Bottom post of the previous page:
After both the policy bus and coderbus meetings the general consensus was TG was interested in going in a direction where heads were more meaningful/impactful to the round. I want to hear more thoughts on this, discuss.Some food for thought:
Do we want administration to warn all heads of staff who do not show ample game knowledge? For example, a CE not knowing how to set up a basic SM setup without causing a delam, so the admin tells this player to play the station engineer role until they learn how to set up the engine.
Do we want the same level of standards for MRP and LRP?
What kind of things/access should only heads of staff have access to? This could be anything from unique and improved gear onwards.
What kind of traitor objectives could we give to heads of staff that could challenge them? As it stands now people are vying for the removal of traitor, blood brother, and theif because it's seen as "easy mode".
Authority and respect are a social aspect of the game, should heads of staff have to earn this respect to keep control of their departments or should enforcement of this respect lay partially on admins. We already enforce metaprotections on valid demotions.
If we want to enforce a higher standard of game knowledge for heads of staff, should we raise the time required to play before you can unlock these roles? If not what other alternatives could we implement?
As it stands the only time a head of staff "matters" is when a revolution is active, what things could we change or add that could make them more useful without it being required?