Vexerot

In-game Username: Vexerot
Discord username: Vexerot
Characters you play: Patrols-the-Halls

On average, how many hours do you expect to admin per week: 4-8

Days you are available to admin on: Everyday; with more hours on weekends

How old are you? 21

Do you have any SS14 experience outside of Wizard’s Den servers, or any SS13 experience? No

Do you have prior administration experience (SS13/SS14 experience preferred, please also post a way for us to verify this)? No

Have you ever been banned from any SS14 or SS13 servers? No

What are you primarily interested in doing as an admin? I would be primarily interested in doing in-game rule enforcement, as well as running small-scale in-game events. In regard to in-game rule enforcement, I believe that swiftly addressing disruptive behavior in-game is critical in nurturing a positive culture. It is an unfortunate reality that, left unchecked, the disruptive behavior of a single player can ruin entire rounds for a multitude of players. In regard to running small-scale in-game events, I am a firm believer that thoughtful interventions open the door to unique, memorable stories that both enrich role-play and foster deeper engagement among players. However, I also recognize that some players prefer rounds with minimal oversight, where the natural flow of gameplay takes precedence - finding a balance is key.

What are you least interested in doing as an admin? I anticipate being least interested in out-of-game rule enforcement as I expect to find replay reviews and log reviews less fulfilling. I love the immediate and dynamic aspect of in-game interactions, where I would be able to have a more direct and timely impact on players. However, I do recognize that out-of-game rule enforcement is important and would still gladly help where needed.

Detail Questions

What role do you think game admins serve on our servers?

I believe that game admins serve as, first and foremost, community members dedicated to fostering a fun and positive playing environment. Beyond that, I believe that game admins are, most importantly, responsible for maintaining the integrity of the community by enforcing rules. However, the role of game admins goes beyond simply punishing disruptive players; it should involve actively fostering positive interactions with, and between, players - whether it be through in-game events, or simply handling disputes with fairness and consistency. It is also my belief that game admins serve as mentors, answering questions and creating an environment where players feel comfortable seeking help and reporting issues.

Why do you want to become an administrator for SS14?

I want to become an administrator for SS14 because I love this game and its community. I want to give back by helping ensure that other players, both new and old, can have similarly positive experiences. It is a fact that SS14 is a niche game with a niche community, and as a result, disruptive players often have a greater impact on player experience relative to other more mainstream multiplayer games. Personally, I’ve noticed times when admin presence is low and I want to help fill that gap where possible. I hope to help ensure that SS14 remains fun, inclusive, and continues to thrive for new players and old players alike.

How do you feel about the current roleplay status on the servers?

Overall, I believe that current roleplay status is in an alright place, with some room for improvement, particularly during high-population rounds and in regard to meta-gaming. I primarily play on Hopper, where most veteran players are committed to quality roleplaying (with occasional exceptions) - leading by example helps foster a positive server culture, and as a result, new players tend to follow suit, contributing to the overall strength of roleplay on the server. However, I have noticed a lack of sufficient admin presence on high-population rounds, leading to upticks in disruptive behavior that goes unchecked in the moment and takes away from quality roleplay - especially on Salamander. In regard to meta-gaming, I have consistently noticed behavior from players that frequent Lizard and Leviathan that arguably violates the metashield. Although I believe that LRP servers should provide a fun, laid-back atmosphere with lower roleplay expectations, I have found that players are slowly blurring the line between IC and OOC knowledge more and more.

Other than banning problematic players, what admin actions do you believe have the biggest positive impact?

It is my belief that being approachable and responsive to ahelps is one of the admin actions that has the biggest positive impact. As I have previously mentioned, addressing concerns in a direct and timely manner is critical when it comes to actively fostering positive interactions with, and between, players. I also believe that occasional in-game events can inject humor and excitement into a round, keeping players engaged and creating unique, memorable stories. In terms of personal experience, outside of receiving admin help with disruptive players, I remember best the rounds that admins went above and beyond to create unique stories for the players; in-game events demonstrate that admins are, first and foremost, community members dedicated to fostering a fun and positive playing environment.

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?

I have never had a negative experience with a game admin. However, in the game, I have often observed raiders ruin entire rounds; increased admin presence in the game would likely help with ensuring swifter responses to similar bad faith behavior. Furthermore, as previously mentioned, I have often noticed behavior that arguably violates the Metashield in a way that often ruins rounds for antagonists. I believe that nudging standout players toward better habits through clear and constructive communication via the ahelp system, not even necessarily to issue a formal warning or ban, can go a long way in reducing metagaming and fostering better behavior as a whole.

Have you ever had a good experience with the game or a game admin? If so, what was it?

I have had numerous good experiences with the game and game admins; it is difficult to narrow things down, particularly in terms of the game itself. I’ll speak in regard to game admins, as a couple standout moments come to mind. On one occasion, a raider caused enough damage to prematurely end the round, but as compensation, an admin ran a fairly involved admeme in the subsequent round. I certainly do not believe that any admeme is ever owed, but it was definitely very appreciated as we had already had multiple instances of raiders that day. On a different occasion, I was Commander on a NukeOps round, and as a result of a bug, our shuttle had been stolen from the outpost by station crew. I submitted an ahelp and promptly received a response, the returned shuttle, and some minor compensation in the form of additional telecrystals; it was the promptness of the help we received that left a lasting positive impression.

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”.

In this situation, I would first wait for the traitors to be selected as to minimize disruption to the game mode itself. I would then communicate to the observing players that I might consider doing something small that would not affect overall gameplay; I would communicate that players are expecting a “normal” round and as a result, I wish to keep interventions minimal as to preserve player expectations. I would be sure to make it clear that ideas are welcome, but that there are no guarantees. In the case that the observing players are acting in bad faith, I would simply not humor their requests, with a note of their behavior made if deemed necessary.

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.

In this situation, there is a lot of ambiguity and I would first look to collect all the facts via admin logs and reaching out to each party via the ahelp system to collect further information as necessary.

Scenario A: Justified Coup (Captain Misconduct)
If the Captain was behaving irresponsibly, the HoS and HoP had coordinated the coup with a majority approval from the rest of Command, and the coup was proceeding according to the rules of escalation, I would allow the coup to play out. If the actions of the HoS and HoP were reasonable and within roleplay expectations, I do not believe any punishment would be necessary outside of a reminder to ahelp for admin permission in the future. It may be the case that a warning for each would be appropriate if the situation was not fully handled according to gameplay expectations and server rules, but I acknowledge that this is not a standard situation with which most players would be familiar. I would likely issue a temporary role ban to the Captain in accordance with the severity of the irresponsible behavior. If the misconduct was particularly notable, or there have been prior warnings on record, a permanent role ban, or server ban, may be appropriate.

Scenario B: Unjustified Coup (HoS and HoP Misconduct)
If the Captain was performing their role appropriately, or the HoS and HoP had staged the coup without reasonable justification or are abusing their authority in some way, I would not allow the coup to play out and would promptly act to punish the offending individuals. If the actions of the HoS and HoP were unreasonable and not within roleplay expectations, I would issue temporary role bans to both in accordance with their involvement and the severity of their behavior. If there exists a pattern of similar behavior in the past, I would consider permanent role bans, or server bans. I would not take action against the Captain unless they broke any server rules.

In the case of both scenarios, unless the QM broke any server rules, I would treat them as a bystander and take no action against them. And as for the Clown, if they did not have malicious intent and intended to return the saber, I would proceed with at most a warning regarding the theft of high-value items as a non-antag. However, if the Clown is acting in bad faith with the saber, either refusing to return it or attacking crew, I would issue a temporary server ban for self-antag behavior assuming there is no history of further self-antag behavior on record that would support a permanent server ban.

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.

In this situation, I would first verify, through whatever channels are available, the appropriate punishment for this type of situation. It is crucial to ensure consistency between players and punishments. If specific written guidance has been provided, I would use that as a basis to guide decision-making over word-of-mouth. Furthermore, I would look to reach out to the admin advocating for the appeal-only ban as to collect further information regarding their perspective on the situation, whilst also explaining my own reasoning for why I might believe a temporary ban is appropriate (e.g. they have no prior noted issues). I would also likely consult with other admins prior to issuing any punishment if the situation were particularly ambiguous. If no clear admin consensus is evident, I would proceed with a temporary ban pending amendment; I would flag the situation for headmin review if the appropriate punishment is not clear-cut according to written guidelines and there is a lack of admin consensus.