Staff Feedback Thread

[Perfect Gentleman]

The problem with the current punishment system is that the Administration doesn't bother to notify players that: "Hey, there have become too many people doing things we wouldn't want to see on the server. It doesn't break the rules, but it breaks the overall atmosphere. Be careful, because we will not be favored after this message."

So, literally threatening a finger is not as bad or childish as it seems at first glance. It's different when the administration first turns a blind eye and then carries out a series of demonstrative executions. I didn't come here to play the lottery or Russian roulette, where a seemingly harmless offense (if there is one at all) will get me a month-long ban or more. Simply because someone decided that I should be the starting point for change.

Writing one simple post along the lines of “You players are too naked and your meme-names have gone too far” is a matter of 5 minutes. Not a comment anywhere, but exactly the post. Players will be able to adjust to any of your new rules if you communicate them in a timely manner and give them at least 2 weeks to think about it, ask the necessary questions and remove any doubts about your decisions.

Having been an admin myself outside of Discovery, this is the approach I've taken, and because of it, players have never once had any doubts about the decisions we've made.

---

Discovery is a server of dreams.
And I'm a big dreamer.

[Eternal.Journey]

Establishing boundaries through Warnings (which arguably is what they're there for...) is the best way to go about this.

From what I've seen, the community is getting half-baked sanction postings and not every case having full transparency or all information given from what actions and reports go through... Where is the warning system?

Needs using. Certain people's actions have been upsetting the community for a long time and all this "we will wait until its sanctionable" isnt a good outlook for staff. Address the issues before they grow on a more reasonable approach and i think the likes of reports and sanctions would be more justiiable to the community as "You were warned."

Just my two cents. Oh. Here's one more cent:

If you keep trying to force the community to tidy up after these issues, there's also going to be displeasure. Part of the problem is that we as players are being asked to sort the issues out when there's clearly tensions. More often than not, a report is because the VR sender is no longer willing to deal with taking out said issues to the opposing side in the altercation. Staff going "Yeah, please stop this. Its not doing alot of good for the community and is making more friction than neccesary" is a simple approach that can benefit everyone in the short and long term.

---

[Lusitano]

Well looks like someone missed my point. Yes it should be public, so this way players can see that "crime" doesn't pay! You can simply put that player in bastille and give it a warning, like so many times was posted in the sanctions section. If the players continues to make the same "mistake" then a real punishment can be made. otherwise it gives a feeling of impunity, and that those who follow the rules are not worth reporting, and that so many... why not also not follow the rules?!

Again, i rest my case. take care and have fun

[_WOLF_]

Greetings, friends. I would like to express my opinion. Each person is different in character, upbringing, emotional aspect. I mean, we are all human beings after all. We rely on our feelings one way or another. It is very difficult to remain unbiased when solving certain problems, issues and relationships. This also applies to the sphere of administration in games such as Discovery. During the time that I have been playing this mod, I have noticed the bias of some people when imposing sanctions. Some people told me that the staff is not paid for this work and they spend their personal time. Yes. But this is not a reason to do this work in a slipshod manner. Nobody forces them. In order to avoid conflict situations, we need clear rules with a full explanation of the points. A specific violation should result in a specific punishment. Rules that the administration can interpret as it sees fit should be removed. There should be no ambiguous rules and points in these rules. I believe there should be deadlines for imposing sanctions, time frames. Otherwise, you play and three months later you get a sanction that you have already forgotten about. Remove this unnecessary rule about ganking. And also, if there's an enemy on the radar, what kind of negotiations can there be? I understand that when you want to rob a cargo or other ship, you start a conversation. But when a soldier sees a pirate, in my opinion, negotiations are unnecessary. And the interpretation of warnings: the rules say - drop two lines and wait 10 seconds before the attack. If so, then why punish people who say - contact - attack and wait 10 seconds and attack? If you're an admin and allow your personal feelings to prevail when imposing sanctions, you should leave.

---

[Weapon]

Been thinking about just how to respond here for a few days and I've a good faith question to @HonourWolf, @vladimir26, and @Mort (if your post is serious - a little difficult to tell given the tone and the fact that you've said you don't really take anything here seriously):

Instead of singling out one staff member and doubling down on it, why not make some actual concrete proposals for staff conduct. I've made a few based off your feedback and I'm curious as to whether or not they would actually satisfy you. If they don't, I feel you may want to reevaluate what's really bothering you.

1. Codified or not, staff should provide notice that they will begin enforcing previously unenforced rules and protocols. @Petitioner actually followed the letter of the law in not providing evidence to an unofficial faction. The rule wasn't changed after that sanction thread. Rather, it had never been followed to begin with.

2. Do we want to talk about codifying some kind of rule where staff can't have fun when posting sanction notices? I don't find what @Petitioner did particularly egregious at all, but I also recognize that both them and I hail from an era where Discovery's administration was far more merciless, their words far more barbed. It was all in good fun, but maybe it isn't the kind of fun we ought be having in a thread where people are being punished.

3. Regarding 1.1.2 and fair play - would it satisfy you to have a sort of non-admin/mod committee that these judgements are outsourced to in determining the fairness of a fight? The rule is here to stay and rightfully so, but I understand how high emotions run here and I think more importantly, not every staff member is particularly pvp savvy and thus not as capable of properly evaluating a fight. I'd keep such a board small, maybe 5 people, and rather than attempting to aim for "unbiased" members (as no one will ever agree on who is unbiased), try and keep the cliques they hail from as diverse as possible. I have always been strongly, strongly opposed to the outsourcing of staff work, but I think this one time there could be meaningful benefit from an exception.

4. This one is an actual piece of feedback for the administration: stop doing this. This isn't me singling out @Petitioner in the slightest, there is a long standing history of the administration simply ignoring even the most clear of offenses if not provided as a violation report. You can take your own action when the case is cut and dry. It's no different than taking matters into your own hands and .beaming someone to bastille when they start dropping slurs. It takes all of 5 seconds of googling to figure out why names like Ar'Tanis, Ra'Zagal, or Ochako.Uraraka don't have a place on the server. I can actually see how @HonourWolf felt slighted by essentially being told "step back in line and follow protocol, citizen."

Or if we want to put a touch of humor on it, "PICK UP THAT CAN."

----------

Lastly, I want to say regarding staff confidence being at an "all-time low."

No it isn't.

We are not anywhere close to an all time low in staff confidence. Discovery has seen strikes, coups, administrations threatening to ban developers for balance and story changes. Discovery has seen administrators who were aces put battleship powercores on their fighters and fly around New York instakilling people with SNACs to prove a point and remain green afterwards. Y'all would not have survived if you think these are the ends times.

I understand feeling singled out, feeling like your group is under attack, but really, all told, shit's going pretty well right now. I would actually like a response from the people involved here to see if any of those proposals would allay concerns, rather than the current status quo where it seems you simply want a target, who could just as easily be replaced by someone who cares a whole hell of a lot less at all.

---

Recruitment | Task Force Prometheus | ICN FIRESTORM

[vladimir26]

Hello, @Weapon

Well, we live in 2025, where we don't know which pronouns we should use to address a person without being disrespectful (nope, not a direct link/attack/whateva) and a lot of people are kinda sensible here. I recall two warnings or sanctions which I can't be arsed to find, one where a witness in Conn was outraged that one player addressed the other with the N word, and another similar one, using a dolla something meme. Without dwelling into these examples, or any others like the current naming issues, maybe it's just better that Staff keeps it official, in the way @Luke. does.

The admin in question was singled out indeed, with reasons and proposals made very clear, by myself, Honourwolf and Mort. A few follow ups from myself and Honour also provide clear issues and proposals, both towards the admin in question and other topics. Who wants to understand the posts will have no trouble to do it. I won't speak about Jammi as I haven't mentioned him anywhere.

If you indeed spent the last few days to think about it, you should've noticed that all our posts have a common line, where we asked for equal treatment, not for a double edged sword, with one side being blunt. Maybe the VR reporting section should be made public, so stuff like this won't be solved with a sowwy PM to the reporter, while a Skibidi will get your ship deleted within days. Until the backlog is processed, it is what it is, and we're all eager to see the fair judgement the Staff has been threatening us with in the past months.

---

[R.P.Curator]

Enjoyed the LV-Amelia Event!
Suggestion:
- Make the Ship Data Research untracktable by snubs or demand more cargo, so that only Freighter with 600 Cargo Capacity can carry it or GBs and above. Basically, any ship that can take it and put up a fight instead of a ship that can just run.
Previous encounter, a Light Fighter with a cloak got it. That means good luck trying to get it back. This applies for all fighters.
- Make the ship carrying it unable to dock anywhere (Including PoBs or Carriers) with the exception of a set location/s - either 1 Location like Heisenberg or a Freeport OR 1 Location in any major House / IW: 1 in Bretonia, 1 in Liberty, 1 in the Omegas, 1 in the Omicrons, etc.
- Make the ship carrying it unable to cloak or use Matrix Jump Holes
Lets have a Sirius wide chase, not a dock, login when low pop and delivery.

[EisenSeele]

Enjoyed the LV-Amelia Event!
Suggestion:
- Make the Ship Data Research untracktable by snubs or demand more cargo, so that only Freighter with 600 Cargo Capacity can carry it or GBs and above. Basically, any ship that can take it and put up a fight instead of a ship that can just run.
Previous encounter, a Light Fighter with a cloak got it. That means good luck trying to get it back. This applies for all fighters.
- Make the ship carrying it unable to dock anywhere (Including PoBs or Carriers) with the exception of a set location/s - either 1 Location like Heisenberg or a Freeport OR 1 Location in any major House / IW: 1 in Bretonia, 1 in Liberty, 1 in the Omegas, 1 in the Omicrons, etc.
- Make the ship carrying it unable to cloak or use Matrix Jump Holes
Lets have a Sirius wide chase, not a dock, login when low pop and delivery.

Thanks for the feedback! This last bit certainly has and will continue to be a learning experience - going forward, we'll probably be manually giving the special mission item to someone chosen at random amongst the top 3 damage dealers still alive.

That being said, we absolutely want (and are anticipating) interesting developments stemming from the use or claiming of the event cargo - and there will be manufactured opportunities for community interaction at stages of the event chain as they develop.

---

FEEDBACK

[Lemon]

Hey guys, can you please update the Maquis ID to shift against the Gallic Union and being the main opposition - the thing has been outdated for 6+ years - I was told to "wait for all ID reworks" - for 3 years now. We got an official event coming up, would be nice to have ID that mentions the lore that's been in place for a long time

[R.P.Curator]

Bounty System Overhaul
Current System: Put a bounty on someone, paint a target on his ship / faction.
Lack of repercussions for the person placing the bounty and lack of evidence in most cases.
Requirements when placing bounties - ingame and inRP
- Evidence (Reason) for the bounty
- Ship Name & Faction tag of the player who puts the bounty
Desired Outcome:
- Automated Script that runs on the server for Bounties and Hits
> Command: /set bounty "target name" "credits reward" "claimable 1 to 5"
> Command: /set hit "target name" "credits reward" "claimable 1 to 5"
Bounty Script runs on IDs that can "claim bounties" - BH, Aegis, UC.
Hit Script runs on unlawful IDs that can "claim hit"; basically any unlawful faction or only certain factions.
When a player sets a bounty / hit via command, the credits are substracted from his current ship and deposited on a bounty ledger. The sum of the credits substracted from the account equals the "bounty reward x claimable times: I.E. /set bounty Ship1 1000 5 would substract 5000 credits from the ship that placed the bounty".
Script runs continuously, in the background, doing the checks for Bounty Owner and Bounty Target. It becomes active when both the Bounty Owner and the Bounty Target are online, undocked; displaying a message for both players and all valid IDs that there is a bounty active. The bounty cannot be claimed if the Bounty Owner and Bounty Target are not online, undocked and in the same system. The moment a valid ID kills the Bounty Target, the player with the valid ID receives the credits.
Now the flipside: If the Bounty Target kills the Bounty Owner, the Bounty Target receives ALL the credits the Bounty Owner paid to place the bounty.
This can and will be abused via cloaking, space afk, etc.
So, for this to be feasible and usable; once you place a bounty as the Bounty Owner:
- You cannot use cloaks
- You cannot rename the ship you placed the bounty with
- If Bounty Owner and Bounty Target are in the same system, undocked, Bounty Owner cannot use Player Generated Jump Holes
- Bounty script is inactive if you are in Conn or Bastille
- Bounty script is inactive is you are in Transit

Is this doable?