Content Meeting Discussion Feedback Thread: Maximum amount of armor obtainable Change.

[Holland]

With the recent change to the maximum amount of armor you can obtain on certain jobs.​

We would like to get community feedback regarding the changes.​

​

Changelog​

​

Feel free to post your opinion.​

The trial will be for 2 weeks​

​

Our intentions​

This change has been done to encourage non-combatives to stay further away from combat, however still allows certain jobs to have the ability to resist a couple more bullets if they choose to obtain the extra bit of armor from an armory.​

​

Be nice and respectfull​

Content team​

 

[Zen]

While I understand where you are coming from, the fact that the conflict lies in the secondary objective means that you are admitting that the change does not hinder your primary objective. In addition, there are ways of protecting non-combatives without running directly at the threat and gunning it down, such as ensuring they reach a safe area and protecting that safe area, manning checkpoints, etc. which don't necessarily require a full set of armor, especially if you don't work alone.

The solution here isn't to just take a bunch of stuff away from ISD. There is no issue here barring the armour level, so why would the solution be to do anything other than fixing the armour level?

As for the specific cases people have named where ISD would be most needed as direct combatives such as in a research wing hold, I will say that at least on the U.S side these are incredibly infrequent and also would not require the sole attention of ISD but rather every combative on site (barring maybe E-11 but lets be honest they'll probably join in too), so your assistance would hardly be crucial to Foundation's success on that end anyways.

This is a US CI skill issue. UK CI regularly push and hold SA offices, US CI just aren't... very good at combat, in my past experience, so they go more for infoleak tactics than combat tactics.

 

[Adagio]

I wonder why they would make it so the overlords of the entire foundation responsible for making world-altering decisions and who are frequent targets of assassination from hostile organizations would have more armor than mall cops?

It really just seems like you have an unjustified hatred for ISD based on this comment and that is why you refuse to see it from any point other than a "because I like it that way so I can kill them easily as CI" mentality due to the additional "choas insurgery commader peter "pinhead pinkman" in the signature. It makes no logical sense that people in just suits with no body armor have 100 armor while ISD have armor and have less shield. There is no logical way to justify it by them being overlords that are targeted. Even if you say "it is advanced technology" then you have to make the argument that if an ISD Inspector has a suit they can have that under it as well since they are CL4 and it would easily be justifiable. People in the military have similar plate carriers but the biggest difference is literally the long sleeves, pants, and helmets. Your argument here is very illogical. Your argument is essentially, ISD being military police are not able to have the same amount of armor as other combatives because they are the military police force when in real life, military police have the same amount of armor as soldiers and instead just don't wear helmets normally.

 

[pinhead]

It really just seems like you have an unjustified hatred for ISD based on this comment and that is why you refuse to see it from any point other than a "because I like it that way so I can kill them easily as CI" mentality due to the additional "choas insurgery commader peter "pinhead pinkman" in the signature. It makes no logical sense that people in just suits with no body armor have 100 armor while ISD have armor and have less shield. There is no logical way to justify it by them being overlords that are targeted. Even if you say "it is advanced technology" then you have to make the argument that if an ISD Inspector has a suit they can have that under it as well since they are CL4 and it would easily be justifiable. People in the military have similar plate carriers but the biggest difference is literally the long sleeves, pants, and helmets. Your argument here is very illogical. Your argument is essentially, ISD being military police are not able to have the same amount of armor as other combatives because they are the military police force when in real life, military police have the same amount of armor as soldiers and instead just don't wear helmets normally.

There's actually a very simple justification which is that its a video game and some changes are made based on balance rather than realism?

Yes I used to main CI and that is certainly motivating my stance on the suggestion but I dont think that should devalue my opinion, im sure if you played CI and raided frontal having to deal with 2 waves of dea and nu7, 7 disguised people shooting behind you, a wave of A1, wave of O1, 10 gensec and finally as the cherry on top some ISD (even though they should be "protecting noncombatives," interesting i never see that) you might see why they dropped ISDs armor and not the O5s.

And FYI, I have also played a good amount of ISD and I don't have a grudge against any roleplay department because im an adult. Ive already suggested compromises for ISD like making it so their pistols are hidden while disguised. I don't think -50 armor will make ISD worse in any regard because as I continue to mention, your duties do not involve bee-lining it to shooting the bad guys. You are the last resort if all others perish, not the sites general security force. I'm not saying that to be mean or because I was the CI COM or because I dont like ISD, thats quite literally the direction SL wants ISD to go in if you actually read the main post.

 

[Niox]

It really just seems like you have an unjustified hatred for ISD based on this comment and that is why you refuse to see it from any point other than a "because I like it that way so I can kill them easily as CI" mentality due to the additional "choas insurgery commader peter "pinhead pinkman" in the signature.

It really just seems like you have an unjustified love for ISD based on this comment and that is why you refuse to see it from any point other than a "because I like it that way so I can kill CI easily as ISD" mentality due to the additional "ISD Director" in the signature.

Make sure to be respectful with your arguments and points. Just because he used be CI COM doesn't make his points more or less valid, even if it is his motivator. Very immature to target his character rather than his actual points, and just going "Erm you were CI COM therefore you're stubborn"

Shame Doyle Adagio, Shame.

 

[Rowling]

This change is fire

if you're a non-combative outside of SA who requires 100 armor, then you're playing your role incorrectly.

If you're an ISD who requires 100 armor, then you're playing your role incorrectly.

If you're an SA+ you're probably just getting assassinated 24/7 regardless of armor because that's all we get to do...

 

[Zen]

This change is fire

if you're a non-combative outside of SA who requires 100 armor, then you're playing your role incorrectly.

If you're an ISD who requires 100 armor, then you're playing your role incorrectly.

If you're an SA+ you're probably just getting assassinated 24/7 regardless of armor because that's all we get to do...

Maybe if ISD actually had armour, they could help keep SA safe

 

[UNGOC Starfox / Walter]

While I'm not a member of the GOC anymore. I still feel as though their Ambassadors should be able to have 100 armour just like Foundation Cl5s.

Considering that they would be a priority target, especially with their model sticking out like a sore thumb compared to the other GOCs.

And, this is the weakest point, they're meant to be direct representatives of the Council of 108. So them having only 50 armour feels a bit strange.

 

[Rowling]

Maybe if ISD actually had armour, they could help keep SA safe

Nothing is keeping me or any SA+ safe from a freedom shot across Core Bridge. It's not going to make a difference, it also isn't ISD's job to protect SA, that can be tasked to any available MTF, GSD, or DEA.

There are simply too many combative roles (7 Departments/Regiments) within the Foundation, a slight nerf to one of them isn't game destroying.

Honestly, I think more people should lose their armor on both sides of the coin, and others should get more armor.

Enforcement/Heavy classes shouls have 125-200 range of armor, Support/Specialist roles should go down to 50-75. Operatives and Officers are fine at 100, idk, maybe make Sniper roles squishier too, so there's a proper drawback to playing them, marksmans often travel lighter anyways.

Honestly, the more I think about it I get the idea to make a full suggestion

 

[Broda]

I don't think anyone from UK ISD is really complaining about this

People still get ripped a new one in 1-2 seconds flat with headshots/energy weapons/scp sweps

Its not that big of a deal

 

[Jimothy"Hamster"]

I think this change just reinforces the roles that each dpt and MTF plays, and promotes better cohesion to deal with bigger threats. It forces ISD to contact and work with MTFs to deal with certain issues instead of just taking matters into their own hands by chasing and shooting CI or SCPs. But like Broda said, it really doesnt matter in the grand scheme of things as most ppl get slimed out almost instantly anyways ...

 

[DasPookieBear]

Not gonna lie. If ISD is REALLY having this much trouble you are probably arresting ppl for the wrong shit and being punished for being a power hungry punk that imposes your will on other people. The only ISD I've EVER fought against were ISD being true dicks about a situation they either had no idea what was going on with. Or trying to run me over in the conversation again without knowing the facts or knowing them and still being a dick.

I wouldn't mind seeing GSD effected in different ways. Like Cadets having lower armor and as you climb the ranks you get higher and higher armor. Maybe capped at 100 for RCU and RSU 120 for Sergeants 150 for Captain 200 for Chief. Since we are constantly in the shit, Having a Liiiittle more armor for those that are meant to hold down D-block But in the end I don't think its needed for us all that much. IDK how much anyone else has, But I do think ERT should have more. I was able to one mag shred an ERT as 912 the other night and I felt BAD about it. They had hardly walked in to site when I ripped him to pieces. It did help 8837 was there and black holed them at the same time but I think them having 200 or 250 would make more sense. Same with LE (O-1 and A-1) And same with Juggs Having all that armor would be a little silly if its not reflected.

 

[Holland]

This thread will be open for 3 more days and then it will be closed for review. as the trial date is due today

 

[Speff]

sorry im late chat

Way too many ISD just become D-block mains nowadays unless they have a current order from leadership.

For more than 2 years, the effectiveness of the DoIA was one of the best in the site. IA used to work perfectly with almost not being able to be combative at all. Never was the idea of being as combative as GSD, as IA, even brought into question. IA were banned from fighting SCP breaches, CI raids, D-class outbreaks, and more.

Only now that they've gotten a taste of that, and it's being impacted, have complaints started arising. As others said, there are a plethora of combatives onsite. ISD does not need to be their own full combative regiment to enforce the law. The fact that they are dying because they would rather engage in a shootout themselves, rather than call upon the 20+ combatives waiting for something to do, is entirely their fault.

When I first joined the server, the problem of "GSD being in D-block" was almost nonexistent. Nowadays, GSD doesn't bother helping in D-block because they see 4 disguised ISD in there. ISD is not needed in any combative areas unless performing an arrest or called upon. The fact that cadets are not getting experience in D-block airlock and catwalk because ISD is taking over their job is a huge, and still growing, issue. Unless Captains+ are there to tell the ISD to essentially "fuck off" and let GSD do their job, this isn't gonna stop. And sure this can be fixed in character, but if ISD wasn't given the same combativeness as GSD, they wouldn't be taking our jobs.

ISD isn't "GSD but with more power", but the increased combativeness given to them makes more and more agents think of it as this. If more ISD resources were poured into actually maintaining the Legal Codex, instead of storming airlock like a horde of GSD cadets, a lot less minging would occur.

 

[Zen]

sorry im late chat

Way too many ISD just become D-block mains nowadays unless they have a current order from leadership.

For more than 2 years, the effectiveness of the DoIA was one of the best in the site. IA used to work perfectly with almost not being able to be combative at all. Never was the idea of being as combative as GSD, as IA, even brought into question. IA were banned from fighting SCP breaches, CI raids, D-class outbreaks, and more.

Only now that they've gotten a taste of that, and it's being impacted, have complaints started arising. As others said, there are a plethora of combatives onsite. ISD does not need to be their own full combative regiment to enforce the law. The fact that they are dying because they would rather engage in a shootout themselves, rather than call upon the 20+ combatives waiting for something to do, is entirely their fault.

When I first joined the server, the problem of "GSD being in D-block" was almost nonexistent. Nowadays, GSD doesn't bother helping in D-block because they see 4 disguised ISD in there. ISD is not needed in any combative areas unless performing an arrest or called upon. The fact that cadets are not getting experience in D-block airlock and catwalk because ISD is taking over their job is a huge, and still growing, issue. Unless Captains+ are there to tell the ISD to essentially "fuck off" and let GSD do their job, this isn't gonna stop. And sure this can be fixed in character, but if ISD wasn't given the same combativeness as GSD, they wouldn't be taking our jobs.

ISD isn't "GSD but with more power", but the increased combativeness given to them makes more and more agents think of it as this. If more ISD resources were poured into actually maintaining the Legal Codex, instead of storming airlock like a horde of GSD cadets, a lot less minging would occur.

I can tell you from experience that IA absolutely wasn't just fine prior to becoming properly combative. It was a major issue that we ran into all of the time, partly because nobody understood the rule and partly because it made no actual sense - it just led us to keep getting told we couldn't do random shit or having players complaining at us for it. You've also fallen into it here: IA was already allowed to deal with code 2s, people just couldn't read and thought they couldn't - they were only ever banned specifically from seeking out combat with raids and breaches, and were allowed to seek combat otherwise.

 

[Advil Smith]

sorry im late chat

Way too many ISD just become D-block mains nowadays unless they have a current order from leadership.

For more than 2 years, the effectiveness of the DoIA was one of the best in the site. IA used to work perfectly with almost not being able to be combative at all. Never was the idea of being as combative as GSD, as IA, even brought into question. IA were banned from fighting SCP breaches, CI raids, D-class outbreaks, and more.

Only now that they've gotten a taste of that, and it's being impacted, have complaints started arising. As others said, there are a plethora of combatives onsite. ISD does not need to be their own full combative regiment to enforce the law. The fact that they are dying because they would rather engage in a shootout themselves, rather than call upon the 20+ combatives waiting for something to do, is entirely their fault.

When I first joined the server, the problem of "GSD being in D-block" was almost nonexistent. Nowadays, GSD doesn't bother helping in D-block because they see 4 disguised ISD in there. ISD is not needed in any combative areas unless performing an arrest or called upon. The fact that cadets are not getting experience in D-block airlock and catwalk because ISD is taking over their job is a huge, and still growing, issue. Unless Captains+ are there to tell the ISD to essentially "fuck off" and let GSD do their job, this isn't gonna stop. And sure this can be fixed in character, but if ISD wasn't given the same combativeness as GSD, they wouldn't be taking our jobs.

ISD isn't "GSD but with more power", but the increased combativeness given to them makes more and more agents think of it as this. If more ISD resources were poured into actually maintaining the Legal Codex, instead of storming airlock like a horde of GSD cadets, a lot less minging would occur.

I would love it if we didn't have to do that but D block is low staff alot..... if d block was fully staffed all the time then we would not need to help out. We are often called to help out by GSD leadership also. I don't want to prioritize combative actions as that isn't our job but when d block isn't staffed we have to do that sadly....

 

[Speff]

You've also fallen into it here: IA was already allowed to deal with code 2s, people just couldn't read and thought they couldn't - they were only ever banned specifically from seeking out combat with raids and breaches, and were allowed to seek combat otherwise.

Not sure where you could've possibly got this from, because unless killing D-class pertains to their investigation, if was quite clearly banned.

"Internal Affairs Department (May not actively seek out combat; May only be combative if it'll assist in arrests and investigations)."

Why would ISD be allowed to help out in fighting D-class but not raids and breaches lmfao. They're all combative jobs.

 

[Zen]

Not sure where you could've possibly got this from, because unless killing D-class pertains to their investigation, if was quite clearly banned.

"Internal Affairs Department (May not actively seek out combat; May only be combative if it'll assist in arrests and investigations)."

Why would ISD be allowed to help out in fighting D-class but not raids and breaches lmfao. They're all combative jobs.

I don't know where you got that quote, but the rules used to say "Internal Affairs Department (May not actively seek out combat in relation to raids and breaches)".

 

[Speff]

I don't know where you got that quote, but the rules used to say "Internal Affairs Department (May not actively seek out combat in relation to raids and breaches)".

Discord - Group Chat That’s All Fun & Games

Discord is great for playing games and chilling with friends, or even building a worldwide community. Customize your own space to talk, play, and hang out.

discord.com

Your quote was only put in effect in 2024, much later than the time period I was talking about.

 

[Zen]

Discord - Group Chat That’s All Fun & Games

Discord is great for playing games and chilling with friends, or even building a worldwide community. Customize your own space to talk, play, and hang out.

discord.com

Your quote was only put in effect in 2024, much later than the time period I was talking about.

I only started playing at the end of 2023 and didn't get involved in IA until later. All I can tell you is that the non-combative rules even with the later change never made sense and only caused problems. Most of the server couldn't read so they somehow understood it to mean they were essentially completely non-combative (including a lot of staff), and it just meant there were a load of situations where it'd get in the way because e.g. we were supposed to be combative and protect non-combative site staff, but then we also had a load of borderline situations where it was just "is this technically seeking out combat with a breach" because you were e.g. trying to fight of 682 to get some non-combatives away safely.

CN players' inability to read was also a huge issue. We'd get people complaining the moment that we pulled a gun on them because "you're semi-combative, you can only defend yourself" or whatever bullshit they'd come up with, and half the time staff would say the same thing.


Regardless - the way it applies to this thread is simple: ISD is supposed to protect non-combatives and arrest people up to and including:

• GSD
• MTF members
• AO members
• Site Administration

If you give them barely any armour, then they're just going to get slaughtered the moment any of the people they're trying to arrest try to resist, and if e.g. they're holding PW during a breach, they're not going to provide any protection to the non-combatives when they have barely more armour than them. There's a reason they complained about a lack of armoury for ages and it's not because they didn't have weapons - it's because they needed more armour than they spawned with, and so they'd have to go to SS every time they spawned and it was just a huge waste of time. Making it so they can't get more armour is the opposite of the solution here.

 

[DasPookieBear]

I would love it if we didn't have to do that but D block is low staff alot..... if d block was fully staffed all the time then we would not need to help out. We are often called to help out by GSD leadership also. I don't want to prioritize combative actions as that isn't our job but when d block isn't staffed we have to do that sadly....

I'm not sure who is requesting you. I've certainly never seen ISD asked to help in d-block literally ever. I've seen ISD called to dblock to arrest people? If thats what you mean. SOMETIMES durring EXTREMELY low pop i've seen them requested for a sweep. The only people I've ever seen asked/requested including during my own time as captain were combat medics and MFT. ISD is just always in D-block anyway cause its the easiest place for them to farm for arrests. Lots of downtime waiting for dbois, researchers, or other GSD. Lots of people try to breach d-bois including chefs, scps, janitors, techies, trainees, and jr researchers. You guys are in there all the time cause its the best opportunity for you to find someone being stupid. Its not because yall were asked. In fact 96 times out of 100 I've seen the opposite. People telling ISD to leave cause they are disrupting the flow or just disrupting things in general. Cause a lot of times people don't understand that ISD get the name. They break character and go. "Uh Sarge. This guy has my same name?!" Resulting in LOOC talks and other things explaining the situation. D-block is where 90% of people go after being a dclass. They jump into Cadet or something else but return to dblock cause its familiar. +its always going to be the most populated area of the map.

@Zen "If you give them barely any armour, then they're just going to get slaughtered the moment any of the people they're trying to arrest try to resist"
Report them for RDM Keep doing it and keep track of your tickets. Put it in a change request OR Request backup if you keep running into a wall of bullets. We have a radio system now so teamspeak isn't even needed. It would take 0 effort to be like. "Approaching a techie with a gun outside Medbay." He starts running. "Requesting Backup to Medbay, running to LCZ." "Going in to arre-HES SHOOTING"

You guys have all the tools necessary to combat anything you NEED to combat.