Denied Remove User Breach Votes (or at least limit them to 1)

[Robert "Tomato" Peterson]

I know this is going to get -supported to hell because the most vocal people are the ones not trying to RP but I don't care

[B]What does this suggestion change/add/remove:[/B]
This suggestion aims to either remove breach votes as a whole or limit them so that each
person who joins the server gets 1 breach vote per day and only one.

[B]Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):[/B]
1. Increase in actual RP for those of us who actually want to RP (Research)
2. Increase in the number of tests that can be done between breaches
3. This in turn gives Gensec / MTF more to do than just stand around at checkpoints or guard D block
4. Provides a boost to Research Moral as we no longer have to wait 4 days to do a test (yes this is an issue we are having).

[B]Possible Negatives of the suggestion:[/B]
1. People who main SCP's will not be able to breach as much

[B]Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:[/B]
Removal or sever limitation of the breach vote system will lead to an overall increase in moral for those who
want to research as we will actually be able to get tests done in a reasonable time instead of having to wait 4 hours each day for 4 days
just to do a test in HCZ.

 

[Coolioo]

From the perspective of someone who mainly plays as a researcher.

I do think that limiting everybody, regardless of VIP, to only one breach vote is reasonable. Controversial though and I can see why that wouldn't change. I think that breaches aren't necessarily as frequent as they were considering the recent changes, and with buffs to ERT they can better recontain.

- Increased average time between breaches in the schedule by 40%
- Removed one-slot breaches from breach queue schedule - all breaches will now be two/three SCPs.
- Average SCPs per breach changed from ~1.5 SCPs per breach currently to ~2.15 SCPs per breach in the new system, 40% increase
- Increased ERT health from 400 -> 600
- ERT now spawn with Scranton Reality Anchors

But, you need to bear in mind that although research RP is a core part of the server it's not the ONLY part of the server. People want to play as an SCP, as ERT, they want to play as E-11 and try to contain mass breaches, etc... Finding a balance is hard and people will probably always complain from one side of the foundation. You talk about a research moral boost, but that would come at a moral decrease for a big chunk of the server.

I don't know what it's like on the USA server, but on the UK server, I can get a decent amount of testing done, incl. in HCZ before a breach happens. Then I spend that time on documents. I think some of the numbers you're using are hyperbolic and don't reflect the actual waiting times, but as I said, different servers.

 

[Mirage]

-Neutral
As someone who rarely plays as SCPs I don’t think this would be needed with the most recent change where breaches take longer to happen, if this was suggested prior to that change then this would be nice but I feel like if this was accepted then people just wouldn’t play SCPs anymore.

 

[Filip McSpazz]

-Support
Breach queues already got lengthened by 40% also this was previously denied in #change votes on the discord

 

[Landon]

-support

 

[Lightsoulist]

No
-support

 

[ModernKiwi]

As a GenSec main on the UK server, I understand and partially agree with your sentiment to make changes that would allow more research RP.

I don't particularly agree with removing breach votes, however, what I have noticed when playing (especially at odd hours due to timezone) is when there is a high ratio of D-Class and SCPs to GenSec (primarily) and MTF the server can constantly be in a state of code 5 due to the inability for security to contain and stop SCPs from being breached again.

Possibly a better solution would be to find a balanced ratio limit so there cant be 15 GSD with only 1 D-Class or vice versa, although at the same time, this could cause issues with people not being able to play their main roles. This alternative solution could be implemented when server pop is below a threshold (eg 30).

Again, I like what you're trying to do, just think there could be a better solution.

 

[RoxieCat2003]

-Support
No

 

[Saphira Harlow]

-Support
No

 

["Darkstar"]

-support
no

 

[Rushi]

Suggestion Denied

---

Hi @Robert "Tomato" Peterson,

Thanks for taking the time to make a server suggestion.

The Content Team has chosen to deny your suggestion because we do not plan on removing breach votes, however, we will be taking a look at this issue.

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