwise people would be quite pissed off with admins/patreon items being abhorrently busted. People do not CARE about busting their balls with nightmarish gameplay. If they want difficulty and grind and constant punishment they would not be hanging on a persistent ERP server... it even seems dumb to need to point this out. |
|
this ones gonna need more discussion |
I think we just need to be more patient and give some time for adjustments to balance and regulations to flow in and be given time to be felt out. If then it feels like the ideas push forward, then'd be a good time to discuss it? But if we're planning a bunch of SoP emplacements and tuning, and if I get this contra rework done in a neat way that suffices well, we'd have to worry less on removing things and more on just adjusting values of things and making just slightly down-shifted versions of trouble items with a clear theme/design to be identifiable easier from the -stronger- items they came from that are illegal. |
|
My primary concern is that if a sweeping pass of stash-bans hit and we just don't provide a reparation for what was lost by probably a -lot- of players, all this would do is damage player trust and instill more worry and insecurity on what's going to be sacred and protected in the words of 'Persistent' and what won't. Like if we do a down-grade copy of these items in stashes, re-theme their design, say "This is the legal, stash-save available one, to replace the blacklisted items we took from everyone in exchange for the blacklist items removal" This is more doable. It's gonna also raise the question of if antagonists are allowed to start keeping any of their gear on success of their task. What is the reward going to be for a successful antag like nukies? A thief? So on and so on. Or do we not WANT there to be any reward for this? These kinda answers would help clarify understanding a lot better. Like the primary reward for a challenging obstacle RESULTING in them having gotten that L6 or you-name ANY suddenly blacklisted gear, was that the success granted them this item. So do antagonists do away with having persistence of equipment they used to aid in their victory and toss it aside as their victory prize? Or do we do something else? Do we have some kinda gameplan like that? |
|
Another thing I'd add is we have things like player trading via bounties for items. If we remove ANY item that's been out for an extended period of time from being stashable especially wtihout prior discussions who is to say people wouldn't have traded with a player for this item and now will be left empty handed. |
I feel it would suck to add it to surplus crates cause you can't use the module without having an emag to grab a borg (making it a junk option except for being able to sell it until it gets deleted). It would also mean having to assign TC value to it. But seriously. This PR shouldn't go through whilst it's actively disregarding directorate opinions. |
I would say having the price for mercoins be ridiculously high for the suits (like, well in the thousands?) would make it worth it being a LITTLE more beefier than a bloodred, nothing compared to how the tacsuit is right now cause like I said, its actually ridiculous how busted it is, but something that'd make it worth it. Just really make them grind for it if they wanted the gear that bad. I WANT to say something on par with a salvager maxim but like, the maxim is already powerful as hell on its own, so. |
An example of like, a stat spread of a freelancer tacsuit while account for the flat 50 across the board spread that the bloodred has, for example. Can definitely be altered to be 60/45, but this is more built for accounting for physical combat rather than chemical/fire warfare. |
You don't need an emag? These modules fit in any quad afaik, though unsure if that is applicable for non-quads. Somthing to look into. |
I can say, as someone who's Faction uses this set of armors/uniform, I saw the Experimental suit and went "Holy fuck that is never getting spawned without EXPLICIT permission and some event reason because it is SCARY STRONG" I still stand by that decision too. That shit is black-ops grade of protection. |
To address this, I would prefer to see an achievement style system that has whitlist only drip that, once unlocked, can be used by the player. Like varying styles of nice looking outfits, with "Successfully Nuke the Station" being an unlock, with better looking versins for multiple times. I would prefer to see something that has more meaning and bragging rights behind it. The other issue is that, as much as we try to police it, a LOT of traitors also just buy shit and stash it, never actually doing their objectives, and this would be a peak way to curtail that. Certain drip for "Complete X amount of objectives as Thief/Traitor" "Successfully open X portals fully as Dragon", and so forth. Give it something actually visibly valuable that can be shown off at all times instead of hurr hurr funny gun go brrrrrrr |
|
What happens in an MMORPG when a large part of players gets to high-level, with their appropriate gear?
This is coming from someone who doesn't interact with it's "persistance" mechanics at all, usually enjoying a stationside "doing the same thing for a few months" until i get onto something else. In this case - genetics. It's fun for me in particular. |
This is something I kinda suggested yeah, cosmetic drip for statements of accomplishment. If antags are stashing stuff but don't succeed all their objectives I don't think they should be getting those things, tbh. The aim should be accomplish all goals to get rewarded. That or, as suggested, do an incremental white-list, but maybe consider some other things. Maybe.. As someone succeeds in an antag role, they get greater and greater access to HARD TO GET AND UNIQUE role-relevant kit. Make these values take time and effort based on their challenge, so that one day if they achieve enough, they -could- have laid ownership to the right to own one of these blacklisted items in question by the accomplishment of repeat success. Then we could actually structure some of these super-rare and specific items to time, success and involvement. Or? We could just make up some funny-currency tied to each antag &/or department role a person plays in, and folks could spend that funding to get certain things. Make the absurdly hard to get stuff cost a buttload. there's a lot of options that could be done to improve the gameplay loop, longevity and visible handling of time/effort/balance! |
I've been kinda sitting and thinking about the current system of rewarding TC-using antagonists, because I know there's a problem with antagonists trying not to use their kit so they get to keep traitor items at the end. So there's an incentive to not use them, and what they use might not necessarily line up with what they want to keep. I feel like maybe it would be a good idea to do a tiered reward system where what they get does not involve keeping anything they used during the round at all, but access to a menu of items based on success level. So they have no reason not to use their TCs appropriately, and do have a reward floor. Complete failure, but a good faith attempt was made? Nothing more expensive than an emag. Probably requires admin intervention since you can't auto-verify this. Partial success? Little more budget to play with. Complete success? Enough for a real Big Item or a couple of emag-strength items. Probably not the best place to keep pitching this though. |
Yeah, this kinda sounds like the same page I was on. |
Objective completion has not historically been the metric on getting to keep Antagonist gear, and I'm at least personally not really liking the sound of these changes being suggested. The metric that's always been bandied is to make a good-faith effort to complete your objectives. Like, say you buy everything that you feel you need, you have some TC left over and wanna buy something you don't need now but is permitted to shipsave. You're allowed to stash that, as long as you make an effort to do your job. ...turned out much more rambling and getting off the PR's topic than I intended, apologies for that, but still felt the opinion and suggestion is a valuable perspective for the subject of Antagonist objectives and incentives. |
Want to quickly note: I was just actually under the impression that we were stricter on this than 'good faith effort', and had been told people tend to be tight-fisted about actually spending TCs for useful-for-mission things because of that. I'm not an antag regular anywhere, much less here, so those thoughts were based on observations by others who are. Don't have a horse in this race other than getting the impression it was stricter than it apparently is. (I prefer loosening to tightening, antagging here is daunting as-is.) |
It's the struggle case of there aren't any written down and visibly firm rules on these things, so it has just been essentially an honor system that's not been fullproof as anyone would want. I agree on good faith effort too as said in the message before yours, and there's probably a clean way to go about ALL of this, but I think until we really have a firm declaration on what is sought to be done, what's the goal, or gameplan for persistence of antagonist gear n'stuff, it's a bit hard to find a route forward. |
Agree to disagree. The fact that there is such a need for antag gear even though it generally serves damn near no purpose other than hoarding it, I don't understand this fervent need to keep it all, especially considering all of it can be obtained elsewhere via smuggling, caches, expeds, or XB ships. This is why as far as traitors go, it's a "Complete X # of objectives" so it's easier to progress though comparatively, vs. A nukie which is quite literally an all or nothing game, wih an additional 2.5 million payout on success. The greed for traitor gear is amazing to see honestly, amd considering how much else exists in the game via exploration and crafting, yet this is the sticking point? Go try other gear and items. Y'all don't need only antag gear all the time. |
It's not really about that? I'm coming at this from a "What would encourage myself and people like me, on a persistence server, to actually want to play antagonist for the server-a role that staff has historically stated is plagued by people not performing their duties". I hardly think I'm being greedy-I have an EMAG, a Access Overrider thing, and a Camera bug, that's the sum totality of the spoils I've kept from my attempts to play Antagonist. I'd like to be encouraged to try to antagonize in the hopes of getting a few toys to be allowed to play with-which, given that I've been up front just how profoundly terrible I am at this game, this is the only realistic route I and players of my skill level have to acquiring items like these. On another level, making rewards based on success alone acts as a perverse incentive-we already, as the staff and memberbase have pointed out, have a problem with Antagonists refusing to RP with their victims because doing so puts them at significant risk of failing their objectives. If RPing with my kill target means they might get the first shot while I'm talking, then I might as well just ambush and shoot them out of nowhere. Or if RPing with someone as Head Rev just results in them killing me or blabbing, I might as well just run at them and flash the moment I get near(granted, I acknowledge HeadRevs do not actually have any incentive structure, but the example still stands). If the rewards are participation-based by contrast, I don't feel any pressure to succeed, I just feel like I get to enjoy being the villain and adding conflict to the round. On top of just feeling like I'm going to get anything at all for my trouble-and like. I don't think it's such a crime to like the thought of getting things out of playing one of the most demanding roles in the game(that is, provider of conflict) and the only role you cannot perfectly prepare yourself to play, because it is never a given if you will role it as opposed to Station. |
I don't think it's on the -need- of antag gear. I think it's kinda just a mix of pride points of success, a legal version doesn't yet exist to fill in the gap that X weapon filled as an identity, and that persistence is kinda supposed to mean..It persists. The reason folks go to stashing it is because that's what's on the box, persistence. They probably don't seek or wish to engage each-shift at hunting down someone selling explicit or illegal kit. What might be a meager and easily accomplished goal for one person might amount to the most daunting task for another. Like, do we want the game experience to start feeling like Sisyphus? Where the new norm is that to persist onto holding something you want that's dear, you're going to have to do a cyclical, repeated or to what might feel as futile -- are we gonna force some goals under that scope? Because if so this is just the opposite of persistence, and the advertisement is false. Plus, if we stash-ban it..It wouldn't really be obtainable elsewhere via all those means but for the round it's in, which still just confuses the concept to persistence again -- but that was an issue tied to not being addressed at the start, but that's a mistake I kinda get, I doubt there could've been folks expecting things to grow this big so fast. The needs for balance and fairness should be a pretty paramount thing. But we should also remember that the moment we start stripping things from peoples stashes, each item that's getting stripped could've had a long, long story and time investment into it, and if you take that away from folk, you may just lose them. We could just ask the community what they'd like to have happen in exchange for knowing they might/could lose something valuable that has a story behind it to them. Money? A trophy? A weaker copy-cat of the item? Cus all three of these -are- doable! And then we're not gonna make a sudden blacklisting of the advertised persistence be as ruthless and cold as it could come off as. Balance is important, but there's kinda an importance about how you go to the balance -- I point at helldivers 2 and its community and how balancing was disgustingly horrid at start and confusing with no thought or input from the players and just a dev teams grunt fantasy, to where it is now where the community is getting actually involved and has a voice, the balance is slowly shifting positively, and the community is contributing and active. |
Its true, we dont need antag gear all the time, ive seen people work without it and variety is the spice of life, and is the big reason why i lean into "make PMC versions of certain things" + everyones suggestion to beef expeds |
Yup. Full agreed. We do those two things and we sort a lot of the issues out! |
|
SO. BIG NEWS. Very soon, weapon damage will be on a PER WEAPON basis, instead of PER CALIBER basis. Once this hits, there will be a huge set of tuning happening, allowing for antag weapons to be separate from non-antag. Antag weapons will not be saveable, but all antag weapons will have a counterpart that can be found through various means that can be saved. This will allow me to make antags properly dangerous again, while also allowing everyone to have the toys they want as they want. |
Bless. It sounds like I should probably pause my contraband list stuff until this goes through, yeah? Fantastic work, and, fuck yeah. <3 If any help is needed to respriting things or anything else, just ask. |
Hell yeah! It might be valuable to get some input on the community on how to balance the counterparts, especially with people that main like, particular weaponries. Bulldogs, C20s and the likes come to mind of what people frequently use. Freelancers should be able to get freelance/PMC equivalent of antag/Colsec funny toys. |
Would it be possible, in that case, for the Antag Weapon versions to be used in a ""recipe"" to exchange them immediately for their non-antag counterpart? |
asking this as well, if the antag weapons are gonna be stashbanned in favor of freelancer equivalent weapons then i would like to know if it can be traded in/converted to freelancer equivalents |
What I would like to know, is do we have a time frame for when these will be changed? I ask because I would like to know if I should be looking to change those parts of the code I’m expecting back for the guns I had bountied out, or if it’s something I can work into a PR and expect to be tuned alongside the other weapons. |
|
May I suggest asking the community what antag weapons they want PMC/Worn versions of so devs know what items are more desired to have as toys while preserving the lethality of antag weaponry? Also please include eswords and dual eswords for worn/PMC versions, some of my characters would love to go get a permit for an esword and have them as their one carry on weapon I have for them |
Do we know how this will affect the brass hand-loaded ammo for guns? Those are based on ammo size, so I am wondering if each gun that can currently use them will have values for normal ammo and those rounds, or if the hand-loaded rounds will just function like standard ammo, which would make them pointless. |
I did have a similar thought, after my last message: how does this affect weapons that can chamber multiple ammo types/calibers? The first to come to mind for me, is the Forged Repeater Rifle, which can chamber both 5.56 and .45 Magnum rounds. |
I should ask, until this happens would it not be better to just have this PR closed for now until the tuning happens/pmc replacements are made so syndicate weaponry can be stash banner in one go? |
20 participants
About the PR
Adds the Syndicate Commander Hardsuit, Cybersun Juggernaut Suit, Raid Suit/Helmet, China Lake, L6 SAW, and the L6C ROW Module to the YAML sanitizer, meaning they will no longer serialize (save) to shuttle ymls.
Also adds the M92-X Experimental Tacsuit and Riot Gun.
In addition, I also reparented the worn China Lake, worn L6, and worn... RPG-7 to the actual versions of the weapons that HardLight uses. They also have distinct names now.
Why / Balance
Direct request from the directorate.
Changelog
🆑