Jackal

I was under the assumption it had gone through already since it is in the "Completed" section of the trello. However, regardless of what the potential buff entails, assuming there is another one planned, we would much prefer to just get the UMP45.

Description: The goal of this suggestion is to have the Delta Force classes up to date as well as having the weaponry/utility similar to T1 factions currently and previously. For example, DF's T2 class would lose it's current shotgun and in it's place get an SMG and medkit. This is mainly because other T2 classes for factions like GB and Rangers are outright better. For example, T2 for GB gets nades and the G36C and the T2 for Rangers gets their M4SOPMOD grenade launcher and nades. Reasoning: Right now Delta Force's utility is very much outdated and subpar in comparison to both SOC factions on US and AFG. For example, our shotgun on the T2 class "Combatant" is the M3 Super90 and to put it bluntly it is straight garbage. However, when comparing it to just GB and Rangers their T2s have utility and other fairly decent guns. However, I understand that Red Group has a similar T2 where they only get a shotgun. Because of this I recommend reading @bishopil's thread which is pushing for utility on those type of classes or they can make a similar thread. Additional Information: US Delta Force : Rifleman - P90 swapped to the UMP45 (cw_ump45) UMP45 vital stats below 28-30 DMG 700 RPM/Firerate Hip Spread 30% Max Spread INC 25%-30% US Delta Force : Commander - P90 swapped to the UMP45 US Delta Force : Combatant [T2] - M3 Super90 removed. Medkit and UMP45 added. Increase playercap size from 2 to 3 US Delta Force : Marauder [T3] - P90 swapped with M82A3 (garnet_m82a3). Scar replaced with FN FAL (garnet_fnfal). OPTIONAL : Swap frag grenades with flashes or remove outright if OP. Up FN FAL mag size from 20 to 30 Reduce recoil from 60% to 50% Make the class able to spawn cars similar to other T3s

Who are you reporting? [Staff/Player]: Conway Your in-game name: Jackal Your SteamID (https://steamid.io/): STEAM_0:0:69077674 In-game name of reportee: Conway SteamID of reportee (https://steamid.io/): STEAM_0:0:138807332 Date & Time of incident: 10/28/21 at around 9:45 PM Timezone: EST What happened? (include any proof): It was a 40 pop war in which AFG was already at a severe disadvantage because of us being outnumbered and US utilizing "Nail Team 6" or about 9 Nailgunners(Not an issue). As the war had just started AFG managed to pull through and clear all/most of the nailgunners as well as point and began capping. Once we had settled on point and began to hold we were subsequently bombed by Conway whilst he was GM, for whatever reason, and all were wiped. After Conway had caught some backlash in ooc he began to focus on damage control by apologizing, swapping to AFG RPG, and even PMing me saying he ""asked for myself to get a strike." BUT he also mentioned how he "selected the wrong one and I missed." The main issue here is why are we using GM tools for balancing when ONLY 2 minutes had passed and also while we were already outnumbered. AND in what world is a staff strike even sufficient for this type of abuse or mishandling of GM tools. https://streamable.com/3wzk8k https://medal.tv/games/garrys-mod/clips/4I8nfp4OKUkvx/EOMMKo0ukKnV?invite=cr-MSxSZ3IsMjk5ODc1NTYs https://streamable.com/t9tieg

+1 Nerfing the radius/damage is very much needed both from a balancing perspective and also a staff perspective. Also, if this were to be accepted I think it's also appropriate to at the very least look into what is being proposed in the "Suicide Bomber" suggestion.

To add onto what Tuna mentioned it could be interesting to see a more overgrown city-esque type of map. I think a good baseline to go off of or even reference would be one of the iterations of Taiga, not sure which one, but it had a similar idea going on. Especially at OBJs like company that had the entire front area that US would push through being completely overgrown with toppled vehicles and even player tall shrubbery that would relatively conceal them. Also, I think the walls dividing the map could also be removed and to replace the empty space things like additional shrubbery, debris, obstacles, and maybe even small buildings similar to what we have on Echo would be a great addition. Lastly, I think that powerplant or really that entire section of the map should be uprooted and replaced with a more favorable objective like Company or could even introduce a variation of old UK base from cscdesert with some additional terrain and/or buildings. EDIT: I like the relationship that cons and Mosq have. However, Cons shouldn't be an official OBJ that can be capped and should be slimmed down to not be nearly as tall. Although, I think this is also in the works. Also, making AFG base a little more unique to themselves would be cool as well. I.E. similar to cscdesert AFG base with some basements in a few buildings, shacks, etc. Maybe even remake Outpost, UK Base, and/or OC and utilize them on this map.

+1 Personally, I don't think that the amount of paragraphs is too important so as long as the content of them are substantial. In the case of this application I think it has plenty of information that helps to outline the type of staff he would be as well as the type of player he is. Seemingly, he wants to help foster a healthy community as well as retain new players by not deterring them with harsh punishments in the event they have a mishap and break rules themselves. Also, while I do interact with Jashmeed very often I don't think it's a big deal that he doesn't interact with the opposing side a lot seeing as how right now, without being staff, they don't exactly have a lot of common ground to talk on. However, when being accepted for staff he would actually have common ground to talk with them on whereas now, as I mentioned, he doesn't really have. Plus it doesn't hurt to give him a chance seeing as how he's been here for a while and done a fair bit over his tenure (Joined TSFU and reached the rank of MSGT and most recently joined Badri) EDIT: I think it's also worth noting how despite being falsely banned for cheating and, at the time, the staff team for the most part being fully against his unban he remained mature throughout the entire situation as well as level-headed. Which is something we desperately need in the staff team since 90% of it is lacking both of those qualities.

Hello everyone it comes with a heavy heart today that I decide to finally get this burden off my chest. There have always been summations or accusations about me pertaining to a variety of things. This includes having a big forehead, being toxic, and lastly cheating. While, as of right now, those seemingly are just jokes I don't think I can withstand the guilt associated with hiding this since 2018. As I am typing this I have tears running down my face, on the verge of throwing up my lunch, and am viciously shaking trying to cope with the reality that I've cheated since the beginning and yet hid it all this time...... @shrimp @Ozzy Nice song? all credit to @Im Dream please unban him

Description: Essentially the reimplementation of ammo types but far more balanced and also restrictive. Also, ammo types wouldn't be what they used to be. I.E. Ammo types before was a matter of choosing either match or magnum. Whereas what I am proposing would function to make the player debate whether the exclusive ammo type is worth it at all. Below would outline the 3 examples of how the ammo types would look stat wise and also to clearly indicate why these ammo types would not be instinctively used. You also may wonder why I didn't include exclusive ammo types for DMRs, Snipers, and pistols. Firstly, the DMRs and Snipers don't exactly have a need for an additional ammo type since they accomplish their purpose. As for pistols I don't exactly think that many people use them to begin with and the only way they would be usable is through insane buffs to put them on-par with SMGs/ARs. Match (AR exclusive) +20% aim spread + accuracy -25-35% hip spread Magnum (SMG exclusive) +20-25% damage +20% recoil and -20% handling Flechette (Shotgun exclusive) +40% clump spread and +20 pellets -55% damage and -25% handling Reasoning: I think it's fair to say that ammo types of this nature help to make certain gun categories a little bit more enjoyable without seeming as a guaranteed positive. Also, some categories, mainly in reference to shotguns, need ammo types to really be relevant in combat either as a result of the flat stats for the gun or being forced into a certain range because of map layout. Lastly, this helps to provide a little bit of variety in playstyle for some players while being pretty straightforward and easy to implement but most importantly not incredibly overpowered. Additional Information: N/A

In-game name: Jackal SteamID (https://steamid.io/): STEAM_0:0:69077674 Staff members in-game name: LSAC AntiCheat Staff members SteamID (/id (name): N/A Date & Time of incident: 10-5-21 6:35PM EST Timezone: EST Ban Reason: No Cheaters Allowed How long were you banned for?: Initially said 0 minutes, or something of that nature, and then converted to a perma Proof of Ban: https://gyazo.com/8e01afdb9e76d1dad4a61cea256d373c What happened? (include any proof): I respawned after being killed in war and promptly bought a small ammo kit and as soon as I bought it I was banned. But to be fair I don't think that action was what resulted in the ban given I always buy ammo kits/crates consistently. Why should your ban be removed?: Wasn't cheating and I think @Nutter could check detections for myself as well.

Sure you can say that and I do agree it is a possible remedy but again far from an actual solution. Elaboration below I'm not exactly sure if recruit is intended for afking as you are saying. However, similar instance to changing to an 11B PFC or IDFA CSC in that it is a remedy but again far from a solution. Mainly because your average player when going afk isn't instinctively considering the possibility of being kidnapped since again kidnapping individuals is for RP and typically would have a dialogue between the two. Furthermore, I don't think it's the most appropriate to essentially force people to swap off of their faction whitelists to afk on another just to avoid the possibility of being kidnapped while AFK. I find it much more appropriate to allow individuals to AFK on their faction whitelists and indirectly represent it, mainly in reference to SOC, without being at risk of getting kidnapped. Right now we can't lock doors on AFG otherwise people would be taking full advantage of that. However, not every player is in an SOC and able to go in their designated bunks and AFK with the door locked. If I'm not mistaken, I don't know about army, but for IDFA they don't exactly have a bunk they can AFK in safely since it is intended for officers only so they would have to resort to the other possible remedies you mentioned. That being swapping jobs and not respawning or afking on civ/recruit. However, I am willing to bet that most players, if they have to go afk, aren't going to go through a ritual so as to not get kidnapped. Myself personally I'd rather just move to a secluded area, that being bunks or otherwise, and tabbing out. I'm glad that we have some common ground and myself personally would actually appreciate to go further. How would this rule be exploited assuming the kidnapping party was recording and sought after staff intervention? Secondly, does the possibility for exploitation of the rule justify it not getting added and why? Lastly, since you agree that people shouldn't be kidnapped while AFK is there a variation of the rule that you think would be more effective as opposed to tedious remedies that EVERY player would have to take part in?

The issue is right now that AFG can't lock their doors otherwise people would be afking within their locked bunks safely albeit giving AFG perms to lock doors is a simple and quick remedy for the present problem but far from a solution. Also, at one point, not anymore obviously, but people kidnapping were generally required to record. So if you were to run around and come across someone that isn't AFK and they proceed to fake being AFK you have the recording to back up your statement. Also, typically I don't think it's appropriate for someone being kidnapped to have to prove that they are AFK hence why prior people who are kidnapping should be recording according to the previous rules. Also, I guess I can elaborate on the idea that reverting back to this rule wouldn't/couldn't be rampantly abused. Firstly, kidnappers recording being enforced would help to remedy the opportunity to lie and loophole this rule assuming the person kidnapping cared and would seek out staff intervention. Secondly, the extremes that could occur I.E. someone afking in front of a base or something of that nature simply wouldn't occur often enough to devalue the post/rule in of itself. And to add on I don't think it's appropriate to completely ignore a rule change/addition like this solely because of the chance that it is abused. A good comparison would be that of flashbangs back when they were added to SEALs. While I did abuse flashbangs by throwing them into a briefing it isn't necessarily appropriate to punish the entire faction by removing them as opposed to simply punishing the player. I.E. instead of making everyone susceptible to being kidnapped while AFK you would punish those who fake AFK which would also be even easier given kidnappers are recording. Granted, I can understand how for some recording their kidnaps/gameplay would be demanding on their computers and not necessarily a viable possibility. But the you would really only need to record assuming you were keen on having staff intervention, under the assumption that the person you are trying to kidnap would break the rules, etc Well that's why people who are kidnapping should be recording. However, as of right now you can kidnap anyone anywhere in their base. Which I don't think is a problem whatsoever but it becomes a problem when there are consistent instances of people kidnapping AFKs and keeping them longer than 15minutes, powergaming info, etc. I fully understand that there are remedies to avoid being kidnapped while AFK. However, I don't think that every player should have to be concerned about going AFK and whether they'll be kidnapped or not as well as going through a whole process to ensure they don't/can't. I.E. running to their bunks, locking the door assuming they can, then changing their job, etc. But also what is the point in kidnapping someone who is AFK to begin with? You can't exactly have an RP interaction/scenario with them up until they aren't AFK seeing as how kidnapping is, for the most part, supposed to be strictly RP and seemingly done for info gathering. The only other reason I can see kidnapping someone for is to just kill them without getting in trouble for RDM. If possible it could help further my understanding on opposing stances if this is further elaborated on.

Description: Implementing an official rule to disallow kidnapping individuals/players who are AFK OR having this fall under common sense. Also the inclusion/encouragement of recording as a kidnapper. Reasoning: To begin with kidnapping someone who is AFK does not allow for RP to occur in any capacity. Because of this it results in the kidnapping party to either execute them, which could be considered a loophole to RDM, or to powergame/metagame for information. Furthermore, not being allowed to kidnap AFKs seemingly does not fall under common sense which has thus far allowed for this behavior to occur. Lastly, this behavior, assuming if it's allowed to continue, encourages metagame as well as powergame since the only people involved in the situation would be the kidnappers and would also inhibit a back and forth dialogue between kidnapee and kidnapper. Additional Information: N/A

Pokemon Colosseum/Pokemon XD Gale of Darkness While these weren't the first games I played in the series these are one hundred percent my favorites in the series despite being a spinoff from an incredibly small studio at Game Freak/Nintendo. Got incredibly hooked on these two games especially Colosseum mainly of how it sets itself apart from the other games in the series. Both of these two games managed to be incredibly ahead of it's time in terms of graphics, story, and even animation. And as I mentioned before this was accomplished by a super small studio called Genius Sonority. Also, these games had cinematics strewn about the games alongside one main opening cinematic. Pokemon Colosseum had an opening cinematic that showed the main character stealing a snag machine from their own gang and driving off on a motorcycle while the hideout he was just in proceeds to blow up. Which I think is the main draw to these two games that being their darker story and plot in comparison to main series games. In Colosseum and Gale of Darkness you go in to recapture shadow pokemon who have their hearts artificially closed to the point where they will attack people aggressively including the trainer. Whereas main series games involve you as a player going about your region and fighting some gyms and the occasional crime organization. Plus the region in of itself is entirely different than those to come or previous. It literally has only a select few locations on the same side of the map that experience lush greenery of standard Pokemon games. However, a good portion of the region, especially Pyrite Town, is run down, filled with corruption, and just dark. And that same corrupt town called Pyrite, at least in Colosseum, has a place called the Underground DIRECTLY below it which is even MORE corrupt and dark. You can not tell me this cutscene is not hype ESPECIALLY for the time that the game was made. Only recently have we even seen shit of this caliber in pokemon up until recent years. Plus you literally get to use the two best eeveelutions in the whole series and experience double battles. @shrimp AND the game has soundtracks/OSTs that are probably the best of the ENTIRE series. If you haven't played this game and you are a fan of the series even remotely check these two games out and play on an emulator or something.

While kicks and bans can affect the server population and also deter new players from playing, assuming they were kicked, as of right now I feel as though it's not as common as people are making it out to be. However, to be fair a lot of the detections thus far have been a cause of things like a crosshair, console commands, etc. But I am also certain that those specific detections have been fixed to be largely ignored already. Although I do think that the anticheat could be further configurated, assuming it hasn't thus far, since according to the gmodstore it has a plethora of things that inhibit people from ESPing, Norecoiling, noaimspread, etc. But I do think it's also important to note that a series of unfortunate events happened across an entire week which all derived from the forums going down. So myself personally think that the addition of the anticheat can be especially helpful and would help to relieve some pressure off of staff members. I don't mean to downplay your situation but at least from what I can see only 8 people have been banned by the anticheat and at least 2-3 of them were banned when helping Garnet test it. I don't doubt that you weren't cheating but I don't think removing it entirely would be the route to go. TL;DR - This anticheat is the best one out there when considering it is both optimized and effective. But things might not be fine tuned right yet just because of a few other things being on Garnet's plate like the forums being down, AFG Part 2, etc. So assuming it's possible just give him a chance to sort it out. -1

I'm confused then. Because the "ban reason" in the appeal is literally Cheating/ban evasion and even in the "What happened" describes exactly that. That's the thing though in most circumstances people not being around and knowing relatively what happened means they are even more prone to being wrong and forgiving when they shouldn't. A prime example is Bleach who was incredibly racist and toxic yet was unbanned with overwhelming support solely because people didn't exactly remember the guy. While people being bias can be an issue the executive(s) shouldn't and if they are it'll probably result in them getting in trouble for it. So what I'm getting here is that you weren't cheating while being accused but were later on? Also, I'm gonna be honest from a precedent standpoint the "We would've given you another chance if you owned up to it" gives plenty of players the opportunity to take advantage of it. However, I am all for being understanding in MOST situations but Yurri was cheating and went on to evade. It's great that you were able to play the server again on an alt and at least make an attempt at portraying yourself as improved. I'm glad that you were able to do that while you could but the initial ban was for cheating which holds a lot of weight and, depending on how long you were cheating for, can hurt the server for a decent amount of time at least in comparison to Oatlife Massing. Let's be honest here in that the criminal record source you mentioned and you cheating on a gmod server are not 1:1. While it may be true, not sure if it is, that people with criminal records are less likely to commit a crime the stakes and punishment itself is ENTIRELY different. Furthermore, historically people that have been unbanned for cheating on Garnet have either gone back to cheating or resorted to being toxic. The only person that I know of that hasn't is Pencil but that could also be because of how he EARNED his unban and also the people he was/is around. Yes a lot of people who were once perma'd have come back but most of them were banned for completely different things. I.E. anyone that was permabanned had reasons for it that could easily range from Mass RDM, Admin abuse, cheating, etc. ALSO, historically those same people who got unbanned from a ban wipe were a huge problem hence why Phantom, when he was still Super Admin/Community Manager, and I believe Garnet has noted how it was a bad idea and wouldn't happen again. I'm gonna be real in a situation like this what really matters is whether or not you cheated. I do understand that you could've had a lot of self improvement while ban evading and such but like you cheated on the server and would've ruined the server for the people on your side and the opposing as well. But you also tried to downplay the extent in which you were cheating. https://gyazo.com/588b8db18c9776cd1d96d3c569109c6d But while you did bring good to the server, apparently, you decided to cheat and taint/ruin all of what you worked on. Then again though a lot of precedent and standards that myself, Phantom, etc have upheld when we were executives have, for the most part, dissipated. Then again, if you actually have potential, you can have the Blooms treatment where you are unbanned but can't participate in war. I'm gonna be honest though situations like that are counterintuitive because, at the moment, war is still the central focal point of the server and you would merely be on the server, seemingly, just for the pop. Sorry to say but if you cheated on the server you should be expecting to never come back. -1 EDIT : Though I don't really care if you play other servers but it's up to their respective executives to determine if the ban should be applied there as well. Unless Garnet decides otherwise of course.

Yeah and as the post prefaced it's a discussion. You should kinda expect a response to your post. Furthermore, I haven't attacked you I'm just trying to have a back and forth. I personally don't care about past instances or examples of other people doing "similar" things because these situations should be dealt with case by case. That is because they are all typically very much different unlike what you are trying to push. For example, Duglas was banned for extensive racism not a meaningless mass and was kept banned because of the racism and previous permas according to the appeal. So as I've made clear prior my stance is to deal with these appeals "case by case" and not precedent. That literally holds no relevance to the decision. Jake or any executive all have the capacity to be wrong or do wrong. Pulling rank in a situation like this more so illustrates you being complicit with abuse of power. I do not care about appeals to authority in a discussion like this because ALL authority have the compacity to be wrong. If you don't know if I'm in a friendgroup or not why throw out the claim like that? Regardless I made the post out of my own accord because I thought that it would be both a meaningful discussion and bring to light issues that may/may not be already present in the staff team. But I don't really know how "being in a friendgroup" is even relevant to the discussion. I believe that Oatlife should've been unbanned it's pretty simple. Also, you say there are 20 reasons for him to stay banned so list 5 so that Oatlife can improve upon it. After the two most recent posts you've made it's been made clear that the super admin made the decision but that doesn't excuse the decision through and through. Also, it doesn't explain why Jake didn't just post on it himself if he has as much power as you are trying to portray. I do not care about the rank that made the decision I care about the decision itself because no one on the server, other than Garnet, can just make any decision they want when they want especially without criticism.

Yeah we know that from the post on the appeal it was denied for ban evasion. The whole point of the thread is to discuss the difference between someone maliciously ban evading and an individual just playing the server. Furthermore, the initial ban was for Mass RDM which also wasn't a malicious mass. I.E. running into a DB and gunning everyone down, tryout, etc. I am trying to understand why it's hard to be the least bit understanding with people actually showing change. The other issue with that decision is that if Oatlife, when making the appeal, didn't include his ban evading he would be playing the server now. So why penalize a player for being transparent and open about their past mistakes. But this is precisely the issue. Seemingly nitpicking and keeping Oatlife banned for ban evading after he admitted to it comes off as Jake, assuming what you are saying is true, trying to have ANY reason to keep him banned. Also, I can't imagine why in this circumstance the ACTUAL reason wouldn't be openly stated on the appeal. Especially because giving the ACTUAL reason helps Oatlife improve assuming he hasn't already. If anything it's just disingenuous to do otherwise. So we can't just "chill out" if this is the discretion that staff take when determining decisions on ban appeals and other staff related decisions. Especially when it seems that the decision was determined by the Super Admin of MRP and other staff being complicit.

To preface the post this is intended to be a discussion pertaining to the ultimate decision on the appeal, clarifying my position, and cover what I was going to post on it. My Position : While Oatlife did intentionally mass, and shouldn't have, the long-term effect of the mass is nonexistent. Furthermore, it wasn't in a standard DB where EVERYONE on that side experiences it either as the person being killed or watching it. The situation itself was enclosed to a small group of people who were all seemingly messing around and didn't care due to it not effecting their experience. To clarify I'm not saying kill your friend(s) on the server over and over but have some sense of empathy and forgiveness given it was a one off situation and at least a year ago. As for alting if you are actually thinking of appealing of course don't evade soon after a ban like this one. However, with veteran mass bans and perma bans of this nature most people simply won't care enough to actually appeal assuming they don't already have an interest to play again. Furthermore, I think it's worth covering what Oatlife actually did while alting. As he mentioned he was able to become an officer in Rangers, 2LT, which isn't something that happens overnight or to people wreaking havoc on the server. Lastly Oatlife was forthcoming with alting and was transparent throughout the appeal. He didn't have to reveal that he was alting just to incriminate himself but to illustrate that he had changed in some relative way. Because of all of this I would've seen no issue with unbanning Oatlife. Furthermore, why wouldn't we consider unbanning Oatlife when we've unbanned and allowed people to play on the server who have affected the server negatively LONG-TERM. We've unbanned cheaters like Tora, Ozzy, Topshot, etc who affected the server in an incredibly negative way. BUT I do believe that these same players did have an opportunity to play again and show how they've changed, if at all, but for most of these same people that was because of a banwipe. And there probably won't be a ban wipe ever again because of the negative consequences that bring with it. So unban Oatlife at that point and give him an opportunity to move past a Mass RDM that happened over a year ago. The Denial Reason : While I understand why you would deny the thread I think it's important to deal with appeals of this nature case by case. If you are willing to forgive the "Intentional MassRDM" why can't we move past the ban evading especially when Oatlife did nothing wrong both in his faction and in regard to staff? The dude wasn't toxic while alting and wasn't seemingly rdming or massing. Furthermore, Staff can differentiate the maliciousness of the actual MassRDM but not the ban evading but why can't we be understanding in that regard indiscriminately when applicable. WITH THAT lets discuss the topic, counterpoints, etc. And maybe through discussion I can change your mind and elaborate more as to how that decision is counterintuitive. Edit : For those with dissenting opinions feel free to make a comment on the thread so we can have a back and forth instead of just reacting. Defeats the whole purpose of the post otherwise.

Yeah this is very neat. Helps to reintroduce Afghan all while being fresh nonetheless. But I do think it's good to maybe clarify what would happen to those with reserves and whether or not they would transfer into their new equivalent faction. I bring this up because people like myself would be affected by it and if we were to keep our reserves would be enticed to make a return or at the very least check it out.

Exactly your RU so, in general, SOC performance/activity doesn't necessarily have a toll on RU performance/activity. Sure it may be great that "you guys" adapt to stuff but a completely inactive faction isn't something you can really "adapt" to effectively. Previous attempts at "adapting" lead to mass recruiting in the lower tiered SOCs leading to an insane overpopulation in them respectively. Side Note : Yes I know that if a large chunk of a country don't play that the other side is discouraged from playing solely because they have no one to play against. But that isn't happening here. Same argument can be made for you brother. You are so defensive, aggressive, and toxic about a post pertaining to a US faction when all you do is, theoretically, play against them. So why be so confrontational about some issue that doesn't really directly affect you. Bro this isn't some debate about the effectiveness of Welfare in the US where you need cited sources and pieces of evidence to support your claim. This is arguing about a faction's activity and how, as it is now, is a problem. As a result, the use of anecdotal evidence or just flat out statements is alright given that, from what it seems, most US players see the same issue. Now it's a matter of solving it which, in this case, requires the executive to get involved. Also, I don't even really understand how Stork is even calling out Jake. If that was what he was doing he would've been a lot more blunt with it and probably wouldn't even be pushing for any meaningful change or improvement with that faction. I already mentioned before but given that this is about all around activity and presence on the server this isn't really reasonable at all. I.E. you want me to screenshot every war they aren't on or record 24/7 to see when they log on/off. Because that is the only way, in your mind, to even substantiate what Stork is saying. Seems like your using this as an outlet to just let loose some emotions or some shit because you literally have no reason to be this confrontational about something that doesn't involve or affect you. EDIT : Probably gonna see a response to this saying "Bro you don't even play so why are you talking. Seems hypocritical to me." Didn't I manage the server for like a year plus and deal with these EXACT situations like three or four times on both US and RU? Safe to say I probably am well versed in the situation without trying to look like an egotistical shithead.

This is like the 3rd or 4th time this has happened. It'll probably happen another two or three times. A quick fix for the swapping sides stuff is just go back to the old "don't balance/we don't care if you do or don't as staff." Chances are though either people will complain or one side can't handle not having the help. Brings attention to the problem if there wasn't any attention on it already. Pretty straight forward. Also, it even has the possibility of outlining issues that the faction had/have that the leader doesn't already see or notice. Essentially giving them a chance to fix a mistake formerly not known. I mean typically if it comes to a forum post that probably means that either it hasn't been noticed or the Executive(s) aren't taking initiative to fix the problem. However, this could be because the problem isn't exactly "fixable" or that they might not believe there is a problem to begin with. So that also gives an opportunity for them to vocalize their stance on the matter and at times maybe even set a precedent for faction situations like this. It very easily can just gotta think longer and harder about it. This isn't the first time where "public" focus was brought onto one faction or another and sometimes that attention, negative or positive, can lead to improvements. Even something as small as them being more active than normal and having a presence goes a long way for new players and can reestablish trust/communication with current leaders. Sure you are right in that the post itself doesn't change anything but an effect or biproduct that this post CAN have is what I already explained.

Oh shit my bad guys. Think we gotta start over I meant to copy paste the next number. Alright here we go 1.

I knew Gamma for a long time albeit towards the end it was a bit on and off and hearing this news makes me regret that. He is someone that showed immense maturity, ingenuity, and care in regard to all things. However, outside of the confines of the community he was an incredibly understanding and nice person. He was and is someone that I'll wholeheartedly remember from my time on Garnet. Thank you for the memories Gamma and my prayers go out to his family. Please don't do it ingame do it in a slightly more formal setting like teamspeak. Hell even Zoom because I feel as though it is not as nearly diminishing as ingame.