I’ve been deep-diving into the current “Admin UI” meta, looking at the standards set by BAE, Syntaxx (Undergoing Rename)Cmdr, Exe, Nexus Dynamics, and Redefine:A Rebooted. While there’s no shortage of visually stunning panels, I’m curious about the actual utility and UX from a moderator’s perspective.
I’m looking into architecting a new admin suite, but I want to avoid the “bloatware” trap that many modern panels fall into. I’d love some honest feedback on a few specific design directions I’m considering:
CLI vs. GUI: Systems like Cmdr are favored for speed and type-safety, while Nexus Dynamics leans heavily into a dashboard feel. For high-traffic games, do you find a command bar faster than a menu, or is a visual interface non-negotiable for lower-ranked staff?
Modular Permissions & Persistence: Is the classic 1/4 ranking system dead? I’m considering a per-command permission set that is editable in-real-time. Specifically, a system that lets you revoke a single command via DataStore immediately if a moderator misbehaves, without needing to demote their entire rank. Is that level of control useful, or is it just over-engineering?
External Integration: At this point, is a two-way Discord integration (banning via bot/logging via webhooks) a standard requirement, or is it better to keep the system entirely self-contained to avoid API dependency?
Feature Creep: Panels like Nexus Dynamics include things like lighting and terrain editors. In your experience, do staff actually use these, or does it just add unnecessary client-side weight? What’s the one “utility” feature you find yourself wishing every panel had?
Speaking from experience as the developer of Nexus Dynamics and as someone who still ends up relying on chat-based admins in real projects:
The biggest lesson I learned is that speed beats presentation almost every time. Dashboards are great for orientation and lower-level staff, but when things are actually happening in-game, typing a command or using a lightweight command bar is still the fastest way to work. Even after building what I personally considered a very advanced UI, I kept going back to tools like HD Admin purely because I could do what I needed from chat without breaking flow.
As for feature creep, this is where I’d warn from firsthand experience. Many advanced tools sound essential during development but see very little real use once the game is live. Every extra system adds weight, both client-side and cognitively. Most moderators repeatedly use a very small subset of features: teleporting, spectating, debugging player state, and quick enforcement actions. Everything else is rarely touched.
If I had to give one piece of advice: design for the actions staff perform dozens of times per session, not the ones they might need once a month. The less friction between intent and action, the better the system will age.
That’s why systems like HD, Kohl’s, and Adonis continue to see more real-world use. Additionally, most custom admin panels that end up with a single practical page: bans, teleports, leaderstats, and a small amount of player info also tend to be accepted more when there are no bloat features like terrain editors, game-wide statistics, etc.. Just a clear, fast way to control and moderate the game.
You can always make a custom command bar unique, with a fresh feel to its interface, and give it cool quick-access features while giving the easy type and enter steps that most people want.
Another word of advice, keep your systems easily maintainable. Nexus Dynamics takes me a while to update small bug fixes due to its complexity. I’d keep it very manageable
Thank you for sharing that perspective. It’s genuinely insightful to hear from a developer who has created a comprehensive dashboard but still prioritizes chat commands for actual use. Your point about speed beating presentation is well taken. A stunning interface loses all appeal if it introduces latency during a critical moment. Moderators will always choose the tool that feels immediate.
However, I believe effective presentation serves a purpose by making the system’s capabilities more transparent and approachable. A thoughtful interface can reveal functionality and information at a glance, lowering the barrier for staff who aren’t as command-line fluent. The true design challenge is balancing that clarity with raw performance. If the visual layer hinders speed, it becomes a detriment, not a feature.
Your warning about feature creep is particularly resonant. It’s a common pitfall to develop for hypothetical monthly needs instead of the minute-to-minute necessities. My current thinking aligns with a flexible model: allowing users to opt for an instantaneous command line foundation for experts, a stripped down advanced GUI for visual navigation, or a combination of both. The core would remain a lightweight command system, with any visual layer loading instantly and highlighting only the core utilities used in every session. Any advanced modules would remain completely separated from this essential workflow.
Maintainability is a crucial takeaway, and I appreciate you mentioning it. Observing how admin systems are received and iterated upon in the community underscores that no product is universally perfect. Each game’s moderation team has its own cadence, and the optimal tool is the one that becomes an extension of their intent without interference.
Your insight helps solidify the priority: “Architect for the repetitive, practical actions first. The features that look impressive in a showcase are secondary to the ones that facilitate real-time control and moderation.”
As the person who designed/developed Redefine:A, I added features I saw other admins would have and made sure they’d find a real use; That said, I kept everything locked behind what you could say ‘The developer would need to enable such behavior to happen’.
That said, I am unsure how to explain everything in a better way than how @DonKingFrog already did, so I’ll just answer each feature you mentioned in the original post;
As Don already mentioned, performance is better than everything else. I’d much rather be able to ban someone by quickly typing up their name as a command in chat than go through 5-6 separate menus just to get the person banned, especially if they use multiple accounts to avoid punishment.
Modular permissions would be a cool idea in theory, but it heavily depends on which market you want to release it in.
After playing around with modular permissions in a previous project, I found that a lot of developers actually kept the default permissions without changing them at all.
In fact, when I posted a survey regarding which system was better, the responses were rather mixed, but shows that “levels” would take the lead.
Do what you will with this information, but I generally like the idea that you can disable commands for specific people.
At this point I generally think you don’t even need to make a Discord integration at all apart from webhooks to log what’s happening in-game.
BanAsync (which you should already be using at this point) and anything related to banning is already an operation you can access using Open Cloud API.
Sure, you could add integrations to use MessageService and receive commands from the API calls, but genuinely apart from that I do not see a real reason for having a specific integration just for the panel.
I’ll admit - it’s cool to have, but not necessary. Don has already perfectly captured my idea for how to reply to this specific quirk;
Once the game is live, chances are the systems you made will not be used, yet every single thing you add to the system impacts its’ performance and usability, be it positively or negatively. I’d say thread carefully with features you think should be added to your panel.
Thank you for the feedback. I appreciate the insights from both @DonKingFrog and @KateyLuvzWaffls, and late contributions are also valued.
The survey data confirms that most developers rely on rank tiers for permissions, which forms the surface layer of the system. Integrations are using the Open Cloud API and built-in services to maintain a clean core, with “external bridges” implemented as standalone add-ons.
Performance is critical latency of even a few hundred milliseconds disrupts user experience. To address this, the command interpreter is being built for maximum speed, with the UI operating as a reactive layer on the same engine. Advanced tools, (Example: Terrain Editor, Workspace, etc…), will be isolated behind a “Developer Mode” toggle and lazy-loaded only when activated.
The planned permissions structure is a hybrid model: It uses rank tiers as the foundation but introduces a real-time, per-command override via DataStore. This allows managers to execute commands like (Example: :revoke @user kick) or a “Toggle Button” inside the GUI to disable specific permissions without altering a user’s role, or remove the role entirely if necessary.
Building admin panels that fit many needs takes work. I reached a solid MVP and feel satisfied with progress so far.
I enjoy UI design focused on comfort and clarity. The goal stays speed and ease of use for staff.
The best way to avoid bloat comes from reading forums and tracking repeated problems. Many tools solve issues users never face. A visual panel often duplicates command bar actions. Extra systems, such as AI features, add weight without helping moderation tasks like banning.
From a UX view, fast actions matter most. Clicking many buttons to perform a simple action feels frustrating, especially with load times. Command bars help developers who want quick results.
Another tip, Keep your systems simple, I learned throughout development that if i make a super cool animation framework is then so annoying to update back and go through that pain, Keep your system ideas and functionalities clear and never run to production things you dont even know if people will find useful.
Regarding advanced editors such as lighting or terrain tools, staff rarely use those features inside admin panels. Optional modules make more sense. Some teams still find value during testing or debugging.
On the utility side, staff often want access to actions limited to development environments. Examples include global server control or data management. Work continues toward solutions in this area.
That covers my thoughts. The answer stays brief and general, since full details do not add much value here.
Thank you for the feedback, I appreciate you sharing your insights on UI design and UX perspective. Making a clean, functional UI is indeed a challenging process that takes considerable time and iteration. I appreciate you sharing your experience.
