Recent content by Sorrow.R

Update: Just realized I didn't submit my proper steamID. Steam ID: 76561198309957185

Username: Sorrow.R Name Sorrow.Raine Recruiter(s) N/A Age 20 Time zone: (UTC-06:00) Central Time (US and Canada) Discord Account Sorrow.R#1075 Military experience No Selected Roster: Active Duty Platform and Game PC - ARMA 3 SteamID/XboxTag/PSN ID Sorrow.R Accepted General...

Well I would suggest exploring that avenue before forcing players into cooperation in the ways you are doing it. At this point, there is nothing more I can do or add to this. I've said my piece. Thank you for at least hearing me out. Though I believe this is a serious mistake on S3's part...

That is a reasonable cause. However, I do not think restricting weapons will prevent splinter groups from happening. From what I can gather, you want people to work together. Restricting their weapons is not likely to do that for the simple reason that, even if they play as one single team...

Would you mind giving me examples of things that have occurred?

As virtuous if a message that is, and one that I agree with, you are strawmanning the argument. There are not 20 medic snipers on the server. As a matter of fact, whenever I have been on tac 2, medics are more often NEEDED rather than overused. The made up issues here are ones by S3, and from...

Risk in and of itself, in this situation, does not justify restrictions. If this were an issue that occurred repeatedly and consistently disturbed players then I would agree. However, risk in and of itself does not justify this kind of action. If that were the case, friendly fire should be...

You cannot say that the risk of it happening due to the number of players who come in and out of the server in and of itself justifies this. And any restriction without a proper reason is extreme.

If your attempts to administrate do not affect the majority of players, then you yourself are admitting that the issue is not common. The minority of players are the ones who are adversely affected to issues that are not rampant enough to warrant such an extreme restriction.

If Atlas is being a major issue, perhaps then the restrictions be localized to only atlas. And even then it is a rather niche thing, given very few people who play tac 2 actually intend to use the atlas role seriously for FOB building. However, should someone come on I think our playerbase is...

While compelling, your argument is incredibly flawed in the fact that an MCC is an event in tac 2, not the norm that is always going on. As often as they can be, or seldom be, emplacing major restrictions upon players for what is, in my opinion, not the primary purpose of tac 2 seems like...

Well infantry roles restricted in such a way remove the incentive to play. I do not recall ever hearing people complaining about an infantryman or sniper not playing their roles properly. If anything, the guns themselves already discourage improper use of them simply because of the function of...

My concern is not with any specific gun, my concern is the restrictions in and of themselves. There's no reason for them to exist in the first place. And yes, I understand that you won't restrict people from having a weapon if they already have it, but then what's the point of restricting the...

Not allowing players access to weapons and gear from the arsenal is, in and of itself, inventory policing. The only way people would be able to access the gear they want is to have a Zeus place down a new arsenal which, if what you say is not to police inventory, is contradictory. There is also...

I personally do not think gear limitations should be a thing at all. There are already rules in place that tell people to not wear things like OPFOR gear or use OPFOR weapons. We're all adults and we have moderators on the servers to prevent tomfoolery from occurring. I think that limiting what...