Leader not being able to be officer.
-
Tilen_15
- Forum Grunt
- Posts: 74
- Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 11:56 am
- ID: 0
Leader not being able to be officer.
Why is this rule here ? What does it do, except makes you unable to be an officer ? Why is it so important, for a leader not having a commander ?

-
[SGC_ReplicÅtors]
- Forum Addict
- Posts: 3949
- Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2005 4:57 pm
- ID: 0
-
garshaw
- Forum Grunt
- Posts: 65
- Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:20 pm
- Alliance: Genesis
- Race: Tollan
- ID: 45570
- Location: Ont. Canada
- Wolf359
- The Big Bad Admin
- Posts: 5208
- Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 2:40 am
- Alliance: EPA
- Race: Tauri
- ID: 0
- Location: Omnipresent
- Contact:
-
Honours and Awards
Nonetheless, it IS a rule of teh game, and there have been countless other threads regarding it - none of which have been successful in changing it.
Mod SpeakSeverian wrote:So I say as a last resort, splice Semper & Wolf359 for a good balance, Clone said unholy abomination a hundred times, let loose on forums and problem solved.
-
Sleipnir
- Merriest Mod in the West
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:16 pm
- ID: 0
- Location: Off-world
-
Honours and Awards
Re: Leader not being able to be officer.
Tilen_15 wrote:Why is this rule here ? What does it do, except makes you unable to be an officer ? Why is it so important, for a leader not having a commander ?
I believe the rule is here because of another feature. One which should also have been removed IMO, but nevermind that. Whenever a commander changes alliances, the officers follow. Now if one of those officers was the leader of an alliance, said alliance would become leaderless. This in turn causes admin to have to fix the problems manually, a tedious and timeconsuming task.

As soon as you build an idiot proof system, somebody else builds a better idiot.
If it moves, kill it. If it doesn't move, kick it until it does move, and then kill it.
-
Allah.
Re: Leader not being able to be officer.
Sleipnir wrote:Tilen_15 wrote:Why is this rule here ? What does it do, except makes you unable to be an officer ? Why is it so important, for a leader not having a commander ?
I believe the rule is here because of another feature. One which should also have been removed IMO, but nevermind that. Whenever a commander changes alliances, the officers follow. Now if one of those officers was the leader of an alliance, said alliance would become leaderless. This in turn causes admin to have to fix the problems manually, a tedious and timeconsuming task.
Which would all beeasilt fixed by making officers not follow their COs when they switch alliances, thus making the alliance leader rule irrevelent.
- Bazsy
- The Elder Admin
- Posts: 3131
- Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:18 am
- Alliance: -
- Race: -
- ID: 0
- Location: Stockholm, Sweden
-
Honours and Awards
-
Sleipnir
- Merriest Mod in the West
- Posts: 2340
- Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 11:16 pm
- ID: 0
- Location: Off-world
-
Honours and Awards
Bazsy wrote:If it was suggested but not implemented before, means that admins dont want to do it for some reason.
Or they just haven't got around to it yet.

As soon as you build an idiot proof system, somebody else builds a better idiot.
If it moves, kill it. If it doesn't move, kick it until it does move, and then kill it.
-
Zeratul
- Elder Administrator
- Posts: 23203
- Joined: Sat May 06, 2006 8:44 am
- Alliance: Lucian Alliance
- Race: Templar
- ID: 7
- Alternate name(s): Hrefna
Reitha - Location: Nivlheim
-
Honours and Awards
we hope they can get around to it...


"Great holy armies shall be gathered and trained to fight all who embrace evil. In the name of the gods, Browsers shall be changed to carry the internet out amongst the peoples and we will spread Firefox to all the unbelievers. The power of the Firefox will be felt far and wide and the wicked users of IE shall be converted to use the true browsers."
Curious about our color? Feel free to ask...


