+- Discovery Gaming Community (https://discoverygc.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Rules & Requests (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Forum: Rules (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=25)
+---- Forum: Faction Rules (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=46)
+----- Forum: Faction Review and Feedback (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=135)
+------ Forum: Archived Feedback Threads (https://discoverygc.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=484)
+------ Thread: Admin Feedback Thread 2.0 (/showthread.php?tid=147306)
RE: Admin Feedback Thread 2.0 - SMI-Great.Fox - 08-26-2017
I asked Skorak a few days ago on an explanation onto why only the rename for my SRP ships was approved and dead silence was given.
I view this as a bit unprofessional in such a state when dead air is given over a legitimate request for knowledge.
The SRP in total will be 7 YEARS OLD soon and people have done more with less RP given in general with less people involved.
Link to previous SRP Materials
Link to Current SRP approval
If the issue is with Oracles ID not allowing battleships, then a simple Spec Op ID will be fine for the Grande Guillotine and I did request talking about the Warwolf if it would be possible to use it or not with a handicap on it.
The Oracles leader Huggiesunrise told me personally that he has his full support for me in this matter as it affects the Oracles faction as well.
RE: Admin Feedback Thread 2.0 - SMI-Great.Fox - 09-02-2017
Any input is better than plain ignorance gents..
RE: Admin Feedback Thread 2.0 - Tunicle - 09-02-2017
You PM'd one admin?
You want the Gallic Battleship Oracle|Gr.Guillotine to the Oracles? (Inote you have already done that) But that ID does not allow things above cruiser level so you want a Special Ops ID?
RE: Admin Feedback Thread 2.0 - SMI-Great.Fox - 09-02-2017
(09-02-2017, 08:08 PM)Tunicle Wrote: You PM'd one admin?
You want the Gallic Battleship Oracle|Gr.Guillotine to the Oracles? (Inote you have already done that) But that ID does not allow things above cruiser level so you want a Special Ops ID?
Aye. Skorak put up the reply, I sent one in kind. I didn't send a message to you or others cause I thought Skorak was the one processing them.
But yes. For both La. Triomphante and Grande Guillotine. That's it.
And thank you for replying.
RE: Admin Feedback Thread 2.0 - HuggieSunrise - 09-03-2017
Ey tuni.
Whats going on up there on Olympus.
anything the community can help with?
RE: Admin Feedback Thread 2.0 - Tunicle - 09-03-2017
The discussion is with mods and admin revolve around battleships and ID.
RE: Admin Feedback Thread 2.0 - Mephistoles - 09-03-2017
Dealing with Baron Snow is a good move. If you want to see someone who is truly detrimental to the server, there you go. I'm not sure just a warning is enough of a smack to make him stop what he's been doing because of why he's doing it, but his toxicity being at least recognised is better than it going unchallenged.
RE: Admin Feedback Thread 2.0 - SMI-Great.Fox - 09-07-2017
(09-03-2017, 09:03 PM)Tunicle Wrote: The discussion is with mods and admin revolve around battleships and ID.
A battleship and a battlecruiser (Was cruiser years ago) for a spec op ID with enough RP to be accepted.
If the issue is just over an ID, I'll take a Spec Op ID over an Oracle one then.
RE: Admin Feedback Thread 2.0 - SMI-Great.Fox - 09-26-2017
(09-07-2017, 08:15 PM)SMI-Great.Fox Wrote:(09-03-2017, 09:03 PM)Tunicle Wrote: The discussion is with mods and admin revolve around battleships and ID.
A battleship and a battlecruiser (Was cruiser years ago) for a spec op ID with enough RP to be accepted.
If the issue is just over an ID, I'll take a Spec Op ID over an Oracle one then.
Has there been an update to this? It's been respectively nearly 20 days of patiently waiting.
RE: Admin Feedback Thread 2.0 - Sombs - 09-29-2017
Thanks for answering the questions in the Rule Clarification Thread, it really helps!
