User Tag List

Page 1 of 12 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 120

Thread: Marine Law Discussion Thread

  1. #1
    Senior Member scsnv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    367
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Marine Law Discussion Thread

    Hey there ladies and gents,

    The CO Council, the dev team, and the staff team are working together to modify and alter Marine Law and SOP in a way that's more enjoyable, more fair, and more clear than its previous iterations. A large component of that is having a dialogue between the community and getting your thoughts and opinions; the more opinions we hear from people, the better ideas we can get flowing, which means a better Marine Law system overall.

    So, this thread is for you, the players, to give your unpopular opinions, your hot takes, or your controversial ideas to the table. This thread will of course be moderated, so keep it civil, but this is your platform to express yourself. Be the change you want to see.

    If you want to see the changes that has been discussed between the CO Council/Awan/staff so far, you can view them via Awan's wiki edit template. It shows Marine Law currently as seen on the Wiki, and then it shows the potential changes we discussed. You can find that here; https://cm-ss13.com/wiki/index.php?t...97&oldid=12965.

    Alternatively, if you would rather convey your thoughts privately, you are free to MSG either myself, or any of the other CO Council members, either here or on Discord. Looking forward to seeing what you all have to say.
    Last edited by scsnv; 10-13-2019 at 09:25 PM.
    Trial Moderator: 4/18/19 - 5/2/19 / Moderator: 5/3/19 - 10/1/19 / Senior Moderator: 10/2/19 - 12/26/19 / Trial Admin: 12/27/19 - 1/11/20 / Mod Manager: 1/12/20 - 4/18/20

    Cerwick/Balakura/etc
    Discord: noah#7322

    Former staff member and long-time CO Council member, now I just wave my boomer cane at people when I want something to complain about.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    216
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My (discord) inbox is also open. (For friends at least.)

    There are still edits being made on the talk page.

    Latest link:
    https://cm-ss13.com/wiki/index.php?t...28&oldid=12965

    There has not been a great amount of work on sop yet so that is not yet in a documented form that we are willing to share.
    Last edited by awan; 10-15-2019 at 11:47 AM.


    How to become senior dev.

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Posts
    42
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Add a point to the SOP that you cannot throw rescued survivors immediatly in the permabrig after they are rescued. It's a problem on how prisoners survivors get thrown in the brig immediately, lock them only if they break the Marine Law, but locking survivors out of the round it's not an interesting RP, it's a dick move.

  4. #4
    Member ThePirateSphee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    49
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by LordLoko View Post
    Add a point to the SOP that you cannot throw rescued survivors immediatly in the permabrig after they are rescued. It's a problem on how prisoners survivors get thrown in the brig immediately, lock them only if they break the Marine Law, but locking survivors out of the round it's not an interesting RP, it's a dick move.
    That's already not allowed OOCly, IIRC. I learned this, through... doing that. (with the intention to let them out after getting a fax response back, which I did, mind you >->)
    Magdalene Meinhof el marino
    FF-XXX-V1 el xenomorpho
    Zin'Keh el predatorro




  5. #5
    Senior Member scsnv's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    367
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by ThePirateSphee View Post
    That's already not allowed OOCly, IIRC.
    This is correct. That being said, there is the fact that there is an IC logic to doing it; this was discussed and we will be seeing about provisions barring that sort of thing, either in ML itself or in SOP. Wouldn�t be too hard to come up with some sort of IC justification on why not to arrest them, so that�s what we may do.
    Trial Moderator: 4/18/19 - 5/2/19 / Moderator: 5/3/19 - 10/1/19 / Senior Moderator: 10/2/19 - 12/26/19 / Trial Admin: 12/27/19 - 1/11/20 / Mod Manager: 1/12/20 - 4/18/20

    Cerwick/Balakura/etc
    Discord: noah#7322

    Former staff member and long-time CO Council member, now I just wave my boomer cane at people when I want something to complain about.

  6. #6
    Ancient Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2019
    Posts
    575
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Don't really need an IC reason, could just state that prisoners and related such colonists will be treated as guests on the ship till the ship arrives at port to properly process them. If you need an IC reason... Does the Alaymer even have the records of that colonist? The colonist can be whomever so might as well make them a colonist ID and call it mission complete for the time being.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    216
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That specific point was already brought up and will be adressed.


    How to become senior dev.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    367
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    SOP addition: MPs should not loiter around in departments without reasonable suspicion or invitation.

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2019
    Posts
    12
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Questions:

    Something that I have noticed in the modified version, there is a good amount of ooc content in it. Is marine law text going to move towards that aspect?

    Examples:
    Whitelisted Commander is shown 14 times in it.
    Disorderly Conduct has " (ooc note: They have to disrupt the flow of the round) "


    How would, "Appeals to High Command" work? Would this be akin to an adminhelp, but an IC solution instead? Will 'high command' also be required to follow the checklist? If so, would that mean faxing MPs for evidence or PMing?

    Suggestion:

    I would also like to suggest a capital crime relating to multiple counts of manslaughter, or having it stack. This is just to cover for when a player results in the death of multiple other players by mistake. Good examples would be a really bad OBs, or a bad CAS runs which was their sole fault.

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Posts
    216
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Killerone2 View Post
    Questions:

    Something that I have noticed in the modified version, there is a good amount of ooc content in it. Is marine law text going to move towards that aspect?

    Examples:
    Whitelisted Commander is shown 14 times in it.
    Disorderly Conduct has " (ooc note: They have to disrupt the flow of the round) "


    How would, "Appeals to High Command" work? Would this be akin to an adminhelp, but an IC solution instead? Will 'high command' also be required to follow the checklist? If so, would that mean faxing MPs for evidence or PMing?

    Suggestion:

    I would also like to suggest a capital crime relating to multiple counts of manslaughter, or having it stack. This is just to cover for when a player results in the death of multiple other players by mistake. Good examples would be a really bad OBs, or a bad CAS runs which was their sole fault.
    The whitelisted Commander bit is to indicate exactly where it is Only a whitelisted commanding officer can do it. Instead of the provision applying to the person currently in command. But I do have a solution for this. I might replace whitelisted Commanding officer with Captain and mention in the document that Captain refers to whitelisted Commanding officers where as Commanding Officer refers to who is in Command at the time. So the Xo if there is no Co.

    Disorderly conduct and Damage to government property are very likely to be re-worded I do not like the wording at all in there myself.
    And I want to look at re-wording it with the Commander Council.

    For ob's. I want to state beforehand that this is my viewpoint on it.
    It is very hard to deterimine icly who caused a bad ob or cas run.
    In general it can be who-ever called the strike but also the person doing the strike or an accident somewhere along the road.
    I like how in the current system you need 2 people to ob or cas.
    But if it is dealt with in marine law it is always accidental.
    And I do not want to be too harsh on that.
    The reason it is assumed to always be accidental is that if it is not you can ahelp it.


    How to become senior dev.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •