BEFORE READING THIS SUGGESTION, PLEASE READ YEKE'S REPLY TO THE ORIGINAL TO UNDERSTAND WHY THIS SUGGESTION IS BEING MADE.
https://civilnetworks.net/community/threads/the-uncoupling-of-uk-and-us-server-content-parity.31804/
This suggestion is going to be formatted...differently. Yeke himself has stated that Ventz wants to see the SPECIFIC things that we want uncoupled, because a mass uncoupling isnt possible. Thus, this suggestion is going to contain micro-suggestions for each thing that I am suggesting be changed. Please evaluate each one when you reply to them.
Suggestion #1: Uncouple the rule that states servers CANNOT enforce a PK on players on the servers, allowing SSL or lower as needed to forcibly auth them:
This would mean that if so desired, each server can decide if they want to further restrict or even relax the ranks that can allow a PK, which will allow for more dynamic roleplay as well as for each server to align this rule further into their environment regarding consequences in roleplay.
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):
Allowing for a server-by-server ruling on this allows for the roleplay environment to match the level of consequences that their players are comfortable with.
Further empowers lower staff ranks or potentially SC of each server to allow for satisfying and fair conclusions to their storylines
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
Some opportunity for abuse if lower ranked staff on the server misunderstand situations and force a PK, which could upset players.
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
This is my most desired change, quite frankly. Yes it's from a UK perspective, but that's why uncoupling doesn't necessarily affect US in the slightest. The need to actually reintegrate consequences onto Site-65 on the UK side is ESSENTIAL right now for people to start learning how to conduct roleplay, and this is one of the best ways to do it for those who continuously abuse our current systems and get off for free from any REAL consequences to their actions.
Suggestion #2: Uncouple the Dpt Leader/SA/SC Guidelines per server (Credit to Broda for this)
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
This allows each server to set their own expected guidelines for Dpt. Directors/SA/SC on what their measuring criteria for performance is, what they are expected to do on the role, and how to succeed in it.
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):
Given the differences between servers, allows far more freedom for each server to provide the guidelines for the given roles to match their roleplay environment, which removes stifling restrictions.
Far more autonomy for SA/SC/Dpt. Leaders, and easier ways for respective staff teams to track CL4/CL5 performance.
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
Guidelines may be set by different standards across servers - this could lead to quality drops and not increases.
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
I overall think that this will allow for each server to provide more fair, helpful guidance to their CL4/CL5 position holders as well as have easier and more reasonable metrics for if each role is succeeding or not. I will firmly stand on the hill that this will make these positions feel like less of a job.
I appreciate that there are only two suggestions here today, but recent events have made it URGENT that I get this suggestion on the forums in any capacity and I don't have the time to write more out for now. Hopefully they get fair evaluation. Thank you for reading.
https://civilnetworks.net/community/threads/the-uncoupling-of-uk-and-us-server-content-parity.31804/
This suggestion is going to be formatted...differently. Yeke himself has stated that Ventz wants to see the SPECIFIC things that we want uncoupled, because a mass uncoupling isnt possible. Thus, this suggestion is going to contain micro-suggestions for each thing that I am suggesting be changed. Please evaluate each one when you reply to them.
Suggestion #1: Uncouple the rule that states servers CANNOT enforce a PK on players on the servers, allowing SSL or lower as needed to forcibly auth them:
This would mean that if so desired, each server can decide if they want to further restrict or even relax the ranks that can allow a PK, which will allow for more dynamic roleplay as well as for each server to align this rule further into their environment regarding consequences in roleplay.
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):
Allowing for a server-by-server ruling on this allows for the roleplay environment to match the level of consequences that their players are comfortable with.
Further empowers lower staff ranks or potentially SC of each server to allow for satisfying and fair conclusions to their storylines
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
Some opportunity for abuse if lower ranked staff on the server misunderstand situations and force a PK, which could upset players.
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
This is my most desired change, quite frankly. Yes it's from a UK perspective, but that's why uncoupling doesn't necessarily affect US in the slightest. The need to actually reintegrate consequences onto Site-65 on the UK side is ESSENTIAL right now for people to start learning how to conduct roleplay, and this is one of the best ways to do it for those who continuously abuse our current systems and get off for free from any REAL consequences to their actions.
Suggestion #2: Uncouple the Dpt Leader/SA/SC Guidelines per server (Credit to Broda for this)
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
This allows each server to set their own expected guidelines for Dpt. Directors/SA/SC on what their measuring criteria for performance is, what they are expected to do on the role, and how to succeed in it.
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):
Given the differences between servers, allows far more freedom for each server to provide the guidelines for the given roles to match their roleplay environment, which removes stifling restrictions.
Far more autonomy for SA/SC/Dpt. Leaders, and easier ways for respective staff teams to track CL4/CL5 performance.
Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
Guidelines may be set by different standards across servers - this could lead to quality drops and not increases.
Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
I overall think that this will allow for each server to provide more fair, helpful guidance to their CL4/CL5 position holders as well as have easier and more reasonable metrics for if each role is succeeding or not. I will firmly stand on the hill that this will make these positions feel like less of a job.
I appreciate that there are only two suggestions here today, but recent events have made it URGENT that I get this suggestion on the forums in any capacity and I don't have the time to write more out for now. Hopefully they get fair evaluation. Thank you for reading.
Last edited:
Game Master
Donator
