Russia doesn't need this right now. I don't know how actively you play, but I have been active for 9+ hours every day these past few weeks and have seen RU numbers dwindling. We do not need another SOC faction for your satisfaction of "keeping both sides even". You may have OCD, but the rest of us do not. US has an outrageous amount of numbers, so AFSOC would only serve to benefit. RU, on the other hand, would only be negatively affected by OMRP. We have enough factions, and we have a flow that we follow, which most RU appreciate and follow. Not to mention - not everyone wants to follow a set path. As Lark said, he went from Tier to Tier, not necessarily caring what meaningless "position" they held in terms of Tiers. The fact of the matter is people join factions they want to, not specifically because of their Tier. Adding OMRP would only serve to split the already small numbers of RU even further.
Your first statement in here is true to some extent - faction is meant for one thing, yet the faction does another thing. This is also something I wish would change, shifting towards joining a faction for their specific specialties. However, with Donator weapons, anyone can become a sniper and anyone can CQC, essentially making your point invalid. You want to restrict a faction from using a certain weapon because they specialize in something else in real life? I don't think so. Now, for RP purposes, this would be excellent. This would mirror the factions in real life and how they operate, and would create for intense and strategic strategies. However, in war, this would serve no purpose other than to restrict players from using certain weaponry because of ridiculous RP restrictions. All of this makes sense in RP related events, and the event server, but not the main server and war.
No. Just no. The ranking system is specific for each faction. Between each faction, rank names might change, but most SOC are capped at O-6. Factions like Vega, which have an O-10 as DGEN, should keep the DGEN title. They are the highest Tier on the Russian side and should receive special treatment for that. However, I also agree with your statement that the GA and Marshal respectively overrule all SOC factions, as they commandeer the entire forces of their respective side. Regardless, O-10 serves a purpose on Russia, where it might not serve a purpose on US. People respect the DGEN of Vega because of his skill, leadership, time invested, and more. Even if the Marshall is the highest ranking officer, people will still listen to the DGEN because of their status. And I feel this shouldn't change. It works differently on US, but that doesn't mean that RU has to fit into the mold of US. It is as if you are forcing a square into a circle hole - it doesn't fit. If the Marshall of 2GA genuinely has a problem with Vega keeping their O-10 rank that they've had for years now, he can comment and change it if he so pleases. He is the Marshall after all.
No. It is their faction at the end of the day, and they are leading it. They should have some jurisdiction over what ranking structure they so please, as long as it doesn't break any server rules, become nonsensical, or overreaching with power (minus Vega). This alone made many faction leaders and enlisted alike uncomfortable. Who are you to change all this on a whim, simply because you don't like it? It seems very over-reaching, and doesn't positively effect the server in any way other than "being accurate". Its unnedeed, and just creates confusion and unwanted change in an area that is the faction leader's jurisdiction alone.
This is just rude, toxic, and unwarranted. This is a suggestion. Humble yourself. I love you Shrimp, but this was uncalled for.
While things like "Tier" should never change, as they are preset by leaders generations older than the current, tryouts, internal structure, rank, and standards need to change between each leader. Otherwise, the faction becomes stagnant. No one would want to join a bottom tier faction if everything on the server is pointing them towards the top tier. This quite literally makes every other SOC except for the Tier 1s obsolete. In GB, while we transitioned through 3 different leaders, the faction became very different. It was a fresh start each time, with each leader bringing a new element, and taking out an old element they didn't agree with. This keeps the server constantly fresh, and allows leaders to experiment with their faction, without going too far out of their boundaries. By no means should GB strive to become a Tier 1 - they aren't a Tier 1 - but on the same side of the coin they shouldn't be forced to have a specific guideline on how they run their faction, written and directed by you/staff. Jackal attempted to do a similar thing, and it was met with such harsh community feedback. Something like that should never happen again. While staff play a crucial role in maintaining order and peace between factions, keeping their boundaries in check, the faction leader should also be given the benefit of the doubt when changing their faction, as most of the time they believe it is for the better. Good examples - UB's GB to Cramer/Crypt. Bad examples - Ruin's DF to Spectre's DF. Staff intervened with the latter, and the situation was resolved.
You have essentially taken all power away from the faction leader at this point in your suggestion. They are nothing more than a figurehead if this were to transpire, simply keeping the title until they step down. Now they can't even pick their successor? The whole reason of a leader choosing a successor is that they have spent the last few months training and preparing the 2IC to take over the faction, teaching the do's and don'ts of leading. This is absolutely ridiculous. If staff need to step in, which is very rarely, it is most likely due to problems with the leader/enlisted. And while this is great, and needs to happen to keep the server moving forward, faction leaders should not be stripped of their choice on who leads the faction next. Our current leaders are perfectly competent, and are striving to improve their factions daily.
Reserves. I am very conflicted on this topic. If someone reaches the rank of O-1, why shouldn't they have reserves. The amount of time and energy you need to invest into a faction to become an officer is already immense enough. They don't need to be additionally burdened with the fact that if they decide to move on, they won't be able to return to their faction. My stance on this topic is very simple - it is the faction leader's discretion to give reserves to a player. If the faction leader decides that a certain player has invested a lot of time into their faction, they should have the option to give them reserves. I am not suggesting that reserves are just handed out to anyone in a faction, but rather the faction leader decided whether that person is worthy or not. If the reserves are given to a player that decides to ruin the faction name/minge on the WL, the faction leader simply removes them. It has always worked this way, and has produced almost no negative events. If a faction is dying, the reserves are there to help out. If a faction needs help in tryouts, the reserves are there to help out. I don't see a problem with reserves at all. I agree some limitations should be enforced, but reserves should not be removed/solely for medical leave. That is just cruel and unfair to those who invested their blood sweat and tears in a faction.
You really expect staff to monitor and observe all tryouts? Really? This is so unrealistic. Once again, this is up to the faction leader. Each leader's tryouts are a little different from the last, and that is how it should be. It is the faction leader's discretion, based on their Tier, numbers, and status to run their faction. If they want easy tryouts to gain numbers, so be it. Who is that negatively effecting, other than the faction? No one. And lately, this hasn't been an issue. Factions, respective to Tier, escalate in difficulty. It has been this way for the longest time, and should remain so.
This entire thread over-reaches. You are the head of Gamemasters, not the game man. It is a little ironic - suggesting faction leaders need to be put in their place and be restricted on what they can do, yet pulling a 180 and saying everything needs to change because you don't agree with it, and your vision is different on the server. I feel as if you have an insane amount of good ideas, and they truly do progress the server, but this wasn't one of them. For roleplay suggestions, I completely agree. You definitely know what you're talking about, and these ideas can create a new dynamic on the event server, and RP on the main. However, trying to pull strings in factions and change the status quo because you don't agree with it is extremely reminiscent of Jackal, who gained an immense backlash and was ultimately removed from Manager. These things need time. You need to talk with faction leaders before making a ginormous suggestion like this, with so much to break down and analyze that it hurts. Step by step is how it is done. I highly recommend you scrap this suggestion, and only keep roleplay elements in mind for now, as there was a severe lack of communication on behalf of the faction leaders before doing this. I want to state once more that the roleplay ideas that you suggest are fantastic, and should not be ignored. But everything else regarding faction status should be considered null for now, as it is too big of a change on such short notice.
