[MRP] The Army Transition

[Shwade 85]

-1 Cool ideas but not needed at the moment. The AFG changes is what the server really needs right now. US already has great pop. 

Edited February 17, 2023 by Shwade

[Ziggy 1,353]

4 minutes ago, PhatPropane said:

These are just some of my thoughts on this idea. 

 

26 minutes ago, The_real_Bp said:

imbalance which will effect war time and PvP event thus reducing pop more after the "temporary boost".

A couple of things. People seem to be under the impression that this suggestion, or suggestions in general, will always be proposed solutions to server problems. This isn’t healthy and you should really just take it at face value as an aesthetic improvement, similar to the switch to Afghan. 
 

Secondly, the concern for AFG numbers is only half real. That’s why the Badri rework is included. Afghan will always be outnumbered by US, but it will always have players regardless. There are a number of people who, in switches, could change factions/nations.
 

It’s unfair to make the prediction that if we move forward with any changes/improvements to the US side, then Afghan will immediately suffer and be doomed to fail forever. 

[acer 636]

13 minutes ago, Ziggy said:

Well you’ve answered your own question on why. There isn’t much I can do currently to support the server past what I’m able to do as a moderator, so suggestions have always been something I’m constantly thinking of. 

I guess my point is that the time spent on creating this change that would yield little improvement could be better spent elsewhere, and I think that would be Garnet's main sentiment as well. Although we won't know until he responds!

[Ziggy 1,353]

For people concerned about logistics and the ‘time it would take to implement’:

 

Yes, it’s a mildly annoying process to change around docs/discord roles. However, we’ve done this twice before entirely and after the literal update is in, it only take a couple days to adjust. Just want to note that this is something the server has seen before, twice, and nothing we can’t handle. 

[Horse 350]

I dont think the doc changing process would be too difficult adding/changing jobs to console is easier than doc changes but I'm more worried about the appeal your bringing to U.S. While, yes the U.S will always outnumber Taliban the Taliban are still capable of reaching high pop the problem currently is the lack of recruitment and an active officer corps. With this suggestion you're brining a ton of appeal to the U.S. At the start of this suggestion you said that Crypt told you someone left 313 for Red Group due to models. Well, here it's the same concept; important Taliban members leaving to U.S because of their new models or appeal which based off this content is pretty sick.

I understand you want to positively impact the server but alot of time that's done behind close doors. Yes, you are changing 313 to ISI and there's some appeal there but that's not where Taliban gets the majority of its numbers from. Maybe find a way to positively impact and reinforce Taliban's prescense on the server pulling in more players from the US. Do this before making a suggest to appeal to US players.

-1

Edited February 17, 2023 by Horseyyy

[MrTooTooT 103]

As much as a change like this would cool, I don't really see the point as to doing all this work when Army is consistently the faction with the most players on. Taliban are more the faction that could use some help, in any way possible. While POP hasn't been the best as of recently, a change like this wouldn't really itch people to play the server more. The effect of "New models, weapons, banger update, W" would really only last a week and after that, everyone would go back to their respective factions. 

-1

[Suesh 8]

I agree with this. The same classes and units have been in play for a couple years now. This update would refresh the server, and bring new functionality and different aspects of gameplay. New missions and command structure would also help with command prompts that need to be updated for army. 

[Tuna 380]

15 hours ago, Ziggy said:

Force Recon

pretty good suggestion not gonna lie, just would suck that I would have to change my RP faction from FORECON to something else lmao.

+1 though. Would shake some things up

[Dillan 750]

Afg died again during January which is one reason I gave it up, couldn't invest the time to help it with scheduling. If you want to help anyone, it's the fuel for the enemy base faction. The bad guys. The good guys are boring, but sustainable. Flipping the status quo for something that would make things worse off? Pointless. 

Marines and seals are cool, no doubt, but in the grand scheme is irrelevant. Sorry but it is, and that's coming from a guy who played both of those factions. Army is fine, GB is fine, Rangers are fine, delta could have better players, but is also fine. 

ISI is the only thing helpful right now, and Badri could use it. However that's not what needs to get fixed, some form of automation for training and hooks for AFG base faction are, otherwise you'll always just get US rejects, and people who come back for nostalgia like me. Keep this suggestion in your back pocket for when US actually needs it, and focus your attention to what matters.

 

[Ziggy 1,353]

12 minutes ago, Dillan said:

for when US actually needs it

I have to disagree here because I think that holding suggestions and updates for "when the server needs it" is extremely unhealthy. With that business model, you're waiting till things get bad before you improve them, rather than just improving them from the start. This mentality plays hand in hand with the idea that suggestions need to fix something in order to be "good" suggestions. Now, of course this is also a suggestion and something people are able to freely express their opinions on. That being said, I see a lot of people who start their -1 off with "this would be really cool to see" but then immediately retract their want for an update into "well, we can't really do x unless y is fixed."

All this does is push the community into a cycle of only making small and niche updates in hope of fixing y. The problem is y will always exist. We really need to stop waiting for things to be bad to introduce cool updates. We really need to stop using the excuse that something else is broken in order to introduce cool updates. We should just introduce cool updates if people think they're cool. 

 

Nobody is saying that Afghan wouldn't be updated if this suggestion went through. It isn't one or the other, we CAN have both lol. 

Edited February 17, 2023 by Ziggy

[Kurtle 298]

Let me explain how this goes. 

Bishop makes a forum post detailing how we should change a country, and everyone agree reacts and comments saying: "This could really freshen things up!" Some vets recount their fun times on that faction a few years back

Garnet reluctantly agrees, since "this is what the community wants"! He spends dev time updating and changing models, while faction leaders have to update docs and textscreens around the map.

The change finally happens. Everyone is elated over the new models and how fresh everything is. They can have some fresh RP on the server during peacetime!
After 2 weeks, people are back to complaining, and thinking up ideas on how to improve the "stale atmosphere of the server" once again.

-

This is not me speculating on what I think will happen, This is actually exactly what happened with the RU > AFG switch that happened in 2021. It got changed, and the server is no better because of it. Some even argue worse, because of the lack of real world information we have regarding AFG.

To me, changing models and factions is really a band-aid solution to the issue that many players face, of stale gameplay. So why should we invest in a solution that will make things fresh for two weeks, instead of some real sustenance and content that will invite longevity. 

This isn't a personal dig on Bishop either, he just happened to make both suggestions.

 

-1

Edited March 9, 2023 by Kurtle

[Ziggy 1,353]

1 hour ago, Kurtle said:

why should we invest in a solution that will make things fresh for two weeks, instead of some real sustenance and content that will invite longevity. 

I really don't get why it is impossible for you and others to conceive the idea that both model/gun changes and sustainable content can co-exist. People don't want to play with the same guns and models for multiple years in the same way that you would be really bored if a game like COD didn't release a gun or skin for months. As I have mentioned at least 100 times in this thread, you should not carry the expectation that every suggestion posted is supposed to serve the function of solving a problem. It's a mindblowing concept that people might want to suggest something solely for the reason of freshening things up or because they think its cool. (crazy, right?)

 

Also pretending like the work investment isn't worth the outcome is silly as fuck because it doesn't take long to change around models once every few years. Only a couple of guns were suggested here and no donators were touched. 

[Bowl22 125]

       
Denied 
At this moment a country switch doesn't seem needed nor does it seem beneficial
@Smity_@OzzyLock and Move