A very unpopular suggestion (But needed)

[Medi]

On 9/1/2019 at 1:25 AM, dotagamer said:

This is a very unpopular solution/suggestion from me, but personally whenever i wanted to try out new jobs I'm not familiar with i go to a small pop server that have similiar jobs to the one in the main server i played at just to learn from it, the benefit from small pop server since they have low amount of players they all kinda agreed anonymously to not acting harshly to other without reason, removing one of stress factor coming from in this case security job, furthermore there's less cases of problem to dealt with and generally everyone are kinda on the same side to not mess up the station too quickly, lastly on the antagonist since small pops mean small security number sometime even just 1, new player who are starting out security roles might be able to learn the pressure a lot of the jobs with simple objective in mind, to catch that antagonist without worrying about lack of coordination cause again, Low pops.

 

So what I'm saying is, ask them if they ever had experience as security on other server, if yes taught the basic of space law in here, if not well good luck and suggest them to either read or try it out on other server first <- (very dumb idea)

That's all what my retarded mind wanted to say

As a server, we can't exactly advocate "Yeah, go play on a different server to learn how to play on this one." I am aware of the fact that we may do this for punishment reasons (although that is more over done for player 'character' specific reasons) but to do so just for a job seems to be a bit of an obtuse standard that would more often then not drive people away from the job. Really, the spirit of my complaint and suggestion is not against those players who have experience with SS13 or take the time to even read Space Law and SOP. You can be a relatively new player and at least do the latter and be moderately successful, however you're going to struggle quite a bit until you get the rest of the game mechanics and foundations down.

In fact, if you take an experienced SS13 player, even from our server, who has never done Sec before and suddenly throw them into the role without doing some prior study- they're going to struggle a lot if not get in trouble. The reasoning for this is that Sec had 3 different guidelines that govern their actions and they're the most watched group because they actively take people's freedoms away. 

It's my opinion that truly new players, those who have little to no experience with SS13 at all, get Security positions FAR too soon. I'm not saying to give it some kinda impossible standard to obtain but having players play roles other then civilian prior to starting Sec can only help. Civilians are not held to any greater standard that Sec would be, so making them at least be cargo tech for a few rounds and have to learn WHAT an SOP is or WHAT space law is prior to enforcing it is probably a good idea in my opinion.

[dotagamer]

13 hours ago, Medi said:

As a server, we can't exactly advocate "Yeah, go play on a different server to learn how to play on this one." I am aware of the fact that we may do this for punishment reasons (although that is more over done for player 'character' specific reasons) but to do so just for a job seems to be a bit of an obtuse standard that would more often then not drive people away from the job. Really, the spirit of my complaint and suggestion is not against those players who have experience with SS13 or take the time to even read Space Law and SOP. You can be a relatively new player and at least do the latter and be moderately successful, however you're going to struggle quite a bit until you get the rest of the game mechanics and foundations down.

In fact, if you take an experienced SS13 player, even from our server, who has never done Sec before and suddenly throw them into the role without doing some prior study- they're going to struggle a lot if not get in trouble. The reasoning for this is that Sec had 3 different guidelines that govern their actions and they're the most watched group because they actively take people's freedoms away. 

It's my opinion that truly new players, those who have little to no experience with SS13 at all, get Security positions FAR too soon. I'm not saying to give it some kinda impossible standard to obtain but having players play roles other then civilian prior to starting Sec can only help. Civilians are not held to any greater standard that Sec would be, so making them at least be cargo tech for a few rounds and have to learn WHAT an SOP is or WHAT space law is prior to enforcing it is probably a good idea in my opinion.

Right on the core of the issue there, indeed the problem lies simply on amount of experience and telling other to play on other server might be detrimental in the regeneration of active playerbase for any server, though frankly it was just a method i used in order to not screw up when i get a job on paradise station. As you pointed out already, the guidelines and taking other jobs as to promote sense of being responsible is already seem enough and my suggestion is a very unpopular one as there's already solution far more reasonable than mine like playing cargo for few rounds rather than going few rounds in other servers.

Edited September 3, 2019 by dotagamer
Lack of further argumentation

[Norwest]

I'm a longtime Seccie myself, and I'd have to agree with many of the earlier issues raised in this thread. More to the point, I'd argue that quite a few of them are closely connected:

-The learning cliff: Security is an extremely difficult job to learn, requiring both robustness and knowledge of station SOP, server rules, and a thick enough skin to survive a storm of criticism.

-Actual shitsec: While often just undeserved whining, much of that criticism is actually quite fair. I've seen prisoners left in cuffs for 15-20 minutes in Processing, utterly ridiculous criminal records placed (a 15-minute charge for just "resisting arrest," lol), and more undeserved harmbatoning than I can count at this point.

-Poor oversight: Between the HoS, Warden, IAA, Magistrate, and Captain, there should be enough on-station personnel to correct bad behavior. I'd argue that much of the problem preventing that from happening is simply being overwhelmed: the HoS is desperately trying to keep a semblance of order, the Warden's watching over officers in the field, and every officer is desperately needed to fight the baddie of the week NOWNOWNOW. This leaves the IA agents and Magistrate with little to do, and when coupled with the high requirements for Magistrate and low job options for IAA, results in the positions usually being undermanned. This, of course, then worsens the problem of "bad apple" officers in the first place.

-Staffing: All of the above, coupled with the reasonable likelihood of dying to valid-salad, makes Security a chronically understaffed force. Any measure to address Sec's issues must mention its horrible, horrible staffing problem, because everything else is secondary to it. No one's got time or energy to train newbies when they're constantly running after the next threat, and no one's got time to process prisoners properly when there's an officer down in Med-Sci Maint yada yada yada. And when there's no "low-speed" Security role, no one signs up for the job if they want a slower shift; it's either ASS TO THE GRASS BALLS TO THE WALL HARMBATON IN FREEFALL YEEHAW or it's playing Janitor instead.

Note that this is a well-known real life phenomenon, often called a "staffing crunch:" with too few staff members on a job, pressure and requirements increase on the remaining ones, increasing their stress and causing them to quit (further worsening the staffing problem). Poor staffing is the heart of Security's woes; we can put patches over other issues, but none of them will stick unless we can ensure that there'll be more than just the Detective and Warden at roundstart. The term I've heard in RL law enforcement is "paradoxical policing," where inot only are there too few cops, the ones that remain are tired, burned out, and angry - and it shows.

Conclusion: Recruitment&Retention is the key, everything else is secondary. I'd love to see a lot of the ideas in this thread implemented, from 'slings getting another rework to additional Code Red access, but ultimately the biggest problem with Sec is simply that there aren't enough of them around. Any suggestions for fixing Security's issues should focus primarily on getting more people to stay in the job.

 

 

 

Issues and potential solutions: It's very, very difficult for even an experienced player to transition into playing Security. Others in this thread have already covered most of the reasons why, so I'm going to cover some of the issues inherent in resolving the problem and my proposals for addressing 'em:

a) Hostile learning environment vs. protecting the "learner" role: Unsurprisingly, no one in red catches a break. I think there's simply no substitute for a "learner" Security role, a la the cadets that Kyet proposed earlier (personally, I'd go with "Constable" myself to avoid too much newbie stigma; I personally wouldn't mind playing a low-speed Sec role sometime). To separate cadets/Constables from the rest of Security's valid-salad, I'd suggest trying to draw a divide between them and the rest of Sec. Keeping other Sec roles more exclusive could be done with either a minimal karma-lock on Security roles (5 points to unlock "Security roles," a.k.a. the Brig Physician, Sec Officer, Warden, and HoS), or simply requiring a bunch of playtime (6+ hrs) in the "learner" role before being able to play as a Sec Officer.

Combine this divide with limited equipment for cadets/Constables, restrictive instructions, and a limited degree of social protection. We can't entirely stop the low-speed Sec role from being a loot pinata, because they'll still need Brig/Holding Cell access and Security comms to do their job. However, limiting their equipment to less-effective tools like flashes and pepperspray a) forces them to actually use that gear, instead of relying solely on the holy harmbaton, b) limits their ability to get rekt by their own weapons used against them by greytiders, and c) makes them less attractive as a target. Similarly, the starting instructions (and hopefully over time, the basic standard and expectation) should tell cadets/Constables to remain in public areas and to not go patrolling off alone. There's no guarantee that they'll follow it, but it should keep at least some newbies on the straight and narrow. And finally, this divide between "always legit" Security targets and "try not to kill/humiliate" newbie role can be enforced through social interaction. Public shaming for antags, or even greytiders, who deliberately dunk on newbie Seccies can limit some bad behavior, especially if there's a clear divide between who's obvious valid-salad and who isn't.

b) Lack of connection vs. a physical presence: One common problem with Sec roles is that there's no 'belonging' to the rest of the station. You've got antags to fight and greytiders to bash, and there's very little interaction between you and other departments. Even within Security itself, there's very little face-to-face time outside of hanging around in Processing at the same time, and the constant barrage of trouble on the radio means that there's very little of the team-building off-topic conversations which are so common in other departments. This worsens the issue of poor communication between Security and the rest of the station, increasing the divide and allowing for an easy bandwagoning of "shitcurity!" calls, whether deserved or undeserved, which make people that much less likely to play Sec again.

I'd like to suggest departmental offices if feasible, the standard 3x3 (or 2x3 in a pinch) cubicles that come with basic ID access and departmental radio encryption. I'd suggest that cadets/Constables spawn at these offices right at roundstart, and serve as their public face of Security to different departments; I imagine this'd provide a more supportive environment for someone to learn the job, and would in turn provide that department with a tangible Security presence. Having a department to guard and a little Security checkpoint office to call their own would help make the role more than just a "learner" one. Security's currently responsible for the entire station at all times, which in practice means that you're running around pissing on brushfires here, there, and everywhere. Having a single department to guard and a small group to watch over would let someone play Security in a relaxed manner, only dipping their toes into the regular chaos when they felt like it.

c) Lack of education vs. having a designated teacher: I've seen someone previously suggest a "Security Instructor" role, which was shot down on the basis of "experienced Seccies can teach newbies already." Without getting too confrontational, lemme put it like this: I've played an absurd amount of time on Paradise, let alone other SS13 servers, and in all that time I've seen a 'Sec training exercise' happen exactly once. On extended. That was it.

Barring extended all day erryday, we need a framework of regular newbie education. Relying on charity, on someone experienced having the means, motive, and opportunity to take newbies under their wing during a busy shift, is not a viable solution. The poor staffing problem is the root cause of Security's issues, and lack of help for newcomers in the role is a significant contributor to the issue. Other players can certainly contribute, but we need someone whose role is focused primarily around education, to teach newbie Seccies everything from prisoner processing to shooting, and who won't bin all that teaching the moment a 'ling pops up in Sci Maint. I think the previous "Security Instructor" role addressed it handily, and I'd suggest a separate radio channel for "cadets/Constables" to give them space to ask dumb questions like "how do I use a flash anyway?"

The obvious response to the concept of a separate radio channel would be "just use mhelp," but as an admin with access to the mentor channel, I can definitively say that they don't. People often just won't ask for help without some prompting ("hey, I saw that scuffle over in Processing, lemme show you how to take cuffs off a prisoner safely"), and other people just won't offer it without a little push. The "Sec Instructor" role is meant to provide that push, because when you log in to that job, you know that you'll need to step up to the plate to help teach newbies. This doesn't stop other Sec players from helping instruct newbies; matter of fact, I'd argue it would make them more likely to do so. It's the basic "bandwagoning" effect in action, where one person setting an example encourages others to join in. The goal here should be to prompt people towards better behavior, to give them that initial push, and to let them carry it the rest of the way.

Tl;dr version:

Spoiler

 

1. Learner role (suggested name "Constable")

-Starting text: "You are the Constable. Your job is to patrol the station and to keep crew safe."

-Brig, Holding Cells access. No Security access.

-Has access to Security comms. Suggestion: spawns with a regular headset, not a bowman one with its hearing protection (makes them less of a target for antags).

-Suggestion: additional radio channel, limited to Constables, the Security Instructor (see below), and the HoS. This would give newbies a safer place to ask dumb questions than on the Security channel in the open.

-Spawns with flash, handcuffs. No ranged stun. Starts in one of the departmental checkpoints (see below). Additional basic equipment would be available in checkpoints.

 

2. Departmental checkpoints:

-2x3 or 3x3 space, effectively imported from /tg/station.

-Constables/cadets/newbies would spawn in these locations. Would require Holding Cell access (allows newbie Seccies while keeping Command members like the CMO/CE/RD from breaking in).

-Basic departmental ID access and a coloured armband included (purple for Science, blue for Medbay, etc.).

-Encryption key for that department's comms.

-Basic equipment for a newbie: flash, pepperspray, handcuffs, security belt. Would have recharger, pepperspray wall refiller, and similar necessities.

-Would also have Security Records and Security Camera consoles, letting someone contribute and help out without leaving their post.

-Suggested locations: Medical, Science, Engineering, Cargo, Service (in or near the Bar). Would also suggest moving the Arrivals Checkpoint to a similar setup, to let a late-joining Constable take it over if they wanted to.

 

3. Security Instructor:

-Starting text: "You are the Security Instructor. Your job is to teach other Security personnel, and to help them perform their jobs better."

-Basic Sec Officer gear. Only difference is the different name change and a slightly different uniform/hat to differentiate them.

-Has access to both regular Security and the low-acuity 'Constable' comms, in order to answer newbie's questions in semi-privacy.

-Karma-locked role, 30 points.

 

Other changes:

-Increased barrier to entry for other Security roles. Option #1: Sec Officers require significant playtime (6-8 hours or more) as a Constable. Option #2: Minimal karma-lock for other Security roles (5 points unlocks the Sec Officer, Warden, HoS, and Sec Instructor).

 

 

I could go on for ages about stuff I'd like to see implemented: additional minor antags like smugglers or drug dealers to add some early-round shenanigans, renovating IA so that people actually want to play the role, improving antag gameplay so that they have greater freedom to act and are rewarded for interesting or exciting acts of villainy, etc. However, none of those things deal with the basic issue of Security staffing, and there's no point in trying to add new antagonists or tweaking high-level gameplay if we don't address the more basic, fundamental problem of "people just don't play Sec."

I've seen a lot of proposals to reform Security in the past, and I've thought a lot of them had merit myself. They were almost universally shot down, primarily by admins and coders; in my *ahem* years playing on Paradise, I haven't seen Security itself change. I have seen admin policy towards antagonists and on-station troublemakers get more restrictive, however, and much of that is due simply to Sec's inability to handle anything significant. As @Ping mentioned on the first page, there's an expectation of peace and order on-station, which Security simply isn't able to fulfill. The current system just isn't working, and our piecemeal efforts to address it aren't fixing the fundamental problem. Unless we make a 180 on the idea of station chaos tomorrow, we'll need a larger Security force to maintain order.

No matter whether we adopt a "newbie Seccie" role or not, we need to change things up, because the current system isn't functioning reliably. I've seen frequent suggestions made on the forums about antags being too restrictive* and Security being constantly understaffed; once again, everything comes back to Security staffing. Threads like this or this are symptomatic of the larger problem we have downstream of Security's ineffectiveness, not to mention the perfectly valid complaints about Sec misbehavior and general shitcurity-ing. I'd like to think that my proposals above would address a good deal of the "learning cliff" problem, and I'm open to suggestions and trying something entirely different. Ultimately, though, I really don't want us to put our collective heads in the sand, and pretend that the problem can be resolved with a few tweaks - or that it can't be addressed at all. This is a major issue, and adequately addressing it will require a major rework.

 

*Honestly, even as an admin myself, I've disabled most antag roles rather than play them due to being too restrictive. Having to look over my shoulder before doing anything is way too much of a hassle.

[Leanfrog]

So, an idea I've come up with is splitting the duties of sec into two new roles, keeping standard sec officers as is but they are now only tasked with handling non antag security work, so things like that brawl that just broke out in the bar, and adding in a new role with the duty of dealing with antags as well as handling space law if it is needed, this would create a more low tempo job that newer players could take to learn the ropes without the burden of dealing with antags, the new role would have the same starting equipment as officers but with basic departmental access to handle emergencies within departments, I'd imagine the new role could be something along the lines of a "S.W.A.T Officer" specifically hired to counteract syndicate actions on NT locations. The less stressful duties of standard sec officers will allow for more experienced players to teach newbies the ropes of space law and SoP while they don't have to deal with the stress of hunting antags, I'm sure it could be worked into SoP that standard sec officers if the situation calls for it will be allowed to assist in dealing with antags, but it does not mean they are required to deal with them.

[Regular Joe]

Norwest’s post is mighty fine description on the issues of the security, and the suggestion there to tackle them seem very reasonable to me.

I just love that idea to implement a junior role to sec. It would both answer the call of Medi’s original suggestion here and add to the sec gameplay, make it more fun, by adding there some variation. As of, the junior sec role as ”constable” would definitely not be just a pinata with different name - in contrast with cadets discussed earlier, as the constable role would  have its own, meaningful share of the sec cake and the restriction to not to go after EoC-type threats like regular officers.

 I would, in certain, take shifts as departmental constable officer, for just having more time to interact with people, instead of running after the bad guys taser hot, which often has to be the case due the situation, even if the main reason I like the game and sec in specific is the interaction, paired with meaningful action. Then have an instructor to herd the red goons in general and the constables in specific, so that a) that kind of activity would actually happen and b) the new constables would have an overwatch that have time for their doings. HoS would have their time in making decisions and maintaining contact with their department, as it is (or should be) presently. 

As in the instructor thread, I support a tweak to sec’s organisation, to have some more designated jobs there, to make the good things happen more often.

Edited September 7, 2019 by Regular Joe

[JarlElbow]

I actually don't mind this suggestion at all. Increasing the time required to play security, even if just a bit, would only benefit the server, if you ask me. A single, experienced security player is generally far more competent in dealing with most situations than three new security players, so having the entire sec team be comprised of people who actually know how to play the game, and know how rounds run, would generally reduce the level of abuse across the board, and quell the shittyness of shitcurity a bit.

Also yeah, having a junior security role, or something similar to it would help players with less time start to learn the department, without having the responsibilities or equipment of actual security officers. Maybe this role could be restricted to helping out in the brig most of the time, since the warden could definitely use some help there on more hectic rounds.

Edited September 28, 2019 by JarlElbow