Make the max slots per OSA and ECA 3 on both servers.

[Cade Valentine]

What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
This suggestion would have the team change the max slots in VJobs to 3 per each Assistant job on the servers.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
I'm pretty confident this has been suggested before, but context has changed and thus that's why I'd like to try making the suggestion again.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
Should eliminate 99% of all cases where Assistants are queuing just for a chance to get on their role
Makes it even easier for O5 to delegate tasks as there are more people available to work with
QoL as it reduces complaints on the subject substantially and gives people more access to the limited slot.

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
Too easy to be on the role, according to some
Removes the 2:1 ratio of O5 to Assistant on the Server

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
Gonna be honest, with how the servers have developed, I think this is just common sense. As Site Command continues to move in a direction of focusing on overarching RP Leadership, which in turn means that OSAs also need to be available so that menial task delegation can be done in a more efficient way, having more potential slots is nothing but a boon for both branches.

The 2:1 ratio actually is irrelevant imo too - it's nothing to do with how many O5 or Ethics Members each Assistant can help, it's the volume of tasks. Issues on the Site tend to flare up all at once, and sometimes two Assistants isn't enough, and bottlenecking occurs. Having more Assistants eases the likeliness of that bottleneck, which DRASTICALLY eases some very fixable pressure on SC and lets them do their job better and spend their time on the Server more efficiently.

This is a small change but a massive, MASSIVE QoL in my opinion and I'd be greatly appreciative of any approval. The context that changed it is to do with how many Assistants I see that are on who play the slot for quite some time. Many Assistants are beginning to actively struggle to find room to flag on to the role and I want that to stop and not be a worry for them.

 

[Emilia Foddg]

I see we are doing this one again.

A time-honoured tradition that never fades away. A brick wall that never falters, no matter what or how much you throw at it.

I once waded into this debate. Never again. There can be no agreement made. The community will always want more job slots for assistants in some form. Content will always tell you, no - For the same reasons. No compromise appears to be possible. This friction will remain eternal, ever standing the test of time, again and again.

I'm tired.
==No Vote
Nevermind, I just had another idea that might work, so I'll put it forward and see if it's liked.

 

[Shaunpai]

View attachment 24767
I see we are doing this one again.

A time-honoured tradition that never fades away. A brick wall that never falters, no matter what or how much you throw at it.

I once waded into this debate. Never again. There can be no agreement made. The community will always want more job slots for assistants in some form. Content will always tell you, no - For the same reasons. No compromise appears to be possible. This friction will remain eternal, ever standing the test of time, again and again.

I'm tired.
==No Vote
Nevermind, I just had another idea that might work, so I'll put it forward and see if it's liked.

It’s important to note that if you really believe Content’s Decision on a suggestion should really be reconsidered, you can get the decision elevated to a Superadmin or NL

 

[Michael Dzhetnikov]

remove site command altogether

 

[Scopes]

+Support

Honestly after the removal of 'Legacy' Assistants such as being past Site Command It would be amazing to see the slots changed to higher numbers. It would benefit Site Command overall and can overall boost roleplay or certain orders that the Assistants, Site Command and AO can work together. I hope SSL/NL can look into this and change their opinions.

 

[Luciferluxu]

+ Support

This is is a very needed change, and this is my POV on the change: There has been a lot of conflict with OSA's fighting for their slot and at this point they need to wait in a line for that said slot. If this change were to happen it would reduce the amount of fighting for OSA slots and arguing as a whole.

 

[Kayla]

+Support
So many times people are waiting to get on the slots to do RP, and staff say 'You can ask to be flagged on' but then refuse and state 'ask someone to flag off' but a lot of Assistant's do not have other roles to flag onto. Meaning that RP with the people that need those specific Assistants has to be halted for anywhere between an hour to like 6 hours. It doesn't just affect the people wanting to play Assistant. It affects the people that are having RP with specific assistants and need them online to progress in their RP also. I can recall so many times that someones RP has ended up having to end prematurely with no actual ending because the slot has been unavailable.

 

[Cade Valentine]

"Issues on the Site tend to flare up all at once, and sometimes two Assistants isn't enough, and bottlenecking occurs. Having more Assistants eases the likeliness of that bottleneck, which DRASTICALLY eases some very fixable pressure on SC and lets them do their job better and spend their time on the Server more efficiently."

Site Administration exist for this though? They should be your bottleneck/filter not the OSAs or ECAs, expanding the assistant slots is actually incredibly detrimental to the health of Site Administration as a whole. I do get why you want it Cade, I just don't think you are seeing the bigger picture here

-Support

This is something that I'd say holds weight if Site Admin was still the same as to when you were here, for sure. However, I have never stopped on my attempt to try and continue further differentiating SA from FCOM in their gameplay loop. Hell, yesterday with O5 relinquishing RSD control for example. The things that people on the Site need to go to us for are becoming very much *unique* to us at this point in terms of those issues actually requiring people to need us and not just trying to skip a rung in the ladder on the CoC and being told to piss off for it.

I fully get why this sounds more like a bad idea from your POV, but to me I think if SA want to continue flourishing, trying to use them as our delegates in this day and age ISN'T the play and they need to keep having more freedom from us, which in turn is where having the wish for a third assistant comes from.

 

[Rowling]

+Major support
Honestly make it 4, makes more sense, 4 O5 jobs so there should be 4 OSA slots

Let's also make it so there's 1 ECC, 6 ECMs, and 7 O5. :clueless:

+/- Honestly, I just don't see a big need for this, but I also don't see any harm in it.

 

['Clank']

+SUPPORT

This is sorely needed, one could even argue that we need 4 slots like Stone commented. OSAs have lots of RP potential andit needs to be explored.

I'd be mad enough to say that we need more O5 as well as ECMs.

No. This creates job bloat and defeats the purpose of CL5 roles

 

[Cain Morris]

If this gets accepted there is some bias floating around, however +support

 

[Neosis]

+Support
The ratio doesn't make sense at all..