Denied New custom comms channels (/mtf and /mtf-co)

This suggestion has been denied and will not receive development.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Second

Second

Civil Gamers Expert
One Year Club Two Year Club Community Engager Conversation Starter
Oct 27, 2022
755
221
91
Las Vegas, NV
www.theseconddiarykeeper.com
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Adds the following comms channels:
+ /mtf - Visible by MTF Alpha-1, MTF Omega-1, MTF Epsilon-11, MTF Nu-7, Emergency Response Team, Site Administration, Assistants, and Site Command.

+ /mtf-co - Visible by MTF Alpha-1 Officer/Commander, MTF Omega-1 Officer/Commander, MTF Nu-7 Officer/Commander, MTF Epsilon-11 Officer/Commander, Site Administration, Assistants, and Site Command.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
I don't believe so, N/A

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
+ Will make coordination between MTF branches easier while being able to focus on a set communication channel and not clutter other CL3 comms.
+ QoL for MTF regiments to organize cross trainings, raids on CI/GOC, or other events that would need clear communication.
+ Allows for MTF COs to discuss matters over comms without including their entire regiment (Specifically for O-1 and A-1, as all jobs are technically CL4).

Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
- Might complicate some things, but only effects a small portion of the server (MTF/SA)

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
The closed comms system is a godsend, but I always felt that a joint-MTF channel should have come out with sop-c and isd-c. It just makes sense, seeing as MTFs should have clear communication in RP and even in an OOC sense helps coordinate events or strategize easier.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 5 Downvote
Emilia Foddg

Emilia Foddg

CG Diamond VIP
Donator
One Year Club Community Engager Conversation Starter Chemical Weaponry
Jul 15, 2023
1,399
320
41
UK
God fucking dammit you beat me to the punch, why are you like this, US players?

Ok, ok since we're gonna go with this I'm gonna throw my idea out in here now.

We should combine these because we are dealing with the some topic and your suggestion makes what I had planned stronger - And vice versa. Anyway, here's this:

My Suggested Additions To The Server:​

The following comms channels:
  • [K/18/AP0] with the command /K18 - Visible to all Foundation CL3+ & all GOC.
  • [U/73/NEU] with the command /U73 - Visible to all CI CL2+ & all GOC.
(however, that's UK-only, you could arrange something different for US, i have specific reasons for wanting to add these, will elaborate)

Previous Relevant Suggestions:​

Green Snake's "Make the comms commands shorter," accepted.
Irrelevant to the suggestion, but worth mentioning since it's about comms.

Vxnt's suggestion for an assistants-only comms channel, denied.
Denial reason -
because, although this seems like a small change, this would basically lead to the server to start seperating by having all these comms added. We're currently avoiding adding even more comms, as we believe the current ones we have is enough, to keep things simple aswell.
Click to expand...
We're not asking for assistant-specific comms, plus hard disagree to the denial reason, more on that later.

"The Composer"s suggestion to add specific comms for inter-GOI communication, denied.
Denial reason -
It would overcomplicate comms and would be to many commands.
Click to expand...
Directly relevant to both what Second wants and what I want, hard disagree on this too, more on that later.

Benefits:​

  • Collapses GOCs wacky non-memorable secure comms frequency codes into something more simple and memorable

  • Prevents metagaming ala Composer's suggestion

  • Less chat clutter for people that normally wouldn't be able to see those, especially since we can't adjust the fucking height of the chat box???

Drawbacks:​

  • More comms to add

  • People don't get to spectate the exchange OOC and deprives them of entertainment, especially since this reduces general OC activity and might make it seem deader

  • CI could use one, but IDK what to call it

  • K/18/AP0 & U/73/NEU are specifically UK only thingies and either something would have to be worked out for US or just have US implement this too, to be fair they do look cool and are more immersive

Ok so, I've got that out of the way.

I'll say what I think about your suggestion in a moment, I do like it - Just let me talk about K/18/AP0 and U/73/NEU first - Obviously again, these are UK things that UK GOC came up with. I agree it's not fair to either just have them on one server and not the other - Or force US to adopt this too (unless US like them, in which case sure, we can push for it together, ayaya). I really would like to see these implemented as their own comms channel commands.

Ok, to what you're suggesting now. I do like it. I think some of the points I've said here also apply to yours. I'm of the firm belief that the benefits outweigh the negative, so +Major Support in that regard. Anyway, complications aside; I have one thing I would like to raise. And this is a big, big question for Content Team and I can't really rebut the denial reasons without an answer to this burning question of mine:

Do comms commands have to be configured for every single job?​

Which I have a feeling that might not be the case because you lose clearance comms when you lose your keycard, so it might actually be tied to your keycard. In any case - Uhhhh I forgot my train of thought. I think the point I was going to end up at is that if any of my assumptions here are correct, then this is probably not the most flexible system to iterate on in any capacity and I would honestly just suggest. at some point. tearing the current system down in favour of implementing a new one so that we can do more things with the comms system.

And since comms commands I'm fairly certain are a cross-server thing, all of what I've just said is relevant to everyone.
Geronimo said:
+Support

Too many times to count on my fingers the amount of times we'd announce a 008 breach on CL3 comms as L3 and then some L3 would use normal foundation comms to relay it.
Click to expand...
US skill issue, we have codewords on UK for this.
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: Sceptre
Emilia Foddg

Emilia Foddg

CG Diamond VIP
Donator
One Year Club Community Engager Conversation Starter Chemical Weaponry
Jul 15, 2023
1,399
320
41
UK
Second said:
I think a better alternative is to add an addendum to my original suggestion and allow ERT to see /mtf
Click to expand...
i thought of that - but then what about people that aren't in any MTF getting ERT and then seeing sensitive conversations that they can then metagame? like, ERT can randomly occur for any foundation job (yes, it's weighted based on combat level and whether or not you are in an MTF, but still).

that includes d-class.

also please consider my first post here, that would be really great since i can potentially get that suggestion out of my backlog
 
  • Haha
Reactions: "Onion"
Second

Second

Civil Gamers Expert
One Year Club Two Year Club Community Engager Conversation Starter
Oct 27, 2022
755
221
91
Las Vegas, NV
www.theseconddiarykeeper.com
Emilia Foddg said:
i thought of that - but then what about people that aren't in any MTF getting ERT and then seeing sensitive conversations that they can then metagame? like, ERT can randomly occur for any foundation job (yes, it's weighted based on combat level and whether or not you are in an MTF, but still).

that includes d-class.

also please consider my first post here, that would be really great since i can potentially get that suggestion out of my backlog
Click to expand...
As an ERT, you should be able to communicate with MTF personnel to effectively contain a breach. You are the last line of defense before a Nuke in most cases, you should be able to talk to your teammates, whether you are a member of an MTF or not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Emilia Foddg
"Onion"

"Onion"

Well-known Member
One Year Club Conversation Starter
Nov 20, 2022
216
34
41
in your walls
+support

/mtf would be easy. the CO one would be harder because it would have to go based on rank not job which is how comms works currently. So very much yes to the /mtf option but CO one is more optional since it would be harder to implement and is less necessary but would be nice if possible
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom