Thread Rating:
  • 5 Vote(s) - 3.8 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Revert the Security Requistion Vendor
#1
As the title suggests, I am proposing that the current Security Requisition Vendor that each security member must now spend their new tokens at for equipment be reverted. These vendors drastically cut the amount of available security supplies to not just Security but also the entirety of the station, seeing as they are now the only way outside of QM to collect a taser, baton, or security belt. Not only this but they also make it so only Security or anyone who robs security of their tokens can actually obtain these said items. It's something that all in all in my opinion makes security officers now way more vulnerable before they reach security and makes combat very limited in your options if say you were non-security, as you can no longer raid security for stun equipment. It can also be frustrating trying to get your stuff from the machine or choose what you want and someone else makes the choice or takes your stuff, and I think this system is also confusing for newer players who wouldn't know what to do to get their equipment.

I get the whole idea of class stuff for Security is pretty important and big to some, but this really isn't the way to do it. The vendor is kind of one thing with nukies, who have way more options and variety available to them, but Security is built upon tasers and batons, and not much else. Maybe if this was WAY more fleshed out and didn't severely cripple the station in terms of equipment then it wouldn't be so bad, but I think for now this needs to be thought through a bit more.

Also, HoS no longer spawns with a taser, making them completely vulnerable bar one flash, which is also kind of annoying and even further shows how restrictive the handing out of stun equipment is with this.
Reply
#2
Yeah - I side with Drago on this one.

It is nice to see robust donuts, the wavegun, morphine and the taser shotgun as more straight up available tools but to restrict for one the tools that can be gained by breaking into security and for the other the tools that one can pick when you are alone as security...that is what I dislike.

I usually pick 2 tasers like most security officers I reckon...and if I am the sole guard I might even pick a third and a second stun baton.

There are times when you have 40 people, at least 3-5 antags and are the sole defender of the station. Times are though and even if it is just for the thievery argument...revert these changes please.



The idea has to be fleshed out more. :/
Reply
#3
I believe drastically cutting down on the availability of security equipment to non sec crew and to individual sec was one of the big points of this. Prevent antags from loading up and depriving the officer. Prevent one officer from taking all the guns
Reply
#4
So after a security officer has been robbed of his gear he is essentially deprived of the necessary tools to get them back?
Reply
#5
Good points about the HoS losing their belt taser and the overall lower amt of security supplies. If people think it's needed, we could definitely throw in another weapon per-loadout or something.
I'll give the HoS a roundstart taser in their backpack now.

(07-02-2020, 12:51 AM)Drago156 Wrote: only Security or anyone who robs security of their tokens can actually obtain these said items
[...]
you can no longer raid security for stun equipment

This was actually the main focus of these changes. Read the PR description for the full brief I typed out.

If anyone here has good suggestions for loadout changes or additions we are open to improving them.
Reply
#6
I don't know how viable this is...

What if, when you went up to the machine, it checked if you had basic equipment (I'd say a taser and handcuffs) and if it didn't, it would give them to you as a sec member? With a hard limit to prevent abuse...
Reply
#7
(07-02-2020, 08:23 AM)Technature Wrote: I don't know how viable this is...

What if, when you went up to the machine, it checked if you had basic equipment (I'd say a taser and handcuffs) and if it didn't, it would give them to you as a sec member?  With a hard limit to prevent abuse...

I don't think stuff like this is necessary really.

Sec usually has access to QM and is able to use the console in there, so they can always order equipment for themselves.

There's always the option of working with mechanics as well to scan and build things

I'll have to actually try out this update before I can give a more informed opinion, but I think I agree with the concept
Reply
#8
I think the vendor is good, but there are two main avenues of consideration - whether Security can use this, and what non-Security should get out of breaking into Sec. On the first front, tokenization makes it difficult to appoint new security officers or re-equip those who were cloned - on the second, I think security lockers should be equipped with at least a little bit of armament, perhaps a relatively weak sidearm.
Reply
#9
I think variance is good - and I'd hope that this system will be have more additional types of weaponry in the future that one could choose from. It makes firefights more interesting when there's multiple things being shot in a befuddled chaos.

...But let's be real. If the intent of this patch was to stop John Doe with 6 tasers in his belt, then I think personally it fails at tackling this issue. The meta now will change to loot the armory.

Now picture this. You're a lone officer. You meet Johnny 6 Waveguns. What do you have with this new change? A single taser and baton? That's all it takes to down someone, but Johnny 6 Waveguns clearly has the upper hand and all he did was hack into the armory which is trivial for players who know how do simple door hacking - so anyone on their first week of playing.

The intrinsic problem with security weapons being used as a rampage item is the sheer inventory nonsense. The very concept that you can stick 6 tasers in your belt is obscene.

In my opinion you should concentrate on that in conjunction with this Requisition Vendor and you might meet a happy medium here.

Restricting belts and bags to 1 x weapon of each type would alleviate this. That means any player would only be able to carry at most 2 tasers and 2 batons (1 pair in the belt, the other pair in their bag) - which is what most solo officers would carry on their person anyway so this would be primarily a nerf to those who hoard guns.
Reply
#10
I think the meta for a traitor wanting stun weapons changing towards Armory looting isn't necessarily a bad change. Many of the armory weapons cannot be accessed without an emag - and the weapons that can be accessed with simple hacking are all 2-handed and projectile/ammo based, and decidedly not as straightforward weapons as the taser/baton classic.

It's also possible that we add alarms to the armory that trip on when the door is hacked open, but that might be out of the immediate scope of the weapons vendor change.

Interesting suggestion with storage space though, would like to hear what other people think about it.
Reply
#11
@mbc

Regarding the stroage space suggestion.

Perhaps if we could have 2-3 dedicated weapons slots on the security toolbelt...that would be nice.
Slightly different looking spots items can fit into (if such a UI change is even feasable with all the different UI options around) - so that it is visible that a maximum amount of weapons can be fit inside.

I would just argue a maximum for that and not limiting it to one of each.
Carrying two tasers and a stun baton should be ok; same as two phasers and a wave-gun for example.

- - -

Question is:
What about backpacks?
How should one not simply just input dozens of weapons in there?
Reply
#12
(07-02-2020, 11:10 AM)mbc Wrote: I think the meta for a traitor wanting stun weapons changing towards Armory looting isn't necessarily a bad change. Many of the armory weapons cannot be accessed without an emag - and the weapons that can be accessed with simple hacking are all 2-handed and projectile/ammo based, and decidedly not as straightforward weapons as the taser/baton classic.

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing either, hence the reason I'm supportive of the change (so long as it's fine tuned / builded upon) - i'm just pointing out it won't hinder the stun rampages that you are trying to reduce.

Your points re: armory - yes, those are all true but 2 handed weaponry ain't any less robust than your bread and butter taser, especially if you have +2 of them. And recharging/reloading/basically all the cons with your 2 handed gun becomes irrelevant when you have the entire armory in your bag and belt.

Quote:Question is:
What about backpacks?
How should one not simply just input dozens of weapons in there?


Exact same rules apply to backpacks as it does belt.

This only applies to weapons of the same type, so while you can't carry two tasers and a baton on your belt, (you'd get the message "You can't fit any more [item] on this belt!") you could carry a taser, baton and phaser on your belt, as the phaser is of a different type. 

There can be further restrictions on this - if you think two-handed weaponry is too strong to have as a pair, you could restrict it from fitting onto a belt (afaik, some already can't fit onto belts, taser shotgun?). This way, theoretically, it would restrict the player into storing only one of these guns.

Syndicate weaponry is immune to this change, for balance reasons.

This would make inventory management a little bit more important for those who want to raid the armory or barrage their targets with stun weaponry. If they're going to be "guns, guns and more guns" then they'd need a spot where they can store their excess guns, such as a private locker that's be welded shut in the dark or a syndicate floor closet.

I need to preach a little here that the issue MBC points out is right: that excess stun weaponry causes easy rampages. Previously the way2play was simply arm yourself with a taser. That'd be enough, just make sure you shoot right. Didn't even need a baton, just point blank. However this was in the time before sec belts, before a time where basically the only tasers were inside security lockers. Then tasers were nerfed so that you'd need to baton to finish them off. This was a good change. Now the problem is excess, where the meta is just to amass the weaponry and worry little about charging. 

I just think the excess is inventory based, as i've outlined above.
Reply
#13
I think the reasoning behind the change is solid (reducing the availability of stun weaponry on-station that is easily lootable), but I have a couple gripes of my own:

I don't really like the loadout names - they feel a little too meta for my taste and I feel that not much would be lost by having the options stand on their own without a label

NTSOs shouldn't get a requisition token - they already have what is essentially a unique sec loadout much in the same vein as the ones from the vendor (self-charge baton and clock)

Similarly, I feel the Head of Security would be better suited as having a unique loadout (egun/lawbringer plus some HoS melee-stun-weapon) with a backup taser, and not getting the standard security requisition token


The riot shotguns are undeniably the strongest pieces of gear in the armory in my opinion, and they're on an easily hackable rack instead of a crate. I feel armory shotguns and phasers could swap number/positions (rack of 3-4 phasers, crate of 2 shotguns).

Taser shotguns as they stand are probably too strong for their current loadout - they were (re)designed around being a straight upgrade to security gear, and could probably use another balance pass

Last but certainly not least, the ability to get stunbatons by deconstructing secbots has to go. It doesn't do much to reduce stun weaponry if you can hop to faint, print a secbot, and get a baton 3 minutes into the round.
Reply
#14
Do people like the idea of security getting a pinpointer along with their loadout to help find lost/stolen equipment? It would be able to locate the taser and the baton. This way, if you steal an officer's equipment by disarming them etc, holding onto the weapon is a risk to you and it will be easier for the officer to retrieve their loadout stuff back.
Reply
#15
(07-02-2020, 02:16 PM)mbc Wrote: Do people like the idea of security getting a pinpointer along with their loadout to help find lost/stolen equipment? It would be able to locate the taser and the baton. This way, if you steal an officer's equipment by disarming them etc, holding onto the weapon is a risk to you and it will be easier for the officer to retrieve their loadout stuff back.

Sounds like a really great way to discourage stealing stun weaponry from sec while still allowing it in principle. 
(And also still allowing sec to hand out weaponry against nukies and stuff in theory.)
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)