Fix emmaged robots

[Carbadox]

Currently emagged robots (floorbots, medibots, firebots and cleanbots, excluding SecuritTrons) seriously suck ass at what they're supposed to do. The major problem is that they dont spread out when emmaged and always end up attack one selective person endlessly until they're (the bot that is) destroyed or turned off, only alerting the crew to a traitor with an emag and not doing anything useful.

I think that needs to be changed because honestly, trying to cause chaos only for the game to tell you "No, fuck off" by having the medibot just inject the AFK guy with pancorium for like 1 hour just because it's not polished is honestly crappy and just fustrates people into doing boring generic traitor stuff like bombings and such.

My proposed rework is to give a "finished" state to robots. Emmaged security drones actively stun and arrest anyone they see. After that, they start again and look for the next person to arrest. Something similar should be applied to the other robots. Normal unemagged Medibots for example will inject mobs with chems until they reach a certain health threshold (80% health eg.). When emmaged however, they should have that threshold turned around. In other words, they'lll keep injecting that someone until they're at 0%. Then they'll go find another target.

Hopefully that makes sense.

[Mouse]

Wouldn't fix emagged medibots, sadly. Pancuronium's effects won't be lethal unless you get insanely unlucky.

[Ryumi]

How about instead emagged medibots count their job as finished when the victim has met a certain threshold of pancuronium in their system? Let's say, 50u, as much as a changeling sting.

[Sundance]

For simplicity, it could just randomize the target in it's FoV, instead of reaching a threshold or a finished state? Would have the same intended effect:

3 people in a room, 1 rogue Medbot. Medbot injects #1, randomizes, goes after #3, randomizes, goes after #3 again (unlucky), randomizes, goes after #2...

It'd create that chaotic effect that Carbadox is looking for.

Nonetheless, I agree with the OP.