Jump to content

Fier

Member
  • Content Count

    365
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Fier last won the day on August 9

Fier had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

424 Good Reputation

Recent Profile Visitors

1238 profile views
  1. Well said. Lack of leadership and authority in the wrong places promotes people to abuse such a thing, and develop habits that are unfair in gameplay by having the focus be kills rather than following orders. I'm hoping this changes over time and that the server (gameplay, combat, and roleplay) are taken more seriously, game or not, people are passionate about whatever they're passionate about and it isn't right to shame them for it (unless appropriate, such as something morally wrong but this conversation isn't one on politics and the like). Lighting, CC, and fog are all pretty pow
  2. He makes a valid argument, just like a few other people on this thread who oppose it. The main point of bringing it up though is his generalization that the people who are opposed are only thinking of themselves so they can keep a powerless rank on a fictional roleplay server that they don't seem to play, and how they'll leave eventually because they are "short term" (the connotation of his statement didn't sit right, and although it is an assumption it read as though players are just disposable and meaningless). Some of the people who oppose the removal of reserves are active leaders. Everybo
  3. Saying you resigned permanently implies that you don't intend to return to the server. If you have no intention to return to the server, then there is no reason for you to have reserves. I originally disagreed with the decision to remove reserves. I've thought about it more and I agree. I think that this could have been dealt with better by giving the community a heads up and hearing out those who are opposed, rather than jumping to the toxic response of "wah wah" like @Bishopil essentially did (although he really isn't wrong) and doing it without full community discussion.
  4. People aren't arguing against why the team felt it was necessary to remove reserves as a whole. Most, if not all, of the responses to this thread that are against the removal of reserves address the issues surrounding how reserves previously worked. So the argument is that removing reserves is not the right call and would be an extreme solution to the problem (and to be plain honest: this community has a repeating theme of going in directions that may be harmful down the line when faced with a serious problem). The guidelines were definitely something that needed to be put into place. The
  5. It wasn't done "all at once" and was definitely phased out a bit prior to making the final decision. Aidan, Jim, and Garnet had felt that it was best to actually define and utilize a guideline when it came to reserves: reserves were only for officers (O-1, of course) and players who were considered "on reserves" had no officer powers (with few exceptions in activities requiring permission from the leader of their faction). More of a confirmed (there were rumors that this was likely gonna happen) heads-up would've been nice so that people who had potentially wanted to return using their re
  6. Small spiel as I'm not active in the community much (if at all?) anymore. The way you've shared how this "case-by-case" will work is unfortunately likely the best you'll get with a system that won't be abused, so long as it doesn't extend past legitimate reasons for an extended absence - meaning absolutely nobody should be given a special case as a previous leader for any reason. (yeah, the rest of my post is rather useless, do note I don't agree with it and I'm upset that it had to come to this but I understand that it was well required). Entirely understand how reserves in the state
×
×
  • Create New...