In-game Username: Tao7891
Discord username: tao7891
Characters you play: Oat Charoite, used to play Tao-Swish-Tail, also a bunch of lesser characters.
On average, how many hours do you expect to admin per week: 10 if nothing significantly changes in my life
Days you are available to admin on: any days
How old are you? 22
Do you have any SS14 experience outside of Wizard’s Den servers, or any SS13 experience? just 140 hours in RMC. Otherwise no, I only really play wizden salamander.
Do you have prior administration experience (SS13/SS14 experience preferred, please also post a way for us to verify this)? this would be my first admin role.
Have you ever been banned from any SS14 or SS13 servers? No prior bans or role bans.
What are you primarily interested in doing as an admin? I am drawn to this because of ingame a-helps, prayers, rule enforcement, and i really do like the idea of doing admin events once im proficient.
edit: While not the interest that drew me here, I am interested in reviewing issues through replays and addressing ban appeals as I look through them regardless. As I am strongly invested in Salamander, im also curious to try the whitelisting process.
What are you least interested in doing as an admin? Issuing bans over honest mistakes sounds sour, but if thats what is required I would still do it.
Detail Questions
What role do you think game admins serve on our servers?
The admins are there to make the game run smoothly and not to be over zealous rules lawyers, however they should step in when rules are clearly being broken and nudge players onto the right path when things look like they might cross the line. Why I say, ‘not to be rules lawyers’ is because admins should be able to take context and situation into account to address if players are truely causing issues, or have just mistakenly ran into a non-harmful exception.
Their secondary focus should be on uplifting the player experience with things like admin events, answering prayers, centcom interaction and such.
I took this question mean ‘in game admining’ and not to be referencing all admin responsibilities.
Why do you want to become an administrator for SS14?
Ive loved every angle I have approached this game from, and I would like to try my hand at this too as it looks different and rewarding.
So, A curiosity, B I think it would be rewarding, and C admin events.
How do you feel about the current roleplay status on the servers?
I put all my playtime into salamander MRP, and while I think that MRP can sometimes feel like low roleplay, in general im quite happy with the higher level of roleplay interactions that I frequently get with other players. So for MRP it’s a mixed bag.
LRP doesnt feel like its roleplay experience is good enough, I am personally biased on this as I like MRP conversations/interaction and I dont know that the community feels the same way.
Other than banning problematic players, what admin actions do you believe have the biggest positive impact?
Admin events are what always stick in my mind as memorable experiences ive had with this game, I think this is by far the most positive thing that can be done for the players.
answering a-helps. A good portion of my personal frustration with the game comes from when something is wrong and I have no idea if someone is solving it, this can kill an otherwise good round for me, when these issues are resolved by an admin the game experience is significantly improved.
Have you ever had a negative experience in the game or with a game admin? If so what, if anything, would you do to prevent other players from experiencing this?
The most common admin experience thats negative is not getting a response from a-helping, my mind doesnt want to move on until I get some sort of response.
I would prevent other players experiencing this by answering a-helps, just a short neutral acknowledgement that what was said has now been seen, without tipping them off to the course of action being taken.
The most common bad game experience i get is EORG, I am often trying to continue the game as normal and its really annoying to see people suddenly not care about life or roleplay. For minor end of round shittery, I would remind the players that the game isnt over and possibly take note incase of repeat. Where full EORG is demonstrated, then I would do as the MRP offence table suggests.
Another frequent issue is when security decides to make some meta decisions. I think its a bad idea to make anyone role back RP in light of power gaming, but the player powergaming should be questioned and then potentially warned, repeat offences would likely result in strike, then de-whitelist.
Have you ever had a good experience with the game or a game admin? If so, what was it?
Whenever I’ve been rescued from a bugged situation by an admin has been a massive relief.
In general when admins just acknowlege an admin message it feels like things are being properly taken care of.
Scenario Questions
Scenario 1
It is the start of the round. There are 60 players on the server. The game mode is traitors, traitors have not been selected yet. There are three players who decided to observe the round instead of join it orbiting you. Two of them are encouraging you to “do something funny”.
(Assuming there were no recent notable ‘admemes’)
Depending on how I was feeling, If i was feeling in the mood for it and already had an Idea in my mind I could start a vote for ‘something interesting yes/no’ and initiate a minor admin event.
However If i wasnt feeling like it, I think I would just tell them to spectate the clown and turn them down.
Scenario 2
This scenario takes place on LRP. The Head of Security has decided to coup the Captain. The Head of Personnel agrees with the Head of Security and has taken up arms in case it is necessary to aid in effecting the arrest of the Captain. The Captain is hiding with the Quartermaster in the cargo shuttle to avoid the Clown who has stolen the captains saber as a non-antag. There are five people named in this scenario. Please describe what actions, if any, you would take in relation to each, and why.
Gain an initial understanding:
The HOS would be bwoinked to see if they have a damn good reason to coup the captain.
The HOP is bwoinked to see if their perspective is the same as the HOS and reminded that their job is not to arrest people.
The captain is asked why theyre hiding on the shuttle, if this doesnt corroborate the HOS and HOPs accounts then I further question them on this point. I also ask the captain if theyre in on a joke with the clown, or if the clown was antagonistic.
The clown is then observed and asked to identify their actions and intentions, this is referenced against the captains statement.
Unless anybody links the QM to what has happened, they are ignored.
Decide on possible intervention/s:
The coup is a failure and appears to self resolve, minimal to no intervention is required.
The coup is successful and justified, minimal to no intervention is required.
The coup is a successful and rulebreaking takeover by the HOS and HOP, intervention is required to restore order with minimal damage. Possible interventions could be: Ahelp prompting them to give up and step down ic, IC centcom negotiation over radio, ERT to restore order, bluespace shell, on spot appropriate banning.
The coup is a successful and rulebeaking takeover by the HOS and HOP where there is no possible resolution due to a combination of Ahelp belligerence and substantial crew backing. Severe intervention is needed, code epsilon occurs, this is above dealing with alone and more admin assistance is required to verify my interpretation of the situation.
Clown and captain were playing a silly mutual joke together, no intervention required.
Clown is self antagging, warn the clown. If security arent doing their job because of the coup and are allowing the clown to continually self antag, minor intervention is required.
QM needs no intervention.
Possible statement/s:
If a rulebreaking coup occured, before returning to lobby, do a server message that requests all induviduals involved in the coup to state their character, relevent actions and reasoning in an Ahelp, further explain that the round replay will be reviewed and anyone involved who doesnt own up will have their actions taken at face value.
A post-round statement referencing relevent major rulebreaks that occured and clarifying game rules would be useful in preventing future incidents.
Decide on repercussions:
Initial offences will be applied from witnessed acts and ahelps, a followup round of offences will be applied from the round replay if needed.
HOS/HOP-
With no valid reasons to coup, likely offence is riots/revolutions. With 2x command modifier, 24 hour to 6 day role/game bans are appropriate. Other relevent offences will be applied.
Security-
With involvment in coup, no valid reasons to coup, and no evidence of being lied to about the situation, likely offence is riots/revolutions. With 2x security modifier, 24 hour to 6 day role/game bans are appropriate. Other relevent offences will be applied.
Crew-
With involvment in coup, no valid reasons to coup, and no evidence of being lied to about the situation, likely offence is riots/revolutions. 12 hour to 3 day role/game bans are appropriate. Other relevent offences will be applied.
Captain-
Punished based on potential rulebreak that caused coup and any other relevent offences.
Clown-
If deemed self antag, warning to 12 hour gameband is appropriate.
QM-
If captain had self-antagged and they willingly assisted them in getting away with it, likely offence is cooperating with known antags. With 2x command modifier, a 24 hour game ban is technically apropriate, but In this specific situation would argue for just a warning or note instead as protecting the captain is not obviously against the rules.
Involved security or crew who were outright lied to will see large to full offence reductions. If instead they were just confused but assisted the coup regardless, then they could see a smaller possible reduction.
If intervention is done, rulebreaks following that point should consider if the intervention caused them and apropriate reductions should apply.
Scenario 3
You are ahelping a player about an issue. The player has no prior noted issues. A few days earlier, an admin had told you that this type of situation should result in a temporary ban for a first offense, and you are confident that this situation is not substantially different from the type that admin was describing. During the ahelp, another admin pings you on Discord with a link to the ongoing ahelp and tells you to just indefinitely ban them and make them appeal. Excluding trialmins and headmins, all admins are equally “ranked”. A headmin is not currently available.
Due to the new doubt of the situation, I reference the offence table and use the suggested repercussion if available.
If the issue is non-standard with no suggested reprecussion available, I equate it to a similar rulebreak and use its suggested repercussion.
If there are no equatable similar rulebreaks, I request further feedback from other online admins to make a decision.
If there is no admin consensus, I temp ban for a period over 24 hours to give time to contact a headmin, I then do what the headmin advises the next day/later.
Whatever non-standard reprecussion I choose, I have to be able to personally justify it as the right measure.
The more nuianced task is going to be not creating any conflict with the involved admins. This should be paramount.
.
Edit: I dont know if this helps the application, but as of recent I have been going over loads of ban-appeals and staff complaints, as well as refering frequently to admin policy, banning policy and mrp policy in order to be properly prepared for the role. For this reason, ive made several edits as I have gained a better understanding of what an admin needs to do. I will give this my best shot.