Denied Give GOC General Job Disguise card / Give GMs the ability to use the !setjob command

[Ronin]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:

Give the UNGOC General a Disguise Kit and allow GMs to use the !setjob command

( Stuff talking about GOC will be in darker colours and GM will be in lighter colours )

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:

Not to my knowledge

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):

- Allows GMs to do events with non-staff players

- Gives GOC General more playability with the Kidnapping rules on surface

- Fits in with the general power dynamic of the UNGOC using underhanded tactics to win

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:

- Power imbalance with the UNGOC General job being stronger

- Potential for the abuse of the GM command

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:

I think that based on the fact that every other CL5 Job ( Minus Ambassador ) has a disguise kit then the General Job should be given it as well but I can see how this could ruffle some feathers

 

[Biscuits]

-Support
Ambassador and Attache should get it instead of GEN job.

(just use field op)

 

[cityismy]

CI counterpart gets disguise card so GOC should get it yes

 

[Starling6]

Give the UNGOC General a Disguise Kit and allow GMs to use the !setjob command

man do i have something to tell you...

i've been asking for this since i got GOC Lieutenant

 

[Bohemia]

- Support
(I don't think CI should get it either depending on a certain little rework that must take 5 billion years, if that change ever sees the light of day then +Support)
GOC also has like what, 12 disguise cards?
Also suggestion will be probably be struck down by zeus for 2 in 1

 

[checkraisefold]

-support
as someone who has used the job your loadout is already good enough. use field op instead or get good and dont get kidnapped fr

 

[Gizzmo]

-support
Doesn't need more disguise cards

 

[Geronimo]

- Support
In future, try avoid stacking two, completely unrelated suggestions with eachother, because it simply causes confusion.

 

[Boris Johnson]

-Support

 

[Zen]

+Support to GM one
-/~Support to GOC one

These are two completely different, unrelated suggestions, why are these in the same post?

 

[Niox]

Shouldve made this 2 suggestions

Either way GM one yes, GEN won no

Normally i wouldnt have any opposition to the GOC GEN getting a disguise card, but you guys have 11 disguise cards total. Compared to CI's 4, i dont think you need more.

 

[Emilia Foddg]

+Support

These are two completely different, unrelated suggestions, why are these in the same post?

disguising as a job and being set as a job are basically the same thing - if you, as an IA agent, disguise as a d-class, that means you are allowed to MRDM everyone with the d-class disguise. very common knowledge

disclaimer: do not do that

 

[Biscuits]

+Support

disguising as a job and being set as a job are basically the same thing - if you, as an IA agent, disguise as a d-class, that means you are allowed to MRDM everyone with the d-class disguise. very common knowledge

disclaimer: do not do that

im going to mrdm

 

[Ronin]

- Support
In future, try avoid stacking two, completely unrelated suggestions with eachother, because it simply causes confusion.

I was told to make both suggestions by SL when I asked for their opinions on it and I cannot be asked waiting the cooldown

 

["Blackout"]

+Support

GOC's commander job is the only CL5 without a disguise card. There are no downsides to adding it, and as RP leaders, it should be entrusted in us to not abuse the disguise card.

 

[Witch]

+ Support

I'll be deadass, I'd happily take away half or even 3/4's of field op to add a disguise card to GEN and Ambassador.

 

["Blackout"]

- Support
(I don't think CI should get it either depending on a certain little rework that must take 5 billion years, if that change ever sees the light of day then +Support)
GOC also has like what, 12 disguise cards?
Also suggestion will be probably be struck down by zeus for 2 in 1

I was curious on the number like you were. Turns out, CI has the least amount lmfao

GOC - 11
Foundation - 15 or 51 depending on how you look at combative persons
CI - 4

Spoiler: Data

GOC
8 - Field Operative (Spy)
3 - Assessment Team (Spy)
Total: 11 Disguise Cards

Foundation
Nu7
0 - Disguise Cards

Site Affairs
5 - IA Agent
5 - IA Operative
4 - IA Ambassador
2 - Director of IA

5 - DEA Senior Agent
4 - DEA Special Agent
4 - DEA Manager
2 - DEA Directors

Site Administration/Command
2 - ECA
3 - ECM
1 - ECC
4 - 05 Council
2 - OA

O-1 & A-1
4 - O-1 SPC
4 - A-1 SPC

Total w/o non-surface combatives: 15 Disguise Cards
Total w/ non-surface combatives everything: 51 Disguise Cards

CI
2 - Deep Cover
2 - Commander
Total: 4 Disguise Cards

 

[Prplex]

GMs cant !setjob??

 

[Arron 'Spectre' Shepard]

Suggestion Denied​

---

Hi @Ronin ,

Thanks for taking the time to make a server suggestion.
The Content Team has chosen to deny your suggestion due to the following reasons.

We are currently looking at the functionality of disguise cards. If a disguise card is absolutely necessary for a specific operation please use another job available for the time being. Allowing GMs to !setjob has also been denied.

Your suggestion will now be locked and marked as denied.​