Chief_ Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 What are you suggesting? - A Edit to Rule 6 of the Class Specific Rules - All Players Section "Players are not allowed to “puppy guard” spawn areas. This includes waiting at SCP Containment Cells during their breach attempts unless called out in RP." To "Players are not allowed to “puppy guard” spawn areas. This includes waiting at SCP Containment Cells during their breach attempts unless called out in RP." "- Maintenance personnel are not allowed to wait inside of a containment chamber after failing a roll. They must leave the area for 5 minutes." How would this change better the server? - It would be better for SCP's when trying to breach so they Are there any disadvantages of making this change to the server? If so, explain. - That Maintenance will have to walk back. Who would this change mostly benefit? - SCP's Please link any workshop content, screenshots, or anything that you think may be helpful to those who view this suggestion - The reason why I am suggesting this is because maintenance shouldn't just be sitting 24/7 in a cell waiting for a scp to self breach. Then the rule about puppy guarding places which includes SCP containment chambers unless they are called out is Kandloff useless. As Maintenance just call out that a SCP is breaching/has breached if they just wait inside of the containment chamber the entire time. All this is going to do is make it so that scp's have a better chance of escaping. Forcing maintenance to check up on other things/do other things while they are waiting for their 5 minute timer to end. Head Admin SCP-RP || Event Team Overseer || Ethics Committee || Ex Security FTO 1LT || Ex Security Warden || Ex CI R&D Senior Agent || UMC Guest [LVL 0] || Former Research Researcher || Former DORSU || Former DOC || Former LCZ Manager || I aM sPeCiAl || Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shin Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 +SUPPORT Yeah, sounds kinda scummy to be honest to just wait 5 minutes, call staff, and ruin player's fun for the SCPs. I've done it before and I've also experience it. But I actually never thought about bringing it up in the forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pills Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 +support -this is something I do anyways on maintenance Former: 𝐒𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐃𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐫 - 𝐒𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐀𝐝𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[GL] Fryingpan36 Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 1 hour ago, Chief_ said: They must leave the area for 5 minutes." that would prove annoying for maintenance, also the maintenance can't harm the SCP if it gets out anyway. Also its not needed tbh the only reason why I would support this in anyway is if FE or CE were forced to go. also you can just wait outside. -/+ support just for MTF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Right Twix Bar Posted July 14, 2021 Share Posted July 14, 2021 (edited) If this were put in place, it would contradict a rule under Roll Guidelines/RP Rules I don't particularly have a large bias for or against this, just pointing out a contradiction. Edited July 14, 2021 by Right Twix Bar Current: None Former: Security Sergeant Major (and SFC), Director of Logistics, Alpha-1 Private First Class, CI Mil Private First Class (and E4 C6), Nu7 Lance Corporal, CI RnD Supervisory Agent (and EOI F3) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demon Dice Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 8 hours ago, Shin said: +SUPPORT Yeah, sounds kinda scummy to be honest to just wait 5 minutes, call staff, and ruin player's fun for the SCPs. I've done it before and I've also experience it. But I actually never thought about bringing it up in the forums. Demonically Inspired ..Nu7 CMDR Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[GL] Fizz-y Soda Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 5 hours ago, Right Twix Bar said: If this were put in place, it would contradict a rule under Roll Guidelines/RP Rules I don't particularly have a large bias for or against this, just pointing out a contradiction. Chief, probably edit your post to include this too? +Support CI CMDR / CA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nydekore Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 I'm not against this idea, but technically they are supposed to stay in the area. In the roll guidelines it states "Foundation personnel attempting to fix a containment cell that fail the first roll must remain at that location for the entire five minutes to be able to reattempt the fix." Now, this is hardly ever enforced and I'm totally fine with this being removed all together, just adding this in so that MOTD doesn't conflict with itself. Former: Deputy Head of Research | MTF Nu-7 Captain x2 | SCPRP Super Admin | MTF O-1 Major Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparkle Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 Obviously the contradiction above has to be fixed if accepted. My input from a Utility perspective. The 5 minutes is meant to used to do RP preparation for the next roll. If no other breaches or events are happening, their current position would be the focus. As already mentioned, the rule is hardly enforced cause it doesn't make sense to be enforced. Movement to other calls should be happening if such calls are available. Also, if rolls fail enough (as rigged as they are lmao), there shouldn't be a reason personnel stays longer putting themselves in danger. The rule clarification on puppy guarding is still +Support Just not convinced on the Maintenance part especially if they are alone on fixes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toasty Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 - Support TBH I don't see a reason on why maintenance would have to leave the cell and come back if the SCP is in the cell self breaching, if they had to leave and come back 5 min later or sit there wouldn't affect the outcome since the rolls would still be 5 min apart. Another reason I think it wouldn't really make sense is that when someone goes to fix a SCP cell when its broken why would they just leave the broken cell if they failed to fix it, especially when a SCP is on a NLR and would get out again why would we just leave it and let it escape to just cause more damage that we are trying to stop. Former: O5-10 "The Mad General" / SCP-RP Head Admin / CI 2LT / Security CPT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rookieblue Posted July 15, 2021 Share Posted July 15, 2021 18 hours ago, Right Twix Bar said: If this were put in place, it would contradict a rule under Roll Guidelines/RP Rules I don't particularly have a large bias for or against this, just pointing out a contradiction. I was actually going to point this out as well. This rule is written in so that people can't just run around to different doors and spam fix stuff. They would have to in RP actually take the time to "work" on it longer to try to fix it. 1 Retired SCP-RP Head of Staff March 3rd, 2019 - December 16th, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chief_ Posted July 15, 2021 Author Share Posted July 15, 2021 3 hours ago, Rookieblue said: I was actually going to point this out as well. This rule is written in so that people can't just run around to different doors and spam fix stuff. They would have to in RP actually take the time to "work" on it longer to try to fix it. Oh I didn't notice this rule. Head Admin SCP-RP || Event Team Overseer || Ethics Committee || Ex Security FTO 1LT || Ex Security Warden || Ex CI R&D Senior Agent || UMC Guest [LVL 0] || Former Research Researcher || Former DORSU || Former DOC || Former LCZ Manager || I aM sPeCiAl || Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coltable Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 Yeah not to sure about this, I understand that having the maintenance sit in the containment results in the SCP being instantly called out when breached, while on the other hand the maintenance in RP is trying to fix the containment so that's understandable. Honestly you would need to come up with a whole new system or rule set if you wanted to get around this issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ya Boi Sawrunner Posted July 21, 2021 Share Posted July 21, 2021 I wasnt even aware that this WASN'T already a rule. On maintenance we usually pack up and go to be fair to the SCPs. I see it in rp as you attempt to fixed damaged stuff but possibly get hurt or make it go to a state that is irreparable for a little bit, sparking wires, crushing gears, so on. Going to go fix something else in the meantime due to hazardous conditions on the previous fix is just logical, especially with scps like 610 where accidents like that could result in contaimination. +support Daddy D Boi |Previously CI SGM XB1 and RAM|Formerly Agent Starboi| CCs: Frank West | Doctor Samuel Hayden | Solid Snake | CI Recon Force | Drip Hank Hill | The O7 Bois (Owner of Sunsetters) The Femboi With The Fubar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Real Slim Nova Posted July 25, 2021 Share Posted July 25, 2021 This should be commonly written in the MOTD, I always thought this was an actual rule. As a former maintenance adept, I would leave the cell and wait the specified time.+SUPPORT The picture explains what I am. [DATA EXPU-] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Igneous Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 On 7/15/2021 at 10:44 AM, Rookieblue said: I was actually going to point this out as well. This rule is written in so that people can't just run around to different doors and spam fix stuff. They would have to in RP actually take the time to "work" on it longer to try to fix it. This makes sense, as basically this rule can be a double edged sword. Either we tell maintenance to stay in one spot to prevent them from going somewhere else and trying to stop self breach, or we force them to leave thus making them go to other self breach, I think our current rule is more beneficially to the MOST amount of people, but sometimes you might get the short end of the stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Igneous Posted July 31, 2021 Share Posted July 31, 2021 Denied. The SCP-RP SMT has decided against adding this suggestion for performance reasons, the benefit to the server, or another unstated reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts