Jump to content

crofty

Junior Event Master
  • Content Count

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by crofty

  1. might not be army but add naval guards already lol

    change DT's role from guarding BSD, cause II is such an insignificant part of the Bridge area, its literally just a spawn point for DT and II. all that Intelligence RP seems to end up in COMPNOR, whereas the Operations Deck is always in use

    It also makes it IMPOSSIBLE for EM's to get EC's even close to the Bridge as DT just bodyblock that doorway and have their cloak vision. I can't remember the last time EC's got to the bridge and had some sort of RP. Last time it happened EC's held Navy hostage and DT didnt listen to negotiations attempts they just bum rushed it and sprayed at the EC's

     

    • Thinking 2
  2. 1 minute ago, Tonberry said:

    Massive +1 for Karnivool, easily my favourite band with only clean vocals (not counting the first couple of lines of The Refusal, the last scream of Lifelike, or the bit in the middle of featherweight)

    Fav metal bands apart from 'Vool; Between the Buried and Me, TesseracT, Gojira, Meshuggah, Caligula's Horse, Opeth, The Faceless, Spawn of Possession, Nile, Necrophagist, Job for a Cowboy, Mr Bungle, Alluvial, King Crimson, mainly nerd prog metal shit

    Also a big fan of countless artists in the classic rock, metal, blues, jazz, reggae, 90's rap, 80's aussie pub rock, alt, punk, 60s-80s pop, prog, grunge, funk, goth, new wave, classical and folk rock genres.  Anything with interesting composition really

    Prog metal :O
    i love gojira (fav song The Art of Dying) and meshuggah (fav song War)

    i know like two opeth songs but i love em (the lotus eater and windowpane)

    • Upvote 1
  3. 25 minutes ago, Setsuna said:

    just do add on, at the same time, ships will be spawned against the wishes of ems during events and it would all get a little messy. 

    didnt think of that, good argument

    • Agree 1
  4. Hello Everyone,

    A week ago at the CO meeting, it was stated that Engineers now have priority with Fortifications and I have seen a lot of people not knowing exactly what the guidelines are. Here are the propositions that have been approved, copy pasted straight from the doc.

    • All Fortification Designs (OOC Dupes) must be Approved by an Engineer of Clearance Level 2+ before being used (Death Trooper BSD Dupe and All COMPNOR Dupes are excluded). Engineers will mark down what Designs have been granted.

    • Engineer Fortification Designs take Priority over designs made by non-Engineers to avoid conflict and distraction from the situation. An Engineer may use the non-Engineer designed fortification if they wish.

    • If someone wishes to use their own Fortification, they are required to get permission from Engineers (Similar to AHC granting usage of specialist equipment).

    Another thing not said here are that If an Engineer builds a fortification/Sec Checkpoint dupe for your Regiment, it will not be marked as approved as we built it ourselves.

     

    Security Checkpoints

    These were not discussed here, but the definition of a Fortification, according to Oxford is "a defensive wall or other reinforcement built to strengthen a place against attack."

    A Security Checkpoint is classified as a fortification in that sense, as it is a reinforcement built to strengthen a place against an attack. For example, if a Rebel Spy tried to infiltrate the Mess Hall but SK set a Checkpoint up on third floor outside Railings, that would be a Fortification as it is defending the ship against an attack.

    Although Security do have Jurisdiction on Security Checkpoints and placing them as they wish, they must use an approved Design, whether it was designed by another Engineer or a design approved by an Engineer, as it falls under the category of "Fortification."

    Reminder this isn't just so the Engineers can be power-hungry, It is for Realism as it is not realistic for someone who isn't an Engineer to just be able to build a Fortification and use it as they wish as they do not have the Skills and Knowledge that an Engineer would have In Character and it is not their role to build. All designs should get approved unless there is a major design flaw etc.

    Thank you for Reading :D

    • Poggers 1
  5. Pros: 80% of staff tickets won't be requesting for vehicles (that's just an estimate)

    ISC aren't waiting for the ticket to be claimed, they can instantly deploy

    Tracks ISC Budget

    Configured to only have vehicles used by ISC (TIE's, Lambda etc. No non Empire Vehicles)

     

    Cons: Can be abused (like Engineer Tools)

     

    Personally I think this is a good idea, but should only be given to CL2's (like how Engineers get Fort Tablet at CL2) and preventative measures should be added to minimise abusing

    maybe add a loading screen for pulling out the ship (Pulling Ship out of Storage...) for a bit more realism instead of spawning it in like a prop

    • Agree 1
  6. 35 minutes ago, Twist said:

    Generals and other VIP's who have the correct clearance or a valid reason are able take 2 guards up to the bridge, if they try and take more than that we stop them you can ask @Misahu before he got Vader. Vader's Fist have a thing with navy where they are able to guard the BOD and then BSD if we request them to or aren't avaliable.

     

    32 minutes ago, Echo said:

    A document was written up a while ago where it was stated that Vader's Fist were allowed to guard and assist guarding BSD or just go up to bridge if BSD is already guarded.

    I didn't know that, fair enough

    • Like 1
  7. 4 minutes ago, Twist said:

    I can assure you that if a newish member of the community asked to be set to a naval guard for no reason they wouldn't be set.

    As an EM, I would only set people who I know won't abuse. If that 'newish' person I have seen RP properly around the ship, I would set them, but you do raise the good point that you shouldn't set someone as an EC who's role can be done by others.

    Instead of setting Roys as a Naval Guard, I could set him as a role that would genuinely give RP to Himself and Navy without getting in the way of another regiment's role, giving him access to the Bridge. Maybe he could be a Navy Crewman transferring from another ISD, getting taught how to operate consoles

    Or a Mess Hall Officer, delivering food up to the Bridge. 

    Like I said, I'd set anyone who I can trust not to abuse their role. And if they do abuse? BLACKLIST. 

     

    6 minutes ago, Twist said:

     Is this not literally a description of favouritism though?

    Roys isn't the only person who goes on the bridge btw. Whenever a general goes up there, usually VF and others go aswell, when half of them wouldn't even have access to the BSD. A lot of others I can't name off the top of my head go up there too. But as DT yourself, wouldn't you stop them?

    I don't like the word favouritism in this sense as it makes it seem like just picking Roys over someone else to go on the bridge because Roys was the old ENG CO. It isn't as much favouritism as it is letting a highly decorated ex-Navy member who has helped the branch out a TON get special access to a restricted area because they are trustworthy and Respected upon by basically all of NHC. If someone leaves a regiment, they don't get PK'd. If someone like Radcop were to resign as Thrawn and become a CL3 in ST, I would still show respect for him. It might be 'letting your friends in on the bridge' but IC, NHC can grant that to anyone as they have jurisdiction. There are worse cases of favouritism but this one was the most obvious to me.

    But in the end its not like he ruins anyones RP, like I said, he literally just AFK's up there anyway.

  8. 16 minutes ago, Lister said:

    i 100% agree with the ranks meaning nothing part i was having this same chat with proxy last night about how they mean nothing you demote somone as punishment and it literally means nothing because they just get promoted straight back up every time they can be they will be

    i disagree crofty i dont think the demotions really did much for that situation seeing as the selected trooper never learnt and eventually it reached the point where he had to be removed permanently from the regiment 

    Punishments like demotions only really work when the person getting punished see what is going on as a punshemt for certain actions and not a personal attack 

     

    sorry about this mess of a comment 

    punishments are iffy because the same punishment doesnt work universally. Some players dont learn when demoted so they need to be kicked. 

  9. Ok i'm gonna make a proper argument instead of the half ass one i made before cause people think others are just mass downvoting.

     

    9 hours ago, Mongo said:

    Special Permissions / Favouritism.
    In my honest opinion this has been happening a lot lately, it's a serious in character issue which extends to out of character reasons. For instance, you're friends with someone out of character who is a member of Imperial High Command thus you are allowed special access into places you normally wouldn't. This shouldn't happen for a number of reasons and it breaks serious immersion to constantly allow your 'best friends' into places for no other reason than to hang out with them.
    In the past we have had issues like this which have been dealt with by management, my best example of this was Hammer with his 'IHC Guards' Stormtroopers who selected by IHC wore a red pauldron and were allowed to assume the role of a 996th/ Personal IHC guard. With that Hammer also allowed them to enter IHC at any point with a number of other benefits, as you can tell this was obviously retracted as it was clear preferential treatment. If people wish to gain access to certain areas and certain regimental duties they would normally join a regiment that conducts that as apart of their regimental duties rather than seek out the special treatment and bypass everything on the whim that you're best mates with a high ranking officer.

    When it has happened it has been dealt with. When Roys RP'd as a Naval Guard not too long ago, the person who would give him guard equipment ended up getting punished. Roys is still seen on the bridge nowadays, but it's not really a favouritism thing as he was the ENG CO for a while and is someone who is highly respected in the Navy Branch. That point may be invalid as he doesnt have the clearance but if someone of CL4/CL5 grants him permission on the bridge then it should be allowed. He usually just afk's anyway its not like hes RPing out of his regiment. But then again, an EM could just set up someone as a Passive EC and RP as a guard. That would be allowed, so avoiding something like the situation with hammer is very easy.

     

    9 hours ago, Mongo said:

    Metagaming.
    Moving on this appears to be a serious issue that never gets punished with almost all cases being forgotten or instantly voided, staff take precautions to 'prevent metagaming' but never actually punish anyone for doing so; Such as troopers using their context menu as a way to spot cloaked people, Members of Regiments metagaming comms to evade trouble; a clear example I have of this which I would name any names, but we'll just say a certain member of navy allowed a Mastiff on the bridge and then completely lied in character about a reasoning why it was let up. All of Death troopers were guarding the BSD and up comes a dog lagging behind the checkpoint, Shock apologised and the Navy Member came down and after a brief conversation with shock simply implied that "The dog is allowed on the bridge whenever it wants" after which led the dog up on the bridge unleashed and without proper training to handle said dog. when questioned about why a dog was on the bridge in a private communications channel then said navy member metagamed DT comms and claimed he was using the mastiff as a means for a contraband check to the Shock members. None of this exchange happened on the bridge in between the dog being led up and the private regimental comms. The Navy member in question knows fully well who they are. but for their own sake I wont name them.  With the Context Menu it's happened a lot, not too long ago we were on titan base rotation and there was cloaked hostiles in the base, a Patrol of Skytroopers jumped down from the top stories and instantly began shooting at a completely random corner of the hallway; Yes there was a cloaked person there, I had my thermals on, however according to another DT at the time who didn't have their thermals enabled there  was no flicker or movement before they started shooting.

    Probably the only point i found that i can strongly agree with imo.

    I think i remember one instance where SK (i think) randomly sprayed me in a corner, but having Cloaked EC's in general is a pain when theres mass amounts of DT and INQ running around third floor/BSD.

    That Navy situation with the Massiff, comms should never be metagamed and is usually pulled up on anyway.

     

    9 hours ago, Mongo said:

    Promotions/Demotions
    Personally I think that Promotions are handed out too easily, there is barely any challenge or satisfaction for troopers to gain a promotion, it seems now that you wait your eligible days and instantly get a promotion in most army regiments, I haven't seen anyone actively get demoted in a long time with the only exception being a few Sky Troopers.
    I think a lot of punishments are completely avoided on the server and everything is just wiped under the rug too easily nowadays with everyone being too light hearted. It also seems that regiments that would normally conduct investigations : ISB being the main one  don't really take much action against investigating into certain officials have it be ; Imperial High Command, Regimental CO's ect. With that being said we've gotten to the point were a lot of hierarchy is backed up and completely blocked of the result of troopers being promoted on the day as well as the fact that most acts that would warrant a demotion don't as most of the time the regimental co sweeps it under the rug and no further investigation is conducted against the trooper and or the CO for their actions.

    Actually now that i reread the post, i can kinda understand the Promotion argument. Army Regiments do tend to promote quicker (with some exclusions, such as SK and i think SKY), In Engineers, we promote for good work. When certain members spawned in deathstar posters, we punished them accordingly. One of them was a WOI Eq and he was doing a good job apart from the incident so Delta and I decided to Delay his promotion and it ended up being like 3 weeks past his eligible promotion before he got promoted.

    With Demotions, They aren't the only form of punishment. Although can be effective, should only be handed out to someone who isn't doing too good in the regiment in general and isnt improving, like the SKY trooper situation. 

    Hierarchy is backed up occasionally, I can only see instances of it in regiments like SK (i think) and the whole Navy Branch. This is because those high ranking slots (CL3+) Are held by people who are active and doing good in their regiment. ENG only have 3 CL3/4 Slots at the moment and they are filled by Delta (CO), Me (2IC) and Jesse who just reached CL3 Hierarchy in my regiment is already backed up from 2 regimental commanders and a new officer. ISC has a mid to high turnover rate and the pilots who stay have reached those high CL2/3 ranks, backing up the Hierarchy. I can't really think of an army regiment whos hierarchy has been clogged with people who have just been promoted on their day. If you could provide examples, it would help.

     

    10 hours ago, Mongo said:

    Perma Kills/PKs

    These are quite a rare sighting now a days, unfortunately they only seem to occur on mingey troopers that only just join the server who in my eyes do some of the more lesser acts compared to others that are still playing characters with a lot of backlash and incompetence among other things on their record. It seems to me overall that people get off with a lot surviving with nothing but a slap on their wrists, this has happened a lot and can generally be the cause of the factor when someone royally fucks up to the point of being nearly executed they call in their commander or higher officers to deal with their situation and save their skin. 

    I stated this before, PK's are an extreme form of punishment and should be handed out to people who you would think actually get killed for their actions. Example, Treason or Intentionally flicking the Reactor switch for "fun". If someone has just been doing really bad in a regiment, then they should be kicked. If you get kicked from your regiment, you save at least some of your rank and don't think that your whole time in that regiment was a waste of time. If you get PK'd, then the whole time you spent in a regiment was a waste of time. This may lead to the player leaving the server because they don't wanna waste anymore time on the server or they might join a regiment which would be known for their quick promotions, just so they can reach a higher rank quicker.

     

    Honestly most of this post seems to be pointing at powerplaying, but i'm not gonna discuss that here.

  10. 18 minutes ago, Mongo said:

    Would disagree, it roots out the defective ones as well, just a few weeks ago Darth Vader pked someone for calling him a pervert.

    kicking someone from a regiment also roots out defective troopers. Im sorry but PK's make people think that all the time and effort they put into a reg has just gone to waste and their time in that reg was just a waste of time.

  11. Neutral

    I don't know too much about you personally, and your app could use a bit more detail, although with the information you give some of it is very straightforward and understandable, like with what you would do as moderator, you give a short and sweet explanation on what you would do, which is good.

    • Upvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...