NBT Jobs Division Feedback

[QuestioningMark]

1 hour ago, Skull132 said:

While the initial point you make is valid, the proposed solution would lead to gutting one department even further and adding even more responsibilities to another. Which isn't necessarily a great play. "Science" doesn't necessarily have to be "Science" in terms of conducting novel research. Having a micro-electronics role or such responsible for small scale prototype and device manufacture could easily be feasible, which is what the protolathe and circuit board stuff does.

You raise very valid points. I would argue however that the reason it would be considered gutting is because sceience's current feature set is rather underutalised except for a slim few users in it's current itteration. It really does just feel like a fabrication department that sometimes makes a OP gun or machine upgrades for dudes - and it never really feels that 'immersive'.

It probably eventually needs a redesign, an oppertunity with NBT will probably become available, but obviously very demanding of codework. So I'm not gonna speak further on the matter.

[BunkyB]

I am very happy with these changes.
Most of the concerns I had have been echoed in other comments

You've stated that none of this is particularly set in stone, so I'd like to suggest:

Are piloting the ship and the shuttles both supposed to be done by Bridge Crew?
I'd much prefer having a unique role with less responsibilities tacked on to either Research or Operations that has the job of piloting the shuttles. Leaving the entire ship to the Bridge Crew.

In the case that a secondary pilot role isn't introduced, would the Bridge Crew piloting the shuttles have authority over the away-site team when on a mission and by extension, the shuttle itself? 

Are the tools and equipment required for off-map locations stored in or near the hangar (ie. Suspension Field Generator and Mining Drills) and if so, who has access to the places where they're stored?

Will there be relevant paperwork added, or will a timetable app be added for planning away-site missions, like Bay? I feel like this is a requirement, even if it isn't used as much as I hope it would.

The Service Manager isn't a head-of-staff, does this mean they can change faction between NT and Idris, like other service roles?

 

[tzeneth]

Question: why is the position called "Executive Officer" when they are not, in-fact, the executive officer which is the second-in-command? That seems confusing as all heck if someone joins the server, the captain is absent and the person sporting the title of what is traditionally the "second-in-command" is in fact, not the second-in-command.

[NerdyVampire]

7 minutes ago, tzeneth said:

Question: why is the position called "Executive Officer" when they are not, in-fact, the executive officer which is the second-in-command? That seems confusing as all heck if someone joins the server, the captain is absent and the person sporting the title of what is traditionally the "second-in-command" is in fact, not the second-in-command.

I think they are the go-to as acting captain if the situation arises, but I don't think that we should outright remove the command vote and cohesion for no better reason than realism. The issue of electing an acting captain does facilitate command roleplay as far as I'm concerned, and I think a designated 2nd will hollow it out.

Also I am excited for NBT and think the changes will bring a nice disruption ^^

[Arrow768]

9 hours ago, QuestioningMark said:

You raise very valid points. I would argue however that the reason it would be considered gutting is because sceience's current feature set is rather underutalised except for a slim few users in it's current itteration. It really does just feel like a fabrication department that sometimes makes a OP gun or machine upgrades for dudes - and it never really feels that 'immersive'.

It probably eventually needs a redesign, an oppertunity with NBT will probably become available, but obviously very demanding of codework. So I'm not gonna speak further on the matter.

The location of the protolathe is not really relevant for the job changes, as it is only a minor part of the scientist job. (Which will remain weather or not we have a protolathe in science.)

[Marlon P.]

Cool changes! I only feel like bridge crew should be called Pilots??

Edited November 1, 2021 by Marlon P.

[MattAtlas]

1 hour ago, Marlon P. said:

Cool changes! I only feel like bridge crew should be called Pilots??

Their role isn't simply piloting. The name is meant to be more generic so they can be sent to do various things by the XO - department checkups, coordinating an away mission, ...

[Alberyk]

5 hours ago, tzeneth said:

Question: why is the position called "Executive Officer" when they are not, in-fact, the executive officer which is the second-in-command? That seems confusing as all heck if someone joins the server, the captain is absent and the person sporting the title of what is traditionally the "second-in-command" is in fact, not the second-in-command.

We want to keep our current chain of command, we believe it works better this way. Executive officer was just the best name to better represent what the position is meant to be.

8 hours ago, BunkyB said:

Are piloting the ship and the shuttles both supposed to be done by Bridge Crew?
I'd much prefer having a unique role with less responsibilities tacked on to either Research or Operations that has the job of piloting the shuttles. Leaving the entire ship to the Bridge Crew.

Yes. But we are against a pilot job only because they would either do nothing or just do a single thing that is not granted to happen.

8 hours ago, BunkyB said:

The Service Manager isn't a head-of-staff, does this mean they can change faction between NT and Idris, like other service roles?

Yes.

[HunterRS]

My only current critique is if machinists are tied to operations and not science. Will Directors have access to the Machinists labs and will machinists have access to both radios to coordinate with directors and science about research levels?

[Marlon P.]

2 hours ago, MattAtlas said:

Their role isn't simply piloting. The name is meant to be more generic so they can be sent to do various things by the XO - department checkups, coordinating an away mission, ...

Are they analogous to QMs then, being middle management?

[MattAtlas]

6 minutes ago, Marlon P. said:

Are they analogous to QMs then, being middle management?

No. They don't hold authority over the crew.

[Marlon P.]

2 hours ago, MattAtlas said:

Their role isn't simply piloting. The name is meant to be more generic so they can be sent to do various things by the XO - department checkups, coordinating an away mission, ...

These imply some level of authority. I'm not sure how coordination, check-up, and other tasks don't qualify them as a sort of middle management. What would their average round look like?

[MattAtlas]

8 minutes ago, Marlon P. said:

These imply some level of authority. I'm not sure how coordination, check-up, and other tasks don't qualify them as a sort of middle management. What would their average round look like?

They're just examples of tasks the XO can offload to the bridge crew. They're not their duties as written. Normally, they don't have this authority - imagine it as an analogue to the captain telling a scientist to round up a few people for an expedition.

[greenjoe]

What companies will the bridge crew be under? SCC or one of the megacorps? Since they're not really a department like the other jobs are, that's why I'm asking.

[Marlon P.]

43 minutes ago, MattAtlas said:

They're just examples of tasks the XO can offload to the bridge crew. They're not their duties as written. Normally, they don't have this authority - imagine it as an analogue to the captain telling a scientist to round up a few people for an expedition.

Thank you for the answers. Sorry if im badgering.

I understand now. I believe it may be better still to have Pilots who are said to have expanded responsibilities - the ones you listed. That way everyone knows that they can fly the shuttle/ship/etc and that they have no authority. Since a pilot is needed for an expedition anyway(?) it feels more intuitive. Bridge crew as ive encountered them in SS13 usually have some authority.

[MattAtlas]

1 hour ago, Marlon P. said:

That way everyone knows that they can fly the shuttle/ship/etc and that they have no authority

Not really a problem, this will be specified in game start blurbs plus the wiki.

[greenjoe]

will operations manager have the same species restrictions as the quartermaster?

[RyverStyx]

On 31/10/2021 at 19:41, Arrow768 said:

The point of the service manager is to provide a non whitelisted low intensity management role.
This was previously the role of the QM, however with the NBT the QM has added responsibilities and is a whitelisted job (the operations manager)

When framed like this I think the service manager is a fitting role. It’s nice to have that intermediary role between staff and command.

[Marlon P.]

While it feels weird to imagine seeing "bridge crew" running around flying shuttles and being out on missions given 'why arent you on the bridge' i imagine and agree enough exposure to it will normalize it.

If anything, I'd love to see Pilot as a job title somewhere, as an alt to bridge crew even. Having a big ship and shuttles and no pilots feels criminal!

[greenjoe]

45 minutes ago, Marlon P. said:

If anything, I'd love to see Pilot as a job title somewhere, as an alt to bridge crew even. Having a big ship and shuttles and no pilots feels criminal!

Helmsman and Pilot may well be good titles for the job

[Butterrobber202]

1 hour ago, greenjoe said:

Helmsman and Pilot may well be good titles for the job

Pilot is being avoided because we don’t  want to have someone assigned to a single job that may or may not happen in the round.

[Marlon P.]

I must sound like the most pedantic man in the world, and i dont want to use a lot of posts over the one job suggestion.

A pilot would have the same responsibilities as a bridgecrewman.

Pilot would be an alt title or the main title.

Think of it like the Warden. No matter how many jobs they have outside the brig its so engrained that they'll be pestered with "why arent you in the brig?"

A ship pilot doesn't have that baggage of expectation.

[OffRoad99]

48 minutes ago, Butterrobber202 said:

Pilot is being avoided because we don’t  want to have someone assigned to a single job that may or may not happen in the round.

On one end, I kind of agree with you: I don't think you're aiming for the same complexity as Bay's flight system (I'm strongly out of date with recent news, correct me if I'm wrong). therefore a pilot-only job would simply consist of clicking "Take-Off" and "Land" every once in a while. And that's it.
On the other...I personally was very enthusiastic about a Pilot-only job. On Bay I regularly ran check-ups on the shuttle even if it never left the ship, and/or hanged out with other crewmembers while I remained on stand-by for takeoff.

[Alberyk]

2 minutes ago, OffRoad99 said:

On one end, I kind of agree with you: I don't think you're aiming for the same complexity as Bay's flight system (I'm strongly out of date with recent news, correct me if I'm wrong). therefore a pilot-only job would simply consist of clicking "Take-Off" and "Land" every once in a while. And that's it.

No. We have the same overmap system as bay.

At best, we could add pilot as a bridge crew alt title.

[greenjoe]

12 minutes ago, Alberyk said:

At best, we could add pilot as a bridge crew alt title.

that's what I was thinking, that and Helmsman as an alt title.