Guac

+ mf 1

Its just the CC exam and training. You can keep them for battalion use at this point.

@Square U gon deny this? new map and shi ya dig?

+1, better anaxes than we have now

ehhhhhh, I see a system in this manner to be used and abused. Not to mention the inflation of permanent medals to inflate ego? LIke we need more of that on this server lmao. MoH is enough, -1.

Big cantina band 2 fan! +1

+1

lmfao -1

This community be like: "Yes I have an issue with the way you did this thing, however I will offer no valuable insight or criticism on how you may be able to change it."

Only thing is that some people not participating in an event for lets say ARC training, will have a tough time looking through an objective visually whilst still participating. Maybe an opt-out option somewhere would help.

+1 sith moment

Uhh originally BCMD, but if community finds it more convient, channel admin. STILL FINE WITH VA’S BYPASSING PASSWORDS THO

Name: Guac | BCMD Gregor Suggestion: Allow the BCMD tag to move VA's. Where would this be implemented?: In teamspeak. How would this benefit the TeamSpeak/Community?: Simply a quality of life change. Have you asked for Feedback from others about this suggestion?: No, but I have viewed a previous suggestion made by Spaghetti and I believe that this would offer as a good alternative. Briefly explain why this should be implemented?: I understand that VA's are respected members of the community. However, I think BCMD's should have utmost authority within their channel's. If there is a VA they either don't want, is AFK, or need pulled down to a seperate channel, they cannot. This is an issue for me personally. I don't think it is that much to ask that a Battalion Commander, who went through application and interview, gaining community and High Staff support, gets to have access to move VA and below.

Name: Guac RP Rank: BCMD Suggestion: Remove the 12.1.1 clause "Teamspeak communications are allowed to be in character if you are in yelling distance of each other in game." Teamspeak communications are used in many cases as In Character for callouts and information gathering. It is unrealistic to communicate properly through typing, unless you can type at 200WPM. We do not have any squad comms implemented ingame so I do not believe that we should be forced to adhere to this unrealistic rule. I have seen any one battalion NOT break this rule during an event. I do not want to adjust rule 12.1 "Teamspeak communications (ex. “I just died at bravo to a sith” You then go to Bravo without RP)." due to the fact that it would be a clear cut case of meta gaming and breaking NLR. Implementation: Hold left click, drag right, press backpace. Lore: No entiendo.

Wouldn’t that be nice. Unfortunately the intelligence (or lack there of) of some synergy role players is beyond our understanding.

……. My point is that many of the player base disagrees with that sentiment and actively refutes it on many occasions. I believe an explicit addition to the rules would be the best way of quelling any confusion

Trust me, I know that. Still doesn’t stop those who believe we cannot. That is the purpose of the clarification. Then that would be an issue you seek with those inside of the sim. If they refuse to stop / calm down, AOS them.

Name: Guac RP Rank: BCMD Suggestion: Allow Sim Room hallways / airlocks to be used as a part of the sim room. I am sick of people coming up to me and complaining as to how I decide to use the Sim Room I claimed. In my persona opinion, everything past the entering door's should be able to be utilized as a sim. Whether or not it was an official rule that I couldn't, many still complained none the less, in some cases threatening to AOS. Implementation: Add a clause within Section D stating "All areas beyond the Sim Room entrance may be used as a Sim Room" or something along those lines. Lore: What is that.

-1, I understand the point, however I dont believe this is the way of going about balancing.

Gonna have to -1 here. I enjoy the current functionality of the jetpack. Honestly, I'd rather a nerf of vertical movement than a change of actual packs. Since we have already cut down on the sheer number of jetpack jobs, it doesn't seem like a huge lag diffrence.

Name: Guac Suggestion: Un-Archive old suggestions. Either leave it in an archive section to be viewable, or redistribute them in their proper categories (accepted denied) Why should we implement this?: Old things being suggested more than once is quite frustrating. Not to mention it is interesting to view past decisions by members of the community. How will this improve the Forums?: Quality of life.

+1 for dogma, -1 for tup. I think that the engineer kit is naturally a balancing move. Can't say the same about Tup.

+1, shame it looks jank but these are important to have imo

+1