03-15-2017, 04:49 PM
The way I see it, there are three viable approaches to the armory issue:
#1 maintains the status quo, which is honestly not that bad right now.
#2 solves the problem of not having a HoS by just skipping him entirely, but it introduces a new issue: what do we do with Sundance the Head of Security now?
#3 addresses the issue of not having a HoS by providing a strong incentive for someone to play HoS, thereby increasing the likelihood of there being an active HoS in any given round. As a bonus, it also provides the coders with valuable feedback about new, untested weaponry, armor, and other miscellaneous gear without having to worry about upsetting the general server populace if something turns out to be horribly buggy and/or unbalanced.
Option number three seems like a win-win for everyone involved. I just hope I'm not overstepping my boundaries by suggesting it.
- Leave it as it is.
- Remove the HoS-lock but incorporate some other kind of special security system. Give the HoS some other unique doohickey to replace his armory access.
- Make the armory even more secure, keep the HoS access, and use it as a testbed for experimental equipment that the coders don't quite trust the general public to have yet.
#1 maintains the status quo, which is honestly not that bad right now.
#2 solves the problem of not having a HoS by just skipping him entirely, but it introduces a new issue: what do we do with Sundance the Head of Security now?
#3 addresses the issue of not having a HoS by providing a strong incentive for someone to play HoS, thereby increasing the likelihood of there being an active HoS in any given round. As a bonus, it also provides the coders with valuable feedback about new, untested weaponry, armor, and other miscellaneous gear without having to worry about upsetting the general server populace if something turns out to be horribly buggy and/or unbalanced.
Option number three seems like a win-win for everyone involved. I just hope I'm not overstepping my boundaries by suggesting it.