What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Allowing various roles (specifically security and higher-ranking personnel) to credit Technicians, Engineers, Tech Experts, and Chefs for fixing various key components in the facility, or cooking meals for site staff respectively. Possible situations where a Tech Expert has to roam HCZ with an E-11 fixing containment doors, or a Chef making high-stat meals for a Captain or Site Advisor.
This change would also affect the possible "Senior Tech Expert" role or any other high-clearance Site Staff roles introduced in the future.
Higher-level Site Staff (such as Senior Tech) or other Site-Issue related roles could confirm the credit, or it could be done automatically due to it normally being handed out by an E11 or other position requiring tryouts (minus Chef).
Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
Nothing similar has been suggested before on the forums, to my knowledge.
Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
The Site Staff roles (minus Chef) are relatively used for minging not only due to their low amount of help during normal non-emergency procedures, but also simply because they have no incentive to play outside of having CL2 access (Tech Expert). This change might possibly add greater incentive to seek out tasks or play the job in order to get much more Support XP, as well as encourage roleplay between higher-level jobs and Site Staff or with the individual themselves.
One major issue with using Site Staff as support is that most doors auto-fix themselves after 30 minutes (from what I've heard/seen). This means that if all SCPs have been recontained, a majority of the XP that could be gained from repairing doors is lost due to Techs not being allowed to roam HCZ in-character.
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
The major issue with this change is that while most positions have a Senior to approve credits, the Site Staff role doesn't necessarily have a role to approve. A very small negative from this situation may arise from players falsely crediting their friends. Players might also use the crediting feature to purposefully cause issues, like destroying cameras then requesting credit for fixing them.
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
There are relatively small amounts of negatives for this change, while mostly only adding positives. While these positives might be looked at with an optimistic vision, they would definitely improve the want to seek out tasks for players who enjoy playing the Site Staff roles for more than just minging (as few people as those are on the US server).
The lack of a role to approve credits could be remedied by a Senior position, or having a seperate role in another branch approving their credits. False crediting can also be solved simply by having a role approve, but due to more crediting most likely done by higher-ranking individuals, it might be rare that the feature is abused. As well as that, there is also the credit cooldown preventing players from spam-crediting.
The small negative of players destroying objects only to request credit could be solved by simply not giving them credit. This can still become an issue due to the amount of players using Site Staff positions to minge, but normally IA or staff will deal with these issues when they arise.
While I do think this change would benefit the Site Staff positions quite a bit, it's not by all means an important one. I do not know the complexity of allowing multiple positions to credit in programming terms, but I think it would be a positive change with little negative impact.
Allowing various roles (specifically security and higher-ranking personnel) to credit Technicians, Engineers, Tech Experts, and Chefs for fixing various key components in the facility, or cooking meals for site staff respectively. Possible situations where a Tech Expert has to roam HCZ with an E-11 fixing containment doors, or a Chef making high-stat meals for a Captain or Site Advisor.
This change would also affect the possible "Senior Tech Expert" role or any other high-clearance Site Staff roles introduced in the future.
Higher-level Site Staff (such as Senior Tech) or other Site-Issue related roles could confirm the credit, or it could be done automatically due to it normally being handed out by an E11 or other position requiring tryouts (minus Chef).
Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
Nothing similar has been suggested before on the forums, to my knowledge.
Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
The Site Staff roles (minus Chef) are relatively used for minging not only due to their low amount of help during normal non-emergency procedures, but also simply because they have no incentive to play outside of having CL2 access (Tech Expert). This change might possibly add greater incentive to seek out tasks or play the job in order to get much more Support XP, as well as encourage roleplay between higher-level jobs and Site Staff or with the individual themselves.
One major issue with using Site Staff as support is that most doors auto-fix themselves after 30 minutes (from what I've heard/seen). This means that if all SCPs have been recontained, a majority of the XP that could be gained from repairing doors is lost due to Techs not being allowed to roam HCZ in-character.
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
The major issue with this change is that while most positions have a Senior to approve credits, the Site Staff role doesn't necessarily have a role to approve. A very small negative from this situation may arise from players falsely crediting their friends. Players might also use the crediting feature to purposefully cause issues, like destroying cameras then requesting credit for fixing them.
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
There are relatively small amounts of negatives for this change, while mostly only adding positives. While these positives might be looked at with an optimistic vision, they would definitely improve the want to seek out tasks for players who enjoy playing the Site Staff roles for more than just minging (as few people as those are on the US server).
The lack of a role to approve credits could be remedied by a Senior position, or having a seperate role in another branch approving their credits. False crediting can also be solved simply by having a role approve, but due to more crediting most likely done by higher-ranking individuals, it might be rare that the feature is abused. As well as that, there is also the credit cooldown preventing players from spam-crediting.
The small negative of players destroying objects only to request credit could be solved by simply not giving them credit. This can still become an issue due to the amount of players using Site Staff positions to minge, but normally IA or staff will deal with these issues when they arise.
While I do think this change would benefit the Site Staff positions quite a bit, it's not by all means an important one. I do not know the complexity of allowing multiple positions to credit in programming terms, but I think it would be a positive change with little negative impact.
Community Sup.
Group Moderator
