monkeysfist101

It's been said time and time again for ofer a year now. Barber. Is. Useless. Change it so that if you want to change your hair, you need to see the barber. Removes: Ability to change your hair in the mirror. Adds: When barber is using clippers, (s)he can alter your hairstyle. Give the barber eyes to alter the color of your hair. When a non-barber uses the clippers, it can only shave heads.

These are awesome. At least on my screen, though, most of them are misnamed.

I'm down for the hearing aid device. On top of that, you could have a cochlear implant similar to the pacemaker in that it stops working if shocked or subjected to an EMP.

It would make an interesting mechanic to have your request bounced back with a message from CentComm that read, "No Emergency Response Teams are available in your area. Sorry, Cyberiad, you're on your own. -Central Command Dispatch."

I meant adding them as a species.

You guys seem to be missing the point here. This would add a dedicated character slot that could /only/ be used for ERT. This would keep current response times and allow for custom ERT members like we used to have. Also, FalseIncarnate, as far as preventing ERT who don't know what to do, despite the fact that I've been with Paradise over a year, I've played an abysmally small amount of ERT. (None to be specific. Go figure.)

That's the problem. It should be a flat yes or no. The act of abstaining implies that you're not voting, so why put a vote for that. I saw multiple occasions where both sides were claiming that the abstain side supported them. "They don't care so you should leave it in." Abstaining to me shows how many people are on the fence and still watching it... though commenting about how you abstain is sort of odd, unless it states your opinion on both sides. It's good to have somebody neutral on the issue talk about things rather than text walls from each side like it usually is, which, of course I'm guilty of making. As long as it isn't just an "I abstained" post, then it should be fairly useful data. But we digress, we're here to discuss rule 9. I'm talking about the much needed community poll for rule 9, so I /am/ discussing rule 9.

That's the problem. It should be a flat yes or no. The act of abstaining implies that you're not voting, so why put a vote for that. I saw multiple occasions where both sides were claiming that the abstain side supported them. "They don't care so you should leave it in."

So...which one was it? Something tells me that we don't have 34 admins, but hey, I could be wrong. Now, if you're telling me that we had a vote AND it was that seems like either conflicting evidence or a flat out lie. If you want people to stop complaining about it, put up a poll with 100% transparency. Set it up so that it will prompt players with a link to the poll when they log onto the server and let it run for about a month. Do not include three versions of "abstain" that one side can use against the other and for the love of Nar'Sie, don't word it like "Do you want to keep it as it is?" and "Do you want to ruin fun?" Whichever way the poll lands, enforce it. Hard. If you want to believe that for a server that peaks over 100 players almost daily that the opinions of the player base don't matter, go ahead. I've said my piece.

Regarding that poll that you keep bringing up, I'd like to call to attention the fact that most of the regulars were not involved with that poll. After the rule was changed, another poll was put up by the player base and for the roughly 20 minutes before it was locked down on the basis that the Admins didn't care for the player base's opinion on the matter, the vote was heavily leaning towards rule 9 reverting to its original form. Let's be frank here, Rule 9 was changed to cater to rule-breakers who had gotten away with it of long enough that they felt entitled to keeping their characters.

While the XCOM situation may still arise, it would be a relief to know that each one is experienced rather than having six "John the ERTs" identifying "granade launchers."

Gather 'round, children, and uncle monkeysfist101 will tell you a tale. Long ago, in the olden days of Paradise mind you, when players were selected to play as Emergency Response Team members, they could choose whatever their little hearts desired for their name. This allowed for recurring ERT members such as Luca Rio and Hannibal. T'was a better time. The end. Now for the point of all of this. I propose that a character slot be made exclusively for your ERT member. This would allow you to build them as you see fit, complete with appearance, name, flavor text, prosthetics, and the rest of the works. Your ERT would then be given the rank of Private starting out and work his/her way up through the ranks as you play more rounds. It would be something like one round per rank for the first three, then two for the next three, and so on. The ERT leader would be chosen as the ranking member and ties would be broken with RNG. The persistent system would allow command staff to judge how competent the team will be and would prevent five Staff Sergents from showing up at once.

If we did that, Dum, we'd need a Tranquility Lane simulation.

What made you put the old boy down?

If it's coded, I'm sure that we could sneak in a pull request and get it in by Friday.

I'm with Icy on this. Not only is making Rule 9 less stringent a bad idea, truthfully, it should be more strict. The names right now are ridiculous. What's wrong with picking a real name? If you want a made-up name, play as an alien. As long as you're playing an original character and not something like "Falco Lombardi," I'm good.

0. I quit.

So much for charging the trench line... 5

Fix bayonets and advance with caution. We're in uncharted territory, lads. 48.

43. "Yet."

Sure, why not?

Lame.

I sense a spy in our midst. 41!

37

25