On an unrelated note, your banners are exceptional.

That comment was out of spite because of what he said previously. That should also be disregarded.

umad

yes

y u lagh at my post

Inexorable.

Bear in mind it wasn't actually me that said that - I acknowledge that wouldn't help constructively improve and that was totally uncalled for. Then again, we know who said that and you just know you'd expect something as mean as that. I'm aware that was pretty cold. I think those pathetic insults need to be disregarded because you know and I know that won't help him. But go to the people that do try to help him. When criticising someone, you're not exactly supposed to sugarcoat it. I'm, like everyone else who is trying to tell him what to do to get more friends, which he seems to want, when critiquing him, should just say it how it is otherwise the point gets lost in pretentiousness. When I told him what he does wrong (and this is on the "If you could hear what people [honestly] thought of you" thread which is the EXACT place you're supposed to criticise others. One of the thing I said is that you shouldn't go around insulting people for no reason, an example of when he did this was in the Counter Strike thread, saying the team wasn't very good with no backup to support that statement - that's come out of arrogance. I'd prefer it if he at least acknowledges it, but no, he starts bringing up my rank, my "under-par" garage and his "awesome" garage and he also said that insult was "advise". He actually implied that, because I'm a lower rank, my advice was INVALID. That is ignorance. You actually saw all of that, didn't you? Sugarcoating it's only gonna make him think the negative traits he's got aren't as bad as they really are and I feel it's necessary to continue telling him about this negative trait until he at least acknowledges to having it rather than him constantly swaying the conversation to my garage every time I try to help. You may think sugarcoating is better for him but as you know, I'm a very critical person so you can only expect me to have such a viewpoint. Go on BSD2 or 3?

Once.

no

Na, we've told him what those faults yet he either acts worse/doesn't bother to try and fix them. He's also going around insulting others for no reason - you don't even need to provoke him. He does need to be let known what he's saying can be seen as real offensive and some of the statements he makes needs to be kept to himself or if not, he needs to put it in a decent manner.

bump

Oh, and bai, monsta!

You never needed to point that out - it only makes you seem spiteful. I can bet not many people will miss you if you were to leave either yet I'm sure they wouldn't say anything like that. What's your problem, dude?

At around 8pm, expect this to be updated, lads.

I don't think I've seen the mods add the specific thing we've argued about so I can understand why it wouldn't be there. Unless you're referring to another place you see the reasoning of the bans. You've said "ban proof" so I think you were referring to something else. Now, I acknowledge there was a big mistake in one of my examples of my previous bans but the rest of my points still stand. No proof is required because it all makes sense. I'm perfectly calm on this end. I don't know what makes you think I'm "mad" or "butthurt". There's no insults, flames or nothing. This is a perfectly serious discussion on a controversial issue. If you call this an argument then...w/e. 2 things - I don't know why you're speaking in the perspective of a moderator or why you think moderators won't punish because the violation is minor. The mod didn't even warn the violators or anything but just locked the thread. Whether a violation is minor or major, something needs to be done about it. If they're supposed to warn/ban for such a violation, IDK but they're supposed to do SOMETHING about it and while locking the thread stops the problem, they didn't get a reprimanding or anything. I've reported to SuperNick95 about when SamothebestforgotPW was flooding on the CS thread and he gave him and warning and edited all his posts to say - "SamothebestforgotPW has been warned. Reason: Flooding (Bear in mind, there was more to that reasoning) I still feel we aren't arguing but are debating but that's just my view. If the whole mod team discussed the argument in the "mod hut" it would be reasonable for you to assume that argument had all of the above in it. I personally thought we were both flaming in it. Maybe what I perceive to be "flaming" and what the mods perceive "flaming" to be are different things. And you are assuming - you say you're helping me but really, you're not actually considering certain circumstances that may come and you're totally jumping to conclusions. That's what with me and assuming. And on that subject, while it's not assuming itself, it's the idea of you unreasonably doing it consistently. You seem to understand that other example so there's nothing to say there. However, as said in FBI's post, the team came with the decision to give out warnings - it's unfair and impossible to pin-point out just one. The conversations are still there and I'll do it for future references. That's the one thing I'm actually gonna take from you when it comes to your "advice." Let's not be silly - "Let's say" is not a synonym of "For example". If you really want to say they're synonyms then you've got it wrong; what would be more legitimate is "For example, if". If you use "let's say" you're going to go on to a scenario while with "For example" you're using actual examples. "For example, if" would also mean you're going to go on to a scenario. One would think it's FBI considering he replied not long after it happened. Overall, I think this has spiralled into something completely irrelevant. All I ask is that the mods be consistent when banning people - it really isn't much. It actually went that far? While I am happy for it, I still feel there's too much leniency given there. You saw that argument was pretty major. I wouldn't have complained because I was expecting a ban originally.

I don't recall ever discussing his actions and I don't recall trolling - but yes, there were insults, I think. Where on earth would I need to discuss his actions when arguing about the hull Wasp? I've never said I haven't discussed his actions in another previous argument (which I probably got banned for) but I'm talking about the example I was using. No actions were discussed. You've either gone to the wrong ban or I've made a mistake when posting my examples - either way, I'm not "lying" like you put it. Way to jump the gun.

I'm not assuming nothing happened, he TOLD me nothing was gonna happen even though he acknowledged to me that they were arguing and flooding. So no, I'm not assuming anything and don't you assume that I assume like you seem to like doing. At least think about it. Also, I obviously PM them or if not, check the thread to see if they've been banned. When I PM the mods about violations, they're almost sure to reply because they have no reason to NOT reply. This argument we had was not in a PM and for god's sake, will you stop assuming? What is it I've said that makes it reasonable to deduce I was discussing his actions? We simply had a nasty argument over Wasp (the hull) and I got in trouble for it. And once again, it never went longer than 5 posts. We were aware that we were violating the rules and we (at least, I) knew a ban was going to come sooner or later. You're not listening to me clearly. I don't need to know what rules I violated or anything like that - it's irrelevant. With an argument like that (which was over a record) we were supposed to get bans for such a nasty argument yet we only got warnings. When I argue with a mod, I get banned. It's clearly against the rules to argue in such a manner so why is it when I do it with a mod, I get in trouble and why is it when I had an even worse argument with a member, nothing more than a warning comes? The same justice needs to be dished out. I don't care if they don't like losing arguments. If we're in one and you want to stop, simply don't reply. That lets me know you don't want to continue and I'll stop. When I argue with mods, it's never about either of those subjects but I'm still in trouble. Believe me, I've already tried going there but all they do is simply repeat the same thing - "Hello! You were banned for serious violation of rules" and it keeps posting that until you give up. It's almost as if it's a bot. Okay, maybe it was an example but it was a really bad one and it completely failed to get your point across. You used ambiguous language which caused me to interpret that in a way that you weren't implying - your own fault. The reason why this may seem off-topic is because I've posted this in the wrong thread. This was actually supposed to go in "Feedback on staff" not "Ideas and suggestions" so that's just my bad. A mod can move these posts there and the discussion can continue or something.

You can still post them but I cannot update until 8pm

I should probably add to "arguing" to that previous post because really, that's more what I meant. The same can apply to moderators not being present when a member insults them. You can't even assume a mod is usually there when being insulted. There's varying circumstances that can make it so the mods can't be there ranging from simply offline, AFK, etc. I obviously want there to be justice hence my previous post and I know what to do too, thank you very much but it never works out. I remember PM'ing *mod that won't be named* reporting them arguing and flooding and nothing happened. Not long after, I PM *another mod that won't be named* after for a mini spat that probably ended before I sent the PM and when they see it, they're in big trouble. Another example is when I had a small argument with husto and I got banned for a week because of it. It wasn't even longer than 5 posts. Later, I had a massive argument with felixbond. We went on for pages and pages and two/three mods had to deal with it - we only got warnings. Point is, mods seem to squash anyone who dares defy them, especially when they're not dominating the argument. "I can't win this argument so I'll just ban them to stop it" is the mindset for a lot of the moderators and while that's not necessarily the problem, they need to have that same mindset when dealing with members. And don't assume the "friend of that guy" won't like that their friend got banned because I know people that have no feelings for their friend getting banned because they felt it was completely fair. The duration of what you've tried to dictate to me is going on unreasonable assumptions. However, I'll continue trying to help them. Just that when they see it, they need to dish out the same justice.

Do another one of its kind pls. Maybe one where you just write a story? No word length?

bump

IDK you

lol

Now, as you know, the recent product kits have made it so buyers can succeed in the game with combos that are obtained way too early meaning they are overpowered in battles. It's not fair on those who play legitimately and haven't bought a single penny. They make up more of the game; anyways, here's my 2 cents on how the product kits should be adjusted. ---------------------------------------------------------------- There's nothing wrong with the M0 kits, they're not too OP nor underpowered, from then on, however: Change the discount of the "Lots of supplies" kit. No way should you be able to purchase 1000 of each supply for less than 100k; that is ridiculous. The defensive paints you get at the Heavy M1 tank kit is absurd; at least make the Shaft M0 and you definitely need to remove Electra AND Python from it; there's no need to go high; Desert and Swash would be better alternatives. All of them are like that, really; the Light Tank M1 is ridiculous. Nothing wrong with what you get; that's fine. However, getting Spark was absurd on your part; Cedar's alright, I guess; I am bearing in mind that this is a kit and that decent stuff has to be on sale. Spark on an M1 kit is taking it too far. Anyways, putting Corrosion would be better. Now for the medium M1 kit; what you unlock wouldn't be a problem if you increased it to Warrant Officer 2; it's just a tad bit too early. Digital, again is taking it too far. You unlock that at Captain, for god's sake, not WO1. A replacement could be Tundra. So, that's the M1 covered; moving onto M2 Nothing wrong with what you unlock with the Light tank M2 kit since you unlock M2 Isida a rank after and M2 Hornet 2 ranks after; pretty good. But once again, the paints you get are absurd; In Love? OK BUT Savanna is just out of this world for WO5. And Loam isn't much better; replacements would be Python and Electra. In regards to when you unlock the heavy tank M2 kit, it's one of the silliest things you can do. Offering M2 Mammoth; the fortress on a tank three ranks early? Are you out of your mind? Not to mention, Inferno is downright ridiculous. This is Second Lieutenant we're talking about here. Urban's a terrible option too but Spark isn't. Replacements for me would be Sandstone and Digital; POSSIBLY Rustle. The medium M2 tank kit is horrible; Viking M2 THAT EARLY? No way! Thunder M2 on the other hand is alright considering you unlock it a rank after. Emerald is a terrible choice and so is Prodigi; pretty silly. Change it for M2 Dictator and that's ok. But back to the paints, change Emerald for Rustle and Prodigi for Hohloma. The M3 paints in general aren't that bad in my eyes but they're still some things I'd like to mention Nothing wrong with what you unlock regarding the light M3 tank kit and neither is the rank you unlock at it. Nothing wrong with two of the paints either! The only thing I'd say is Zeus has GOT to go, fosho. Change it to Savanna. The medium tank kit is pretty much the same; nothing wrong with it at all apart from a single paint that in my eyes shouldn't be there; Needle needs to go. Change it for Inferno. As for the large M3 tank kit, the turret and hull isn't bad but the paints are all-out OP for their rank. I'm aware the duration of people near that rank have pretty nice paints but the ones you unlock at Generalissimo? Uhhh, no! Jade, Prodigi and Emerald would suffice. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Now, getting three paints that are near their rank is not a problem, even if it is THREE. The fact is, for every kit, you've given access to high class paints too early. And I know that my suggestions may not sound that less overpowered but what you've got to remember is that the kits do need to sell to us and so they've got to be at least decent. Alternatively, you can take the 50% discount off meaning everything will technically be all the goods added together (but no halving after) and you just get it early). Otherwise, you need to do something about it. Is there anything I could change about this? Let me know. I've posted this on a noob account for absolutely no reason whatsoever; feedback coming soon.