Godfather

I've been inactive in this community for a while, but nothing made me jump on forums faster than hearing the news. Never a bad experience with this man. Gamma was a large part of why I joined Vega. He was bright and funny. His shenanigans could cheer anyone up, were always welcome, and were a big part of why I got on. He was very empathetic to my situation after Vega was cleared, and just an understanding guy overall. This made seeing him leave the factions and server a sad affair, and subsequently, his passing. Gamma taught me seriousness in what matters and kindness in everything. It's fact that he made this community better with his existence, I just wish I could say goodbye to him. I shed a tears for my man Gamma and my condolences go to his family and friends.

What's funny is that the defending line of thinking is a type of thinking that is influenced by survivor bias. If we accepted that defense, anyone not currently banned for cheating could just use that defense. Ignoring hypocrisies, the points mentioned boil down to "GB Mad". The situation occurred after the tryout because we had been investigating and suspecting you of cheating for quite some time. You proceeded to mouth off, explaining how you "shit on us" in similar mannerisms. That was reason enough for a blacklist, but in fact, you were blacklisted before the tryout began. We checked docs afterward and noticed your name on the list while in the process of adding your name to it. Given the proceedings of this event, it checks out, seeing as toxicity is looked down upon. On to the videos: The first thing I noticed was at the third video, at 12:30, instead of moving to cover where I could have gone, he walks straight up the stairs, all the while staring at me through the floor. Pay attention to his view for the following 15 seconds. Very strange behavior, especially after the previous awareness he's displayed, he chooses to deliberately stare at the ground while walking up the stairs. The instinctual crouch jump, might be irrelevant, but could have come from him not expecting to be shot. This is especially notable, as he chooses to ignore potential flanks, while staring at the ground. Additionally, the same video, at 3:58, the tracking there is pretty blatant. This is a major oversight by him, thinking that you could see through the shelf at that distance from it. Also, neither player shot, until there was established sight. Perhaps he committed to this phantom line of sight, but not enough to fire his weapon. This is clip is even more damning when you watch the GAP TEST video. Game sense it's much of an excuse here, since his opponent stood still long before he rounded the corner of the supposed "gap". EDIT: Upon review, of all of the SCs of the instances and recreations, the instance at 3:58 is dismissable. Once again, same video, time stamp is 5:08. He displays very strange behavior, before giving himself away. To elaborate, he sees his opponent proceed behind the (small) shelf. He continues to suppress ONE side of his opponent. Coincidentally, the one side his opponent is on. This is strange, considering his display of awareness, he should at least be aware of an obvious flank. His opponent could take literally one step to his right and peek him on the other side, but he completely ignores this. He also pushes into the open, and after finally pressuring him enough, his opponent peeks his left, followed by a jump peek on the right. While this happens, he repositions, at the exact same time his opponent jumps, to peek him as he lands. While he swivels to peek him, he proceeds to swing far enough to shoot me in the chest, then immediately head shot his opponent on the next shot. You can hear me say "he hit me in the chest" which is also displayed in logs in a following video. An obvious explanation could be smooth aim, seeing as he, well, aims smoothly. This also explains why I got targeted. Also, people want to read everything you have to say. So far, all I've seen said in regards to anything posted here is the barrel through the box, and that trusted players have said that you were a non cheater (?) in the past. Both points, of which, are moot. Both videos showcase the opponent not being visible by any means through the shelf. Regarding the "history" of being a "non cheater", it not only doesn't make sense, but let's say for an instance that we heavily considered/accepted this. This would be that personal history is heavily valued subsequently, in which, you have much of being a cheater. That being considered, it seems a little backwards to stand by this point. EDIT 2: @Torch's response is well put, and I have to say I agree. I will not be adding a -1 or +1.

We discussed the issues you presented and the manager reported that: 1. The staff strike system will be in place. (Including on-server punishments such as bans being removal and such) 2. Staff forums posts will also be moderated by other staff. 3. The process of bans will be dealt carefully; all and any player/staff bans will rely on deniable evidence. (Eg: exploiting/fast-firing require videos on clear evidence)

+1 I skipped all of the replies so far, but reading them seemed unnecessary to comment on this suggestion; therefore, forgive me if my take on this has already been posted. The suggestion identifies a lot of REAL problems, there is no denying that. These instances of staff misconduct might not have a true origin, but we can certainly assume it's because of leniency on executive's part over the past year. This suggestion should pass because it makes sense, not just from a point where staff should be the players they want the players to be (behavior-wise), but from a point were it's just actually enforcing staff rules. Allow me to elaborate: It is also because of the problems clearly outlined by Bishop that the recruiting process for staff is (intended to be) in-depth: so we can hear what is thought of that person by the most important party, the community. This is done during application process so we can understand if they are a good fit for staff, before they can deal damage to the server's reputation. Pretty basic, but it seems the standards or criteria for applying for staff has gone down. This could be highlighted by either a large influx of staff, or just the behavior problems we see now. Either way, something needs to be done, and therefore, +1. Edit: I'd like to add that the MRP staff team spoke about these issues in the meeting today (2/22/2020).

Mass RDM

+1 I spoke with Gamma, and he elaborated on the application of each weapon compared to each other. So, in addition to the PKM being awful, the addition of the Veresk would not apply much difference in principal as having another primary. The effective range of Veresk and the ASVAL are the reasons why the classes won't be the same in principal. The Veresk having much more damage drop-off, and the VAL with more range.

Vega's specialization is probably the HEART of the reasoning to accept this suggestion or not. While I might have identified what would be the deciding factor, it isn't that simple; let's take a look at the heart of the suggestion in general. The orthodoxy, of not just Vega but, of every faction would be in question. If you can't see what I mean, look at this question: 1. Is it unorthodox to give a faction essentially TWO operator/assault whitelists? -This questions what,the community as a whole mainly staff), as to how much control they think each faction should have over their whitelists. In other words, specifically for this instance; "Is it acceptable to leave it up to the actual faction members to have dictation for what is done with the whitelist?" To answer the question personally, I do not think that Vega should get another SMG like the Veresk; however, it would be cool to see something changed with the PKM itself or the weapon the class has. I would like to see a suggestion for a different weapon or even a medkit. That's what Rangers did. But I digress and leave this with a -1 on the Veresk, because I believe it to be unorthodox for a long range faction to have two SMG whitelists.

+1 This organization would help localize leadership and delegation, making the base faction region easier to manage. +1 The spawns were changed so long ago for a reason that is no longer prevalent. It would make sense to change the default spawn to neutral. Not sure why there are replies giving the 2nd suggestion a -1 for the reason that US has been doing better. Dillan explained that there are options; instead of just giving a -1, actually read the thing.

Big Nut

Air Support

+1 These changes all make sense. Same as the others, Bishop obviously spoke to me before making this, and I thought it was a great idea. As for Fier's post, that's an easy +1, as well. Please go visit his post to put your input on the topic, in addition to this one.

+1 The 3s deploy times are definitely not intended and should be reduced. The damage should also be increased to match the other sniper rifles in it's class.