Chain of Command Change: Heads of Staff > ERT > Crew

[EvilBrage]

Exactly like it says on the box. Too often, they blitz the station with very little understanding of what's going on, exactly. Even though it was the heads of staff who called them, there are often times they ignore them altogether and simply do as they please aboard the station - and unlike heads of staff, they are not whitelisted.

Thoughts?

[Guest]

I think ERT Leader>Heads>ERT>Crew>Synthetics would be better. But I totally agree, unless the situation is COMPLETELY out of control, the ERT should try to bend to the Heads of Staff's will.

[Jamini]

I think ERT Leader>Heads>ERT>Crew>Synthetics would be better. But I totally agree, unless the situation is COMPLETELY out of control, the ERT should try to bend to the Heads of Staff's will.

 

I've suggested something similar to this. A few times.

[Johnny Mnemonic]

Not sure about heads of staff. What about Captain>ERT commander>heads of staff>ERT>crew>synthetics

With ERT taking orders from both heads of staff and Commander, but taking precedence to commanders orders

In emergencies this would encourage acting captains, and ERT will still retain some modecum of power if the ERT commander was played by a competent player, while the station can still retain independence with the whitelisted captain

[Serveris]

Only shitler ERTs completely take command out of the hands of the heads of staff. There are circumstances where it is necessary, usually when there is conflict between the other heads of staff (cases where the captain is on a murder spree is a good example of sidestepping the chain of command.)

Otherwise, you're there to assist the recovery effort. If an ERT rolls onto the station and starts to completely disregard command's authority, adminhelp it. Work with command at every turn, and delegate your efforts. There's so much more coordination when you don't have to do it all alone.

As for shifting the chain of command to accommodate people, I could see myself getting behind a solution like this. Personally, I wouldn't mind moderators actively drumming this kind of behavior out, as it typically causes more destruction ICly than fixing, as is its purpose. OOCly, it just ends up with a series of complaints and round end OOC complaining.

Also, concerning this:

Not sure about heads of staff. What about Captain>ERT commander>heads of staff>ERT>crew>synthetics

With ERT taking orders from both heads of staff and Commander, but taking precedence to commanders orders

In emergencies this would encourage acting captains, and ERT will still retain some modecum of power if the ERT commander was played by a competent player, while the station can still retain independence with the whitelisted captain

 

It should be noted that ERT Commanders are Doombergadminspawned and are arguably the most high ranking CC staff you're going to see, and should have a staggering amount of authority.

I'm almost positive that you're referring to LEADING TROOPERS, or L/Tprs, as these are often run of the mill players. This role is given to whichever ERT joins in first.

The two have similar roles, but there is a distinct change of power between the two. I wouldn't mind drawing a line on their station authority either, though.

[Tainavaa]

This is an interesting thing. If it weren't for some ERT that ignores the rest of the station or cause more issues I don't think the chain of command would have an issue. Basically, if they did their job well. So the chain of command issue stems from an OOC issue.

That's what makes me reluctant. I'm not necessarily against it but I see ERT as a "practical" team that comes and sorts out the issues deemed an emergency, and ignoring or only assisting with issues that aren't emergent. So they'd be delegating their efforts to the heads while they dealt with the reason they were called. If they're in charge of solving the problem they're given more authority than crew that would normally outrank them but ONLY for the specific issue.

For example, there are terrorists on the station and there are also wounded. The terrorists are clearly an emergent threat that caused the ERT call while the wounded can be managed by medical. The CMO says that, so ERT shouldn't have authority over medical but they do have authority necessary to manage resources to deal with the emergent issue. That does include delegating your own power to the heads of staff to better deal with the issue.

I haven't seen ERT for a while personally so I don't know how they're generally seen or played but Im going to guess they're played something like, "We're ERT. We do what we want. You do what we want."

If so, then I would have to begrudgingly agree that the chain of command probably should be changed to prevent abuse of power from players that aren't regulated for ERT.

[Johnny Mnemonic]

It should be noted that ERT Commanders are Doombergadminspawned and are arguably the most high ranking CC staff you're going to see, and should have a staggering amount of authority.

I'm almost positive that you're referring to LEADING TROOPERS, or L/Tprs, as these are often run of the mill players. This role is given to whichever ERT joins in first.

The two have similar roles, but there is a distinct change of power between the two. I wouldn't mind drawing a line on their station authority either, though.

 

Yes, i was, albeit i wasn't even aware there was a difference personally (i don't generally interact with or play ERT). Thank you for correcting me

Accomodating accordingly- ERT commanders> captain>ERT leading trooper>heads of staff>ERT>crew>synthetics

As for murdering captains, if the validity of the loyalty implant can be brought into question, sidestepping the chain is as probably valid

[Eliot Clef]

Exactly like it says on the box. Too often, they blitz the station with very little understanding of what's going on, exactly. Even though it was the heads of staff who called them, there are often times they ignore them altogether and simply do as they please aboard the station - and unlike heads of staff, they are not whitelisted.

Thoughts?

 

I think that the proposed rank restructuring solution is a bigger recipe for trouble than simply having mods or admins deal with chucklefuck ERTs. ERTs usually aren't around, only get called in when things are extremely fucked, and even with our current rank structure I've had problems with regular crew members claiming that I have no jurisdiction to do minor things like retrieve implants from the armory as an ERT.

In an attempt to damage control the possibility of chucklefuck ERTs, you're opening the door for compromised or chucklefuck Heads of Staff -- and there are chucklefuck Heads of Staff, whitelist or no --making the problem worse on arrival. Additionally, you're making the ERT subject to SOP rules that wouldn't allow them to handle the AI without assistance of security or the Heads of Staff, and subjecting them to the personal whims of people like the Head of Security who won't allow lethals usage during counter-terrorism operations.

Basically, the consequences of making such a change is an introduction of excess complexity and additional problems. Ban people from ERT if they can't behave themselves.

[EvilBrage]

We like to pretend that we've thrown these elaborate checks and balances in through paperwork and other mediums, but the fact of the matter is that 95% of ERT characters are one-off things. They don't face consequences for their actions (even less than normal crew members, impossible as that sounds.) An ERT member can indeed waltz into the armory and jack a lockbox full of implants and go to town because of an "emergency," but will there ever be any repercussions for that? Will they have a whitelist status scrutinized?

There's no accountability whatsoever; literally anyone can become an ERT member and immediately jump beyond the scope of what the emergency has been defined as because they simply don't answer to the heads of staff, and that is a bit troubling.

[K0NFL1QT]

As ERT is the stations last line of defense, and their deployment has to be authorized by Heads of Staff in the first place, I don't want them forced to obey a potentially traitorous/culted head of staff/Captain.

I like that they are above the established Chain of Command. It means they can actually get shit done, but they shouldn't be hijacking departmental control unless -absolutely- necessary. Ideally, an ERT wants as little 'control' over a department as possible, freeing them to go hunting for cultists, nukies, breaches, combating rampant viruses or whatever other threat was deemed too much for the stations crew to deal with.

If some ERT are being shit, report them.

[Jamini]

As ERT is the stations last line of defense, and their deployment has to be authorized by Heads of Staff in the first place, I don't want them forced to obey a potentially traitorous/culted head of staff/Captain.

 

The issue is simple.

Heads of staff are whitelisted, often very experienced players, with a vested interest in keeping the round going/interesting for all involved.

ERT staff are not-whitelisted, often those who have died in the round or not joined in the round, with a vested interest in fighting shit with their overpowered guns and a boner for complete control over the station.

Who would you prefer to have command?

DO/CMDR > CAP > Lt.TPR > HEAD > TPR > STAFF > ASSISTANTS > SYNTHS > PRISONERS

Please and thank you.

[K0NFL1QT]

Good point, but there's no need to punish ALL ERT players for the mistakes of a few. An ERT whitelist would be a more palatable solution, and appropriate considering their authority exceeds Heads of Staff, but would lead to an increased workload for approval staff.

[Eliot Clef]

Good point, but there's no need to punish ALL ERT players for the mistakes of a few. An ERT whitelist would be a more palatable solution, and appropriate considering their authority exceeds Heads of Staff, but would lead to an increased workload for approval staff.

 

ERT is hard enough to fill as-is a lot of the time. I often see staff members have to go take up the role for lack of anybody else.

I honestly don't think it's a good point. I think it's a knee-jerk reaction that will cause more problems than good on the rare occasion that it's relevant. I'd rather deal with the sometimes-bad-egg ERTs than giving Heads of Staff authority over them, because I'm almost certain it will cripple ERT's ability to do their job.

[Tainavaa]

It's an IC solution to an OOC problem.

I don't enjoy it and it makes more sense to keep them above the captain. So my question is, is it WORTH making these changes? Will the benefit of hindering bad ERT outweigh the con of restricting good ERT?

[Jamini]

It's an IC solution to an OOC problem.

I don't enjoy it and it makes more sense to keep them above the captain. So my question is, is it WORTH making these changes? Will the benefit of hindering bad ERT outweigh the con of restricting good ERT?

 

Good ERT will not be ignored, like they are currently

Bad ERT will get adminslapped for abusing their authority.

Win-win

[Tainavaa]

You say that but I foresee a lot of good ERT being subjugated to possessive heads of staff.

[K0NFL1QT]

ERT are not there to 'do as they are told'. They are there to solve a problem that the Heads of Staff were not able to solve themselves, ergo making them then answer to the Heads makes no sense. However, good ERT will not take control of a department unless the Head themselves are rogue or missing

[Guest]

What konfliqt and Tainavaa said.

What's the point of calling in soldiers in the event the heads cannot return the station back to Command staff's control, when they themselves answer to the heads anyway?

[Frances]

I believe this suggestion is being brought from an OOC perspective, to adapt and change the role of the ERT in an attempt to curb down on the damage caused by baddies.

I nevertheless do not think the ERT should have a major change in purpose (going from being in command to basically being extra hands for the station to monopolize). Both in my time as an admin and as a player, I haven't seen enough ERT members being terrible to justify this, and the few that did misbehave or fuck up usually engaged in fuckups of a much simpler and easily explainable nature than anything that would involve the chain of command or giving out orders to anyone.

Like, they'd run off alone in the station, or get lost in the armory, miss the ERT shuttle, and C4 Centcom. Moving them down in the chain of command wouldn't solve any of this.

[Guest]

Making ERT whitelisted would fix that issue.

[Frances]

Making ERT whitelisted would fix that issue.

From having observed the general contingent of ERT players while being on staff, I can tell you that a good 50-70% of them are a mix of regulars who don't play heads, and semi-regular or non regulars who happen to feel like playing ERT.

As it is probably the role you get to play the least in the game, I can basically guarantee you if it were whitelisted no one would ERT anymore.

Has the stupidity in ERT really gotten that bad? Can you provide some examples, maybe? If people seem to think it really is an issue it might be worth trying to come up with another possible fix.

[Guest]

I've seen security and ERT shoot each other up during a cult round over one (1) pacified cultist prisoner, me, because I kept intentionally aggravating the dickweed with the SMG. Evidently, the ghosts from early on in the round that I slapped with my tome came along and did rather spoopy things (even going so far as SueTheCake appearing as a creepy goliath ghost and spooping everyone off.)

I've seen ERT shoot themselves in the foot and charge headlong into nuke op firing lines, warranting a deathsquad because they failed.

I've seen ERT (that did not even have command/head of staff whitelists) assume complete takeover of the station and sit their dumb butts on the station, making their rule a rather oligarchical and fascist one.