inb4 Springhill Jack. Anyway, denied.

I haven't taken the time to read everyone's post completely in this thread, but skimming over it, I can see a few points that have been raised that I have an answer for. Please excuse me if these points have already been stated by someone else.

Regarding what Lone said about resistance getting very little admin attention, its partly because there is no official resistance at CG, however the CCA and OTA are official. As for the issue of events, nearly every loyalist event has the potential for a resistance group to come disrupt it. As admins, we literally keep that in mind when doing loyalist and CCA events. I think what many people fail to understand is that during events, you can do anything you want. Just because the CCA are taking part in an event, doesn't mean it has to be CCA oriented completely. If you want resistance involved in events more, either a) suggest actual events that can be done that's easier for resistance characters to partake in, or b) find ways to interact with the events that are done. A good example of what I'm talking about was that loyalist tea party we had before we changed the map from C45. After the tea party with the CA's, we had rations in which the RDT was bombed, resulting in the death of a unit (permanently) and quite a few injuries. Yes, the bomb had to be authed but still, its proof that events can be altered by anyone at any time, including resistance characters.

Regarding Lone's comment about the usual responses of a resistance in P3, that's because the resistance is what the players make it. When capable people step up and make an actual organized group that's good a role playing and is capable of not making themselves so obvious, you'll have a good resistance group. A good resistance group, you should never actually hear about by just asking anyone.

As for Lone's comment about how rule breaking resulted in the death of his organized rebel group, don't blame the admins if you didn't call for them or make ban requests, etc. We can't see every little thing that happens on the server, especially when no one says anything. If the admins didn't do their job, then make an admin complaint on them with proof of it.

Regarding Jugger's first comment about how there are only two admins that focus on rebel RP, its because there's a server for rebel RP. Its called Outlands and those two admins only play on that server, which is why they focus on it so much.

I said it earlier in this thread and I'll say it again as the main point I want to make. Resistance RP is what the players make it. Sure, admin help can boost it, but we're not going to just get on our admin characters and spawn guns for everyone. CG has no official resistance. The resistance relies on you guys, the players. Its supposed to be a player controlled and player ran faction with the admin team mostly having their hands off to let you guys do what you want within reason. As Khub said, if you feel you need admin help with anything just add one of us on steam and we'll help you however we can.

This has set for a few days and seems to have enough support anyway for acceptance. I'll go ahead and accept this.

Accepted. Locked. Moved.

I also enjoyed reading the story. It was easy to picture in my mind and see what David's personal character is like. With 2 SA's supporting, I'll go ahead and accept this.

Accepted. Locked. Moved.

I understand the argument here and I can't say I disagree from a player's standpoint. But from a business standpoint (and there is a business half of this website), business comes before pleasure, so to speak. What I mean by that is that by removing the things you get as a donator, that lowers the number of donators. Without donators, our servers don't even run. Think about it, most people don't donate to this community out of the goodness of their hearts. They donate because they want their Huey on HRP, or they want their tool gun on HL2RP, or their Ferrari on OCRP.

Its not as big of an issue with people who have been here a long time and just enjoy the community, and in reality most of those people play HL2RP and probably wouldn't mind. From a customer service standpoint however, resetting tokens (as small of an issue as that sounds) is like taking what someone donated for. Yes, anything donated is purely a donation and we're not entitled to give them anything for a donation, but you also have to look at the fact of why people donate to begin with. If the returns aren't worth the input, the number of donators can and sometimes will go down.

Now granted, most of the gold members are coming from HRP these days so this probably wouldn't have as many repercussions to wipe tokens and remove v flags from the donator benefit list. It really just depends on how needed hl2rp donators are I guess.

But yes, all in all I'd like to see a token reset and v flags removed from the donor list of benefits, so long as money and a potential lack of donators isn't an issue.

We don't give bionic limbs and haven't for a long time. Standard augmentation surgery results in full organ removal with the exception of the brain and eyes. Challenge claims 270 has 25% bionic limbs, meaning about 25% of each limb would be augmented. Its pretty obvious Challenge somehow received non standard augments under someone's authorization that wasn't my own. If Challenge doesn't have organ replacement, then 270 isn't even augmented in the sense every other augmented unit is augmented, which also goes against policy because its a rare exception that OfC+ units aren't augmented.

Challenge clearly references their augments in their auth app, so they must have received unauthorized, special augments at some point as an enlisted unit, or something really shady is going on.

Also, you say my example of a Rainbow Dash character is totally off canon and unrealistic. What's also "totally off canon and unrealistic" is allowing an augmented unit to survive and function without stasis.

I've already said twice I don't mind letting 270 go to the outlands and RP as long as its with no weapons and the character is killed of or gone from the outlands in some way within 10 OOC days. That's the only condition I'll agree to support this auth app under.

Quote from: YankeeSamurai on February 20, 2013, 07:16:07 AM

Section commanders should already have a decent idea of who's OOCly cut out to lead the division and who isn't.

In any case, trial periods of any sort are an inaccurate representation of a player's leadership potential. Any random d00d is going to be on his toes for the entire trial and do everything right - that's a given. Then once he gets the billet for real, he gets complacent or bored, dithers around, and becomes a problem.

More HC training might help a little, but you can only OOCly improve a player so much with Gmod. The best hl2rp leaders are going to already be leaders by virtue of their natural IRL personality. I don't think training courses in Gmod will affect hardcoded OOC character traits in any significant way.

If HC would be chosen based on skill anyways then why not evaluate their command ability when they are at 01 level, when they should already be taking charge of small operations and doing some busywork for their respective OfCs? They would be at an 02-01 level for at least a few months before even being eligible training-wise, and their ability to command squads of 4 or 5 grunts effectively during in game scenarios such as P3 sweeps or community inspections would be the next best thing to knowing the candidate and their abilities personally. It should still be on the down low, as to keep them from knowing that they are being evaluated.

I can't speak for anyone else, but this is the type of approach I've always taken with my subordinates both in real life back when I was the XO of my old high school's ROTC unit, and on the server with the CCA. If the top leader does everything, how can those under them learn to the job of the top leader when they move on? Some things are best learned with hands on methods. I've always allowed my units to make their own important decisions at the 02+ rank. Even still, I mostly leave my hands off of both of my Officers and I just let them run their halves of Section 4. I keep an eye on who I think will be best suited to be my replacement when I move on from my current position, and I answer any questions they may have and I step in when I'm needed. But otherwise, I let my OfC's learn by doing, rather than always watching me do everything. I hope they both allow their 01's to do things without having to always ask for permission and have my Officers breathing down their necks constantly, but I can't really control that without micromanaging both halves of S4.

Basically, a "learn by doing" approach is always good. Its not such a bad thing to allow someone to have a bit of freedom to make their own leadership decisions, appropriate to their rank of course.