Thread Rating:
  • 4 Vote(s) - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
HoS Application - saccharineChampion
Usual character name: Scam Likely/Calliope Likely/Constance Viridian
BYOND username: saccharineChampion, previously CandleCandleCandles
Recommended by (if applicable): N/A
Goon servers you play:
Goon Main
Reason for application:
Desire to teach new security players how to do security well - new folk would sooner listen to a HoS than a regular security peer, from my observations
Dark blue name on discord
Security experience (300 word minimum):
     I have not played security much. In likelihood, I have played maybe 15 rounds total of security, including playing as detective. In those few times, however, I have consistently striven to both play in a responsible, fun, and fair manner, and to pay attention and learn from the judgements and actions of senior security players. I have continually made an effort to communicate with fellow security members and talk out disagreements within the team.
    My view of the general security culture, both from playing as part of security and observing from the outside, is optimistic. As much as the "shitcurity" label gets joked around, I honestly believe awful security is the exception rather than the norm. It can be frustrating as security to work alongside the occasional awful player, but as long as they are willing to talk, they can usually be reasoned with. Not only that, but the greater goon culture tends to support this process of improvement - nonsec crew can be well-forgiving of mistakes. Not always, but people tend to pull through, at least in postround where everything can be laid out and discussed.
    As for my own actions - I do my best not to simply end rounds. Killing antagonists is the final option to do, and to be avoided when practical. When I do end up with a dead antagonist, if it's a human antagonist, I'll have them cloned if possible and process them as usual. If it's a nonhuman antagonist - that is, the sort of antagonist which can easily and quietly wreak havoc when brought back, most notably ling, I'll borg them. As for processing antagonists, I generally confiscate any contraband they have. With some cases of more harmful traitor acts, that is enough of a drawback and a fair punishment for getting caught. With more grievous acts, such as murder, brig time is appropriate.
    Although in my relatively few times I have played as security I have not personally used this final measure, extremely lethal antagonists - mass bombing, gibbing, and similar - are best dealt with by a trial. This can allow an interactive traitor to still have fun interacting and making their case without particular risk that releasing them would bring. It is also a good way to get non-security involved in the processing of traitors - and it encourages traitors to be interactive and fun for others before they get caught, to possibly create drama with sympathetic crew members.
    Ultimately, my philosophy is to be the "traitor to traitors" - I'm not in it just to "win" and beat up all the antagonists. But by applying pressure and consequences, I let the crew feel safe - ideally they know they can call for security if they need help, and the antagonists may focus on security more than on regular crew - and I create boundaries for the antagonists to struggle against and either attempt to overcome or subvert. The best times are when the antagonists and I have a sort of mutual respect, leading to fun interactions outside of simply just trying to shoot each other down.
Answer two or more of the following:
  • What advice would you give to other sec players?
       To other sec players, mostly new ones, I would say - it's not "us vs. them". By creating an environment where antagonists feel like they won't be cheated out of a round just by getting silently tased and beat to death should they try to do something interesting, they have the freedom to have more interesting plans than just "try to murderbone everyone" sorts of plans. While those are some peoples' thing, it would be awful if that was the ONLY sort of round which occurred.    Also - communicate, communicate, communicate. Security as a team is a blast. You feel a sense of camaraderie, and you become mutually accountable - you don't want to be though of poorly by somebody you've been working with, so you're further pushed towards a fair and fun pattern of gameplay.
  • What was one of your favorite security moments? (Either playing as a sec officer or interacting with one)
        One of my favourite security moments was a round where I was accidentally a captain. There was an extremely effective ling who kept taking names and giving us the slip. But I worked with the security team and, only by working together, we just barely managed to catch the ling - it was an exciting chase for all involved, even for, to my memory, the ling.
  • What game improvements or changes do you think would benefit security players?
        I believe locking the security role behind a certain number of rounds played would benefit security players. It is difficult working with multiple security officers who have not been playing in this server long enough to know the culture and how things are carried out. While teaching singular security players isn't too much of a bother, sometimes it can cause a dampened round when most of security doesn't quite know what they're doing - the crew will feel and be in danger, the antagonist(s) may get bored by the lack of effective opposition, and security will be tied up teaching the new players. All in all, an issue which round-lcoking would have minimal downsides and appreciable upside.
  • Describe any differences in your playstyle when part of a full security team and when being the only security officer.
        Team security and lone security are night and day. A security team member can rely on his coworkers and can stop to have nice minor interactions like reprimanding a petty thief or settling a small brawl dispute. A lone security officer ends up continually paranoid. With only one set of eyes, so to speak, to watch out for a stealthy antagonist they likely won't find much time to stand around and chat. They have a target on their head as well - if a traitor disposes of a lone security officer, they'll have much more free reign, and the officer knows the antagonists know that. In my experience, lone security officer is genuinely stressful and miserable, and I'll try to vet and recruit anybody willing to switch to security. Without coworkers, such a social job takes its toll.
Answer one or more of the following fun questions (because it's important for the HoS to be fun):
  • Write a poem to convey your thoughts on security/NanoTrasen/space/bees/anything related to SS13.
        The hallways quiet, hum of the engine.    Few remain. The exigency rises.    No comp. No shuttle. No heads. No hope.    A shine? A "zwap". The saber strikes again.    Fewer remain. Nobody fights.    Same quiet everywhere. Powerless.    Blood and glass. Detached ass.    She comes. You fire. She dodges.    Zwap. Beep. Gasp.    A party in deadchat. When will the shuttle come?    No shuttle. But in the bridge, hope.    Three clicks later, six minutes too. The shuttle has now arrived.    One person. Spinning chairs. And at last,    Centcomm.
  • What's a security gimmick that you've ran or wanted to run?
        One security gimmick I have wanted to run is, with the cooperation of another security officer, an absurd and humorous good cop-bad cop being inflicted on caught antagonists.    With agreement beforehand, the bad cop acts absolutely bonkers and eventually - again, with prior agreement - attacks the good cop, stunning him, and throws the antagonist in the brig poorly enough for them to immediately escape if they want.     The ideal outcome is to confuse and amuse the antagonist a lot, with spooking them into thinking bad cop might just use violence on them, but then they get to feel clever about escaping.
  • Draw a picture!
  • [Image: unknown.png]

Previous bans (while this will not affect your application lying about it will):

Although I don't exactly remember you on Security. I've seen you as a pleasant player to be around. Your application also holds merit and shows you have experience with Security, +1
Yeah absolutely; despite the low sec experience I definitely trust you with the beret and being a positive influence on cops. Big +1 from me
While I have never seen you play security, I know you have everything you need to be an absolutely fantastic HoS. As easily one of the most creative ~and~ communication-focused people on the station, I am delighted that you applied! +1!
Like everyone else has said, I haven't seen you as sec. Therefore, it's going to be a no for me. Actual experience as security where other players can observe your playstyle and how interact with others is very important. You can be a good and fun player in all other aspects, but that doesn't make up for applying for HoS with minimal time as sec.
Sorry, but sec is one of the roles with potentially the most stressful and antagonizing times, and the HoS hat is literally a beacon begging people to be an asshole to you. I think you're an amazing player but you really don't know how someone will respond to that stress until they're actually in the hot seat. No from me until you have more sec experience (and please do come back and apply again)
You're a good player but haven't played enough security to be an HoS in my opinion. You gotta have more experience than maybe 15 total rounds!
Can vouch for Constance here, got back into the game and they showed me all the security changes (when I rolled HoS!).

Was very fair and showed an inquisitive side, making rational decisions throughout.

Buzzwords aside, I agree that it might be a tad bit too hasty app for the beret, but I might recommend that this application sit for a while instead on heaping onto the rejected pile - as I do feel Constance is a good fit.
(08-05-2019, 08:30 AM)Sundance Wrote: Buzzwords aside, I agree that it might be a tad bit too hasty app for the beret, but I might recommend that this application sit for a while instead on heaping onto the rejected pile - as I do feel Constance is a good fit.

when I recommend players I also factor in how they develop in the future. if given the reins, saccharine would quickly be a fish in water. i think they have p good in game instincts and definitely have the perfect makeup to be a HoS that teaches players transitioning to play more sec-both in terms of standard security shit and for like, not being an asshole. while i just tell those types of players (the assholes) to fuck off I think sac would be a lot kinder.

they just need like, 10-15 more rounds of sec imo.
While you're an amazing player all around, I really can't say yes to this because of your lack of security experience. As much as one can observe and figure out how things work with an outside view, it takes being on the inside to know not everything will go right and to know what to do in even the most unlikely of scenarios. You are a completely great player and robust individual, but it's a no from me until you have more experience under your belt.
sacc has logged in ~50 rounds this week and has been consistent and excellent in every manner. my only criticism would be that he takes action earlier (puts himself at risk sometimes by trying to deescalate a potentially firey situation) but that's not enough to take away my recommendation. he's the cream of the crop brother yeah
Having played quite a few sec rounds with Sacc over the last week, I think I'm ready to +1 this app. He's got the right attitude for the role, I think, and working with him is very pleasant for antags, crew, and his fellow secoffs.
Constance is a great secoff. Been a sec peer of yours many times. I've found that even when I have thought of making a decision I believed to be right, you were quick to interject and point me in the correct decision that at the time I had overlooked (meaning perhaps considering borging a traitor instead of throwing them out of an airlock).

I couldn't agree more for someone to be a HoS
Hi, we're doing a pass through apps right now. Some of the earlier replies were mentioning security experience, while later ones seem to show that people have seen you play as security a bit more since you posted this. We're going to leave this one open for a bit longer. Those of you who posted about the experience issue I'd appreciate if you post again now that we've had more chances to see saccharine play security a bit more.
After having played a bunch with Constance on sec as HoS recently, I believe they'd make a good HoS. They're self-aware about their impact as sec on the round, a good team player, and have a great attitude in general for the role. +1 from Ants.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)