Zombinator
-
Posts
61 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Important Post
GMod Tutorials
Knowledge Base
Posts posted by Zombinator
-
-
+support
Free to play Sarkic? Better buff CI. -
+Support
Extremely active and knowledgeable, I'd give the man what he wants.-
1
-
-
+support
The motd states "CI are not to initiate combat on Containment Specialists, or researchers / utility staff actively testing or working in a containment cell."
This rule should be broadened to cover Sarkic and SCPs. -
-support
remove 912 and give CI more raid SCPs? This is getting silly. -
+support
You'd best take him up on this interest. -
+Support
5 seconds is a sick joke. -
+Support
If D4 is E11 then they should follow the same rules as E11.-
1
-
-
+Support
Oversight on the mapper's part. -
-
5 hours ago, Rookieblue said:
Are you asking that SCP 912 be prohibited from attacking and damaging people that aren't attacking him or others? Because if that's the case, that's already a thing, it would be called RDM. The only difference is that if 912 sees a non-GENSEC or MTF member with a weapon out he orders them to put it away first, and then attacks.
Every time I use the damaging right click I am told that I am not allowed to use it. I am wanting clarity about this.
-
What are you suggesting? - Add a line to SCP-912's rules that states "Though SCP-912 is classified as a combatant, he is prohibited from right-clicking D-Class and CI personnel except in self defense, or in defense of other Foundation Staff or Class-Ds only."
Current self-defense rules state:
"The self defense clause is satisfied by observing CI personnel, D-Class or SCPs attack other non-combatants or being attacked themselves.
D-Class that interfere with Site operations and are armed may be killed as long as it doesn't violate FearRP."
I would like to clarify the rules regarding SCP-912's right click of his baton. The baton right click deals ten damage and assists in stunning players quicker because it is on a separate cooldown from the left click. I would like the same self defense clause that applies to non-combatants to apply to SCP-912 so that when lives are actually in danger he may take more desperate measures to subdue threats. In short, I would like the right click option to be clearly stated as available under current self-defense rules.How would this change better the server? - When there are three Class-D or CI rioting and actively dealing damage to himself or those under his protection, SCP-912 becomes much more able to provide effective defense. This change would solidify SCP-912 as a protective force for the Foundation as he would only be able to right click legal targets that are dealing legal damage, much the same as The RIG, Advanced Combat Medic and Mobile Mop Force classes which are already always exempt from this rule, and are considered combatant classes though SCP-912 would only be able to take these actions under the self-defense clause. He is currently the only combatant that cannot participate in self-defense outright and I believe this to be an oversight that would benefit everyone by being clarified.
Are there any disadvantages of making this change to the server? If so, explain. - This change would make escaping as a Class-D or raiding as a CI slightly more difficult, though a group of three armed people will still quickly overwhelm SCP-912.
Who would this change mostly benefit? - SCP-912, all Foundation Staff.
Please link any workshop content, screenshots, or anything that you think may be helpful to those who view this suggestion -
-
21 hours ago, Ya Boi Sawrunner said:
People have better shit to do than to track an scp who is usually on their side in active combat situations or chill ones. I am not constantly eyeing up the chat either to see someone hit a bind.
Sounds like a skill issue.
21 hours ago, Ya Boi Sawrunner said:What happens if he cuffs command or something? SF? They don't ask questions, they will light him up.
They KOS him.
21 hours ago, Ya Boi Sawrunner said:You don't gotta patronize everyone because you want him to nail every rule perfectly.
-
On 10/28/2021 at 11:36 PM, Mary said:
+Support
Its been over a year, seems like enough time to me. -
15 hours ago, Ya Boi Sawrunner said:
I mean, to be fair, the majority of foundation combatants look like gensec or mtf anyways, and RIS isn't even human so 912 wouldn't bother it anyways.
Policemen have more than a uniform, they have badges and authority. MMF are just janitors with guns. RIS is a tool built by researchers to protect them. Neither are equivalent to authority-wielding officers with badges.
15 hours ago, Ya Boi Sawrunner said:I mean if you wanna get that technical the only people who should be able to order it around would have to wear that police uniform. We already bent his lore for server convenience, saying he doesn't fuck with someone who looks like an MTF and a robot isn't really a stretch.
Under this logic SCP-912 shouldn't be allowed in D-Block and shouldn't obey anyone on-site. Just slap him in a containment cell and call it a day, following that thinking.
15 hours ago, Ya Boi Sawrunner said:So you are saying, that the once in a blue moon when someone hops onto 912 to RP instead of just helping gensec, minging, tryna get hostages, or be a nuisance, that taking away 2 classes will REALLY detriment it that much? It can still force non combatants all over to have to watch out for him, but if a RIS is trying to escort a researcher and proceeds to get jumped its just silly.
The infrequency of players performing legitimate roleplay on this server merits its own post and discussion. RIS and MMF need to be on the lookout for SCPs, this is an **SCP-RP** server after all. SCP-912 is an ***SCP*** and deserves to have people keep an eye on him. Just like SCP-076-2, weapons out around SCP-912 cause a reaction. The fact that SCP-912 can be successfully utilized by Foundation staff is an intended roleplay and gameplay mechanic, it is hardly silly just because you don't seem to understand it. I hope this post helps clarify.
15 hours ago, Ya Boi Sawrunner said:The amount of RP you get out of being stunned and cuffed is about the same amount of RP I get out of getting up from my keyboard and taking a nap on my couch. With the amount of SCPs harmful to the foundation, and the many scps under the control of players that can be allied with it, and this is all forgetting the fact that the majority of 912 players play in a way that fits this suggestion as is, how is it so much of a rp problem to let 2 classes slide by on this?
Following wiki SCP lore and established gameplay rules definitely accents roleplay for many people, I'm sorry its not your cup of tea. Being arrested and handed over to an MTF is interesting and exciting to some folks, many consider it amusing. The majority of SCP-912 players are breaking the rules according to you. The !motd stipulates a *must*:
"SCP-912 must order any non-MTF or non-GENSEC personnel to put away their weapons.
If the player fails to put away their weapons 912 can attack with its baton until the player puts the weapon away.
If the player draws their weapon again 912 may then use his baton to stun and arrest the player, even if they put their weapon away."
This means that you are literally saying that the majority of SCP-912 players ignore a *must* and commit FailRP. I don't encourage rule-breaking. Using a bind to motion for someone to put a weapon away and giving them 5 seconds to comply is not only polite, its well within RP and !motd stipulations.
15 hours ago, Ya Boi Sawrunner said:how is it so much of a rp problem to let 2 classes slide by on this?
How is it so much of a combat gameplay problem to keep an eye on what jobs and SCPs are near you and putting your weapon away accordingly? Watching chat or listening to people speak is part of combat RP and situational awareness is a bare-minimum requirement.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
On 11/1/2021 at 10:29 AM, Loaff said:There have been issues before where 912 takes advantage of the wording of the rules and hits MMF with its baton while they are protecting d block, to the point where it became such an issue that it was brought to high command.
"Taking advantage" sounds a lot like following intended rules to avoid FailRP warnings instead of choosing to commit teaming.
On 11/1/2021 at 10:29 AM, Loaff said:Edit: May I add that according to the command who reported this, the 912 players in question were just stunning the MMF, not even cuffing them. Not much RP to be had there even if they do cuff them as they are required to turn them into security/MTF, at which point they'll undoubtedly be released by the latter with no further interaction.
From the !motd:
"If the player fails to put away their weapons 912 can attack with its baton until the player puts the weapon away.
If the player draws their weapon again 912 may then use his baton to stun and arrest the player, even if they put their weapon away.
SCP-912 may attempt to arrest rule breakers and bring them to GENSEC or MTF personnel.
SCP-912 must comply with any orders given to it by GENSEC or MTF personnel."
The wording from the !motd states that he *must* ask them to put it away, that he *can* hit them with his baton and that he *may* arrest them. You're attempting to make an issue of someone following the rules and choosing to be lenient in lieu of arresting. A shame that wasn't brought to the attention of your command as well.
As far as "undoubtedly" being released, they aren't always. Its up to the discretion of the GENSEC or MTF what to do with the rule breaker. Any number of roleplay scenarios can occur after this, it is up to the imagination and wishes of those involved in the RP. Providing open-ended RP opportunities for people is a cornerstone of good gameplay. As Rookieblue, the ***HEAD OF STAFF*** has mentioned, these mechanics are all working as intended.
I was a bit on the fence before, but this thread has solidified my opinion as a whoppingly decisive
-SUPPORTOn 11/1/2021 at 11:09 AM, Rookieblue said:- Support
In lore, SCP 912 attacks anyone not wearing a specific police department's uniform, meaning that if it ran into a regular guard at the Foundation, it would attack that guard. For the purposes of the server, we've obviously changed the rule to allow SCP 912 to both listen to, and respect GENSEC and MTF authority. Changing the rule would further allow SCP 912 to be a sole benefit to Foundation forces, however it would reduce SCP 912's RP ability. This rule was intentionally written to force those players with weapons around SCP 912 to be careful, as those not specifically in GENSEC or MTF would be vulnerable to 912 attempting to arrest them.
-
1
-
-
10 hours ago, Ya Boi Sawrunner said:
Are there any disadvantages of making this change to the server? If so, explain. - None. I can't see a single downside.
Taken directly from https://scp-wiki.wikidot.com/scp-912
The downside is that it would break the entirety of SCP-912's lore. Many folks enjoy combat as a roleplay while others enjoy reading SCP wikia articles and roleplaying around standardized understood rules. This is clearly an intended RP mechanic. Semi-serious, not Breach.
-
1
-
-
What are you suggesting? - In the combat cuffing section of the !motd it states that Sarkic are exempt, Islandtoad just told me in a sit that he cleared it with his higher ups that SCP-912 is also exempt. I would like to add SCP-912 next to Sarkic in the combat cuff exemption on the !motd.
How would this change better the server? - I've always tried to stun all combatants at once before trying to cuff as I regarded combat over once all enemy combatants are stunned, this clarity would ease tensions regarding SCP-912 combat cuffing.
Are there any disadvantages of making this change to the server? If so, explain. - Some people would likely not enjoy SCP-912 being on the same level as Sarkics in regards to combat cuffing.
Who would this change mostly benefit? - SCP-912 and anyone that has a problem with combat cuffing.
Please link any workshop content, screenshots, or anything that you think may be helpful to those who view this suggestion -
-
1
-
-
+Support
On 10/21/2021 at 11:20 PM, Chief_ said:From experience I tell d-class they are allowed to wander lower d-block. Just wander. They can’t shoot back at gensec unless shot at. But they canmt bait gensec. Like holding a gun out.
Allowing them out of their cells causes a distraction for any Foundation Forces that are looking down there. If there is an active shooter then they will be one more target to be ruled out. If someone is moving to the Lower D-Block Tower then they will also be another potential threat to be analyzed. If there is a lockdown then they will be one more potential threat to be ruled out, causing a distraction if they are lingering near the elevator. Every other job in the game with an NLR has to wait in their spawn for the duration, it's obscenely unfair for paid classes to receive special treatment.-
3
-
-
+Support
Hard enough to melee with hitreg/latency/crouchspam anyway. -
+Support
We're semi-serious not semi-casual, there is too much mingery already and this would be a very beneficial change to the roleplay environment. The blue stick being used distracts folks from their established RP situations, nobody should feel okay being a roleplay vampire who sucks the RP out of those around them for their own amusement. -
Your in game name: Jeb Threep the 912 Main
Your Steam ID:STEAM_0:0:19270437
The player's in game name: The Gaming Goat
The player's steam ID (required): STEAM_0:0:183269254
The original staff member's name: One dude with the long name
Date and Time This Incident Occurred: 5:00PM EST 10/20/2021
What did the player do: Broke fearRP
What was the disposition of the sit (no action/verbal warning/formal warning/etc):No action via islandtoad saying so. This should have been written down, there is no excuse not to update your documentation. You are insanely large as a network and this sort of thing shouldn't be happening. Update your motd to reflect your homebrew rules or people will blatantly ignore them and take an hour of three peoples time to do a sit that just gets rejected by islandtoad with no action anyway.
Why do you think the disposition was inappropriate?: The motd clearly states:
"Do not break FearRP. FearRP is established under the following conditions:
Non-Combatants (Utility, Research, CI R&D) can be placed under FearRP if two or more individuals point heavy weapons at them.
Combatants (GENSEC, MTF, CI Military, D-Class, MMF, ACM) can be placed under FearRP if three or more individuals point heavy weapons at them.
SCPs that can be FearRP'd can be placed under FearRP if two or more individuals point any type of firearm at them.
SCP-049 is an exception to this rule and requires three or more individuals point any type of firearm at him.
Individuals can be FearRP'd even if armed.
Heavy weapons are defined as shotguns, assault rifles, sniper rifles, and light machine guns.
Individuals actively engaged in combat can not be placed under FearRP.
Distance to establish FearRP is within voice chat range. All individuals have to be within line of sight, and unobstructed by walls, doors, or other cover.
When placing an individual under FearRP it must be for the purposes of capture, interrogation, or ransom. FearRP'ing and summarily executing personnel without taking other actions is not allowed.
The Praxedes' Fist is exempt from FearRP.
Non-combatants are unable to place others under FearRP."
Do not break FearRP. FearRP is established under the following conditions:
Non-Combatants (Utility, Research, CI R&D) can be placed under FearRP if two or more individuals point heavy weapons at them.
Combatants (GENSEC, MTF, CI Military, D-Class, MMF, ACM) can be placed under FearRP if three or more individuals point heavy weapons at them.
SCPs that can be FearRP'd can be placed under FearRP if two or more individuals point any type of firearm at them.
SCP-049 is an exception to this rule and requires three or more individuals point any type of firearm at him.
Individuals can be FearRP'd even if armed.
Heavy weapons are defined as shotguns, assault rifles, sniper rifles, and light machine guns.
Individuals actively engaged in combat can not be placed under FearRP.
Distance to establish FearRP is within voice chat range. All individuals have to be within line of sight, and unobstructed by walls, doors, or other cover.
When placing an individual under FearRP it must be for the purposes of capture, interrogation, or ransom. FearRP'ing and summarily executing personnel without taking other actions is not allowed.
The Praxedes' Fist is exempt from FearRP.
Non-combatants are unable to place others under FearRP.
"Evidence (required): https://medal.tv/games/garrys-mod/clips/4Ed1NFe1mom3Z/d1337BAfkpGQ?invite=cr-MSxTRG4sMjUwODQ1NzAs
Any extra information:
https://medal.tv/games/garrys-mod/clips/4Ed1NFe1mom3Z/d1337BAfkpGQ?invite=cr-MSxTRG4sMjUwODQ1NzAs -
33 minutes ago, Some minge said:
However I must say zombinator you're discussions with CI have also not been proactive either... hence cloakers screenshot..
I was given a strike for that post. Responding to rule-breaking by breaking a rule is prohibited, fighting toxic with toxic isn't an acceptable answer.
Just now, Mary said:if Cloaker was already warned for it in game then why make a player report for him?
Because the behavior continues, its a trend that has not ceased. Different issue.
-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Cloaker said:
Jeb bringing forum issues in-game ^^^
It was in-character. He was Maynard and lying. Maybe upload the previous twenty seconds, yeah?
58 minutes ago, Yato Sensei said:I understand that he was on a job with a playermodel that is indeed bald
-
Your in game name: Jeb Threep
Your Steam ID: STEAM_0:0:19270437
The player's in game name: Cloaker
The player's steam ID (required): STEAM_0:1:461863232
Date and Time This Incident Occurred: Various times on 7/28 and 7/29. Latest incident was 6PM on 7/29
What did the player do: Cloaker was formally warned yesterday by Stonksman for toxicity towards me in game, he killed me and said "How's that negative reputation on the forums?" Stonksman in the sit informed me about reputation, a factor I had been unaware of. Stonksman noted that I had accrued -20 reputation in about a day's time. I hadn't noticed and didn't see how it factored in. One minute after the warning, Cloaker went directly to the forums and left another thumbs down on one of my comments. I reported this to Stonksman and he pulled him into the admin only channel to talk to him over it. A thread opened up on the 28th in the suggestions forum in which I weighed in. I received a toxic response and then a Forum Diplomat stepped in to say "To avoid arguments please leave all posts to +/- Support. Any further arguments or useless posts will be hidden by our diplomat team!" After this post Cloaker came into the thread and quoted the toxic post and commented that they " said it perfectly". I feel that given the string of toxic and abusive behavior he has been exhibiting, this is a clear cut case of toxicity after a Forum Diplomat had already stated to leave all future posts to +/- support.
Evidence (required):
What do you believe should happen to the player: After this many issues, I believe he should be removed from staff.
Any extra information: Stonksman has handled this entire issue, I believe he will be key to assisting with the facts.
-
11
-
-
-Support
Sure are a lot of CI supporters in here.
You want to make it to where a group of incarcerated murderers can't kill you? Nah. Its bad enough that they can't kill each other. Even if you are saving them, there is nothing saying they wouldn't have every roleplay reason not to terminate you once your back is turned. Doesn't make RP sense and just doesn't make for fun gameplay. You wanna constantly destroy the entire Foundation roleplay to break them out, you deserve the risk you take by trusting violent felons. Personally, I think its hilarious that you can't hurt them until they decide to betray you. Now you know how we feel around Sleuths and Maynard.-
3
-
15
-
General Suggestion - Forbid combatants from using Error models - Denied
in Denied
Posted
+support
Though this won't happen. Folks with access to the content pack are aware of these errors and have not fixed them, making a rule about not using the models simply won't happen. This would force a workload on the one or two people with access to the content pack or box and I frankly feel that changing a single line of code for each error instance would take an hour or so tops once a list is compiled but it simply won't happen. Why not? Good question for them.