So, roleplay demands are now against the rules

[Thyrzul]

What are the chances of approval from Admins if Spazzy asks that? What are the chances if someone else asks? Asking this also because I would question his ideas too knowing they can be enough unique sometimes to be borderline abusive/rulebreakish, do not mistake me agreeing with him in this specific case with being a fan of his ideas in general. I guess because of these reasons the solution is either "friendly ties" or rather some more open-minded, receptive admin in the staff, or someone else asking this for him.

---

[sindroms]

Well, if a certain Bob was still in green, he would have been the first choice for said spot. At that point I had no friendly ties to any administration I would have chosen to participate in this.

Im not sure why you would need 'friendly ties' for a simple "Hey guys, I have this idea, can I do it? Do you have suggestions how it should be done differently?...".

I didn't mean any harm, sindroms. It was all huge misunderstandment and both parties made mistakes - being convinced they do a right thing. I agree putting it into ID would solve a lot. Actually, rewriting IDs would surely be needed, because there are some issues granted by lack of actual definition in certain lines.

Soon ™

Frankly, I was going to give the group a trial run before opening recruitment. The reason I did not want to involve an admin was because I honestly thought that this sort of demands, considering I have made them in the past, would not be seen as something out of place. Frankly, the Parts system was not my concern. The concern I had was the attempt to go for officialdom on an untagged faction. That was the big deal about it. The Parts system and the way to acquire them was mostly there as a balancing feature and was not viewed as something that would conflict with the server rules.

The only changes I've done to it over the last few weeks after I posted the writeup, I adjusted so that killing a transport would yield less parts than removing guns in order to encourage this sort of precision demands as well as making sure silent traders would not disrupt the Parts economy.

After this sanction and seeing though as the administration team are not about to review it, removing the Parts value for equipment might be the best choice as a short-term solution.



If anything, right now if I had a choice in the manner, I would like to invite @Tunicle into the group so that he can see first-hand at what is being done with it, what the attitude it is and what it represents. Because I quite frankly understand that when you think of a group made by me, an RP focused one is the last thing you would expect. But as I said before, it is a RP-Centric replacement for the now disbanded LR- and a group I take seriously. This is why this sanction caused so much problems for me in the first place.

Having the whole group branded as trolls or griefers with this sanction after a single encounter like this is just sad.

---

--------------
PSA: If you have been having stutter/FPS lag on Disco where it does not run as smoothly as other games, please look at the fix here: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2306502
----------

[Durandal]

I didn't mean any harm, sindroms. It was all huge misunderstandment and both parties made mistakes - being convinced they do a right thing. I agree putting it into ID would solve a lot. Actually, rewriting IDs would surely be needed, because there are some issues granted by lack of actual definition in certain lines.

Soon ™

Oh god please no, we do not need a rule/ID rewrite stemming from an admin screwup. It wasn't an unreasonable demand, and trying to define what is or isn't an unreasonable demand is not going to end well, especially if you try to distinguish that based on what's possible with the game's mechanics.

[Wildkins]

I didn't mean any harm, sindroms. It was all huge misunderstandment and both parties made mistakes - being convinced they do a right thing. I agree putting it into ID would solve a lot. Actually, rewriting IDs would surely be needed, because there are some issues granted by lack of actual definition in certain lines.

Soon ™

Oh god please no, we do not need a rule/ID rewrite stemming from an admin screwup. It wasn't an unreasonable demand, and trying to define what is or isn't an unreasonable demand is not going to end well, especially if you try to distinguish that based on what's possible with the game's mechanics.

Pretty sure that's referring to an actual total ID rewrite, not just one based on this single definition, which...is probably needed, in all honesty. There are several lines that are confusing or just simply silly, especially on the less-played IDs.

---

RP Feedback

[The Savage]

We can all just agree that entire drama was caused by lack of knowledge and communication, as both parties thought what they do is right.

[sindroms]

I didn't mean any harm, sindroms. It was all huge misunderstandment and both parties made mistakes - being convinced they do a right thing. I agree putting it into ID would solve a lot. Actually, rewriting IDs would surely be needed, because there are some issues granted by lack of actual definition in certain lines.

Soon ™

Any update on what you guys are going to do about this nonsense?

---

--------------
PSA: If you have been having stutter/FPS lag on Disco where it does not run as smoothly as other games, please look at the fix here: https://discoverygc.com/forums/showthrea...pid2306502
----------