Posted by Vice Admiral Robert Archer (Engineering DIrector) in IRW Rovarran

Posted by Nicholas Villarreal in IRW Rovarran

Posted by Russell Watt in IRW Rovarran
Posted by… suppressed (8) by the Post Ghost! 👻
Hi all,

Whilst Tom leads on the discussion on a Captain’s Handbook, I wanted to provide a quick update on the IRW Rovarran. For those tracking the ship, you’ll have noted that posting has dropped off over the past few months (with 26 IC posts in 3 months), .

When it comes to the health of a ship, I would say a ship needs to have an active crew, an engaged CO, and a suitable sim being run by a qualified GM; at the moment it has none of those. However, these aren’t an endorsed set of criteria, and we don’t have a clear process for how we should establish a ship is unhealthy and the process for recovery (or decommissioning). Whilst this is something I would like us to get after this term, a decision on the Rovarran is required sooner rather than later.

While there are some subjective portions, FCOMM defines a set of criteria that standard ships must maintain, and the Rovarran charter sets out the criteria it, as an Alt-RPG, must meet, which are actually less stringent than those for a standard ship.

I’m not sure Rovarran has ever met these criteria.

So, I think we can agree that the ship is not in a healthy position. The question is more about what the options are to resolve. I have to admit that I am not convinced ensuring there’s an active CO and GM is necessarily going to fix the issue, but I would like to get other perspectives.

I believe there are three options:

1. Decommission the ship. There is an argument to say that it’s just not working out, however I also don’t think sufficient steps have been taken to improve the RP area.
2. Decommission the ship, and re-establish in X-Fleet. This is a variation in the first option, but with the recommendation that those interested re-establish it in X-Fleet, subject to the X-Fleet criteria.
3. Place the ship into some form of “special measures”, which would put the ship on notice that it’s got 3 months to improve. What this means in practice is not well defined, so if we did want to do this I’d welcome thoughts on the practical implications.

Firstly I would like for us to discuss what we think the most appropriate option is for the. Once we’ve decided on that, we can discuss how we proceed.

At a separate point, I do want to discuss how we review ship health, and what are the interventions required before we get to a stage where a ship needs to be decommissioned. Part of that will include what data and information we need to make decisions, which touches on what’s required out of monthly fleet reports.

Yours,

Jack

At this point, I feel it should be decommissioned or put into X-fleet (where I feel it should have gone in the first place, instead of directly into the main fleet). When it had its’ initial 3 month review, it passed (barely) with the caveat of improving over the next three months. It did not achieve its’ objective at that time either, yet was still given another chance.

The ship did not pass the first review, it was extended by 90 days until February 28, 2024. I can find no mention of a review of the ship after the linked edict.

The FComm/AFComm comments from Meridian Fleet reports since then have not been good; neither have the monthly post counts.

While it was an interesting idea, the ship never gained much momentum. I believe at most they had 5-6 players tops and have gone through 3-4 captains in this time? To me, that does not sound like a healthy ship.

Yes, max 6 posting characters in a given month. That is their minimum crew compliment per the charter: a CO, XO (who also holds a DH position), 3 DHs, and a GM. Six unique characters have posted in 30% (4) of months since commissioning; there have been posts from less than 6 characters in 70% (9) of months since commissioning.

The Rovarran has been given many chances to improve. In defense, there have been ships that have been de-commed, yet were more active and with more crew.

Since Jack was asking, figured I’d give my two cents worth.

Terry

I’m surprised it didn’t start in X fleet. It is a good idea but if it’s been given plenty of chances already then it should either be decommissioned or go to X fleet.

This suggestion was made several times during the discussion phase before Rovarran launched. It was roundly dismissed.

On your other point Jack about ship health. I strongly believe that having an active CO and GM are so important to the health of a ship. I don’t think that should be the main factor in determining whether a ship is healthy though but I do think COs and GMs should be held accountable more for going AWOL. If a CO isnt being active on their ship this doesn’t set a very good example to others. You can’t expect a CO to hold their crew accountable for AWOL when they’re AWOL themselves. I do understand there might things going on behind the scenes, conversations etc. but I don’t think it will help foster a healthy rping environment. The same could be said of XOs too.

I think establishing a set of criteria that we have to determine a healthy ship that can be measured against. You could then monitor each ship against this and if this isn’t met consistently then the shop is deemed unhealthy. You could then set a review period and if the criteria still hasn’t been met by the end of the review period then the ship is decommissioned.

Tom

I do agree with Terry and Tom but not on the point of a GM being a criteria to be healthy. Sure while they are there and posting their very thought out story, they are great. But GM’s are people as well and I’ve been on many ships that they just quit or went AWOL. That left not only the command crew to think of something but it hurt the crew, especially if it was a great story.

I think they meant for a ship that has a GM. I think your example of hurting the crew is a great reason for GM involvement to be taken into consideration when reviewing ship health.

That being said the CO must come up with a story of their own until a suitable GM can be found and GM’s are extremely taxed since most people don’t want to do that either because they don’t want the headaches, being ridiculed,feel shy, etc… I as the CO for the USS Chernov don’t have a GM and we are a self SIM ship. How would you rate our health without a GM? Maybe make more ships Self SIM like the Chernov and give GM’s a break and not be overtaxed. Just a thought.

I do urge caution for this route - in my experience (I was the CO of the first self-sim ship in STF) it can be very difficult for many players to adapt to. Without an arbiter like a GM clashes among players are more likely as their conflicting visions of how the story should play out clash against each other, and sims are more likely to stall out. For certain players, it is a phenomenal playground. Planting a seed and watching people grow a scenario collaboratively is incredible. I am so glad Chernov has found success with it. For some players it is the opposite, though, and we can see this in how ships do when a GM goes AWOL. They flounder with no guidelines. It can be a tough line to walk.

Travis Good
Captain USS_Chernov

I concur that Rovarran has been given enough time. It was an experiment (better suited for the Experimental Fleet as the name implies) and the data is clear that there isn’t support for the idea - it would have been decommissioned in X-Fleet automatically in December for missing posting guidelines. Further continuing to support it strains the already thin resources of the club as we try to keep them with an active GM, an active CO and XO, Fleet staff keep monitoring it and trying to support it, and players stretch themselves further trying to keep another RPG area intact. Decommission it. If the crew, or anyone, is still interested they can submit an X-Fleet application.

I started writing this post with quotes and tables and numbers; but I think it’s fairly easy to see the issue and the solution here.

Nathan
TECH Lead

Okay so speaking as the previous FComm, I will chime in here. I always thought that should have been in x-fleet, but it wasn’t my decision. Rovarran NEVER met the first review. She was given an extension because after just a month both the CO had dropped off to no posting and it took time to find a new CO. Then shortly after the new CO took over, the GM left. A new GM, certified GM was found, but a new sim was never started. Travis and I both reached out to Hjortur and BJ about strategies to bring her back to health, but I think there just was not enough interest to begin with. I spoke with Sage many time about the health of the ship and other strategies that could be used. It was, left for far too long.

As for qualifiers to what makes a healthy ship? FCOMM does state some criteria, but it is also a bit subjective based on the crew and individual ship. I think it is a discussion that needs to be had. Both for the benefit of FComms and COs.

Cmdre Ward, Academy Commandant

Hi all,

Thanks for all the comments so far. I’m taking a couple of things from this:

1. It’s probably time to decommission the Rovarran, with the option members setting up something in X-Fleet.

2. We need to have a discussion around the process of assessing ship health, and the process for remediation.

I’ll leave the discussion open for a few more days to see if anyone else wants to comment. I also want to ask for us to avoid us doing a postmortem on how we have got here, as it has the risk of coming a bit personal. When we discuss ship health process in the future, that’s where we can have a good discussion on what should be done (vs what hasn’t been done).

Please reach out if there are any questions or comments on the above.

Yours,

Jack

I know I’ve had a few conversations about ship health over the previous few days.

The Rovarran, unfortunately, I think has reached the end of it’s life span. It’s been made quite clear that the Rovarran has been given chances to improve it’s posting and has unfortunately failed to do so.

A conversation around the Rovarran leads on to ship health in general. A brief conversation I had a few days ago was around the use of the Master Roster. The Master Roster is a great place to find a new ship to write on, it’s brilliant for that. However, it’s offputting when you’re flicking through the Master Roster to find a new ship to write on and some of your options are just blocks of red with different members AWOL. I raised a point a few days ago - why would I choose a ship that appears stagnant over a ship which has hustle and bustle and things going on?

I completely second the need for a discussion around how we judge ship health and ways we can improve ship health should it appear to be on a decline.

Tejay

I concur regarding decommissioning the Rovarran and the need for a broader conversation around supporting our other ships.

Thanks

Russell

I’ll be sure to place the Rovarran’s specification in the retired specifications page when the edict comes to decommission it.

On the point of the specification’s retirement it could/should remain to me as a spec in npc/support roles for gm reference. If nothing else it is a good spec for GMs to use in more modern sims still.

One point of consideration - that would bring the Meridian Fleet to 3 active RP areas. Obviously, increasing the other fleets to six RP areas would be a fairly heavy workload for an FComm and AFComm. As such, disbanding Meridian Fleet and reallocating those 3 ships probably isn’t workable. That being said, that begs the question of whether Foremost or Pioneer gets reduced to four RP areas in order to re-balance the fleet arrangements, and how the FComms and the President would determine that decision.

Regards,
Nicholas V.

I’m sad to see the Rovarran go, especially as I had a hand in its making and running but for me as its GM just was to chaotic at the time when things suddenly happened with my grandfather. But I also agree it has gone on and given enough chance to be fixed, and if after the above mentioned efforts to get things going it still failed then yeah its time for her to dock up sadly.

Though the point of xfleet vs main fleet for it to start is another discussion on xfleet use/point of it vs chartering alt-rpgs prior/post xfleet.

Robert Archer

Thanks all for your input; I shall write the decommissioning edict shortly.

There are a couple of points that I will look to discuss at some point:

1. How we assess ship health, and what the process is for recovery where possible and decommissioning where not.
2. Balance of fleets.

Yours,

Jack