Go back to previous topic
Forum Name Gameplay
Topic subjectHow is it possible there are 38 Fortress Applicants?
Topic URLhttps://forums.carrionfields.com/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=6&topic_id=32055
32055, How is it possible there are 38 Fortress Applicants?
Posted by Pro on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Is someone spam pledging?
32094, ITS NOT ME THIS TIME!
Posted by Welverin on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
I have only one Fortie. I'm pretty sure I deleted all the rest.
32072, RE: How is it possible there are 38 Fortress Applicants?
Posted by Isildur on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
38 people pledged. Next question!
32079, That's my point. I doubt 38 people pledged.
Posted by Pro on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
More like a handfull have several characters pledged. I think that shouldn't be allowed if it's happening.
32080, Unavoidable.
Posted by vargal on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Unless you want to change the very nature of how you log into CF, and I don't see the immortals being willing to do that much work.

Sure, maybe a few players have multiple characters pledged in the same cabal. However, I'm betting most of those will either auto or delete and the very, very rare player will actually bother to get two inducted. Even still I doubt that those players will play both.
32084, You obviously forgot.
Posted by Scrimbul on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
That retard Welverin who actually did do that and promised not to.

I doubt he's doing it again but I wouldn't exactly be surprised if he is.

Fortress has an inordinately high amount of apps just due to how easy it is to RP the basic nature of the characters, most folks empathize with it especially most noobs. But yes, 40 apps is ridiculous.

What would be a better solution to silly #### like this is to let the cabal leaders reject pledges while the given characters are offline, let the cabal leader see a list of offline pledges, and then finally cause pledges to count toward the actual member limit of the cabal, forcing the cabal leaders to manage pledges heavy-handedly.

Of course the imms don't like doing things that will almost necessitate a cabal leader to get flamed and char assassinated on the forums but it's what actually needs to happen lest the imms find themselves having to start rejecting pledges on a case by case basis by themselves.
32089, I don't think it's a big deal.
Posted by Adekar on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
A lot of pledges isn't really that big of an issue if they aren't really playing.

I don't see how this is really much of an issue other than adding a slight amount of confusion for cabal leaders.
32095, RE: You obviously forgot.
Posted by Welverin on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Retard? Really? Come on now. And it wasn't 38, more like 4 or 5.
32097, RE: You obviously forgot.
Posted by Daevryn on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
I think the count was 12, but I'd have to spend more time than it's worth to figure it out.

I'm glad you've turned over a new leaf, though.
32098, RE: You obviously forgot.
Posted by Welverin on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Man, 12? You really think so? Oh well.... Yeah, you don't need to figure it out... I'm really only playing one char now. I had another in Outlander, but deleted him....
32099, RE: You obviously forgot.
Posted by Daevryn on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Yeah, if I'm remembering right you'd get to a point where you obviously had moved on but you didn't actually delete.
32100, RE: You obviously forgot.
Posted by Welverin on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Probably cause I couldn't remember the names of them all.
32081, RE: That's my point. I doubt 38 people pledged.
Posted by Isildur on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
How would you prevent it? For that matter, why is it even a problem?

Most people who pledge never send a note. About 1/3 of the people who send a note never actually get a recommendation. Probably because they stop logging in because they're playing their other character(s). I guess I don't get what the problem is with having a lot of superfluous pledges as long as they don't end up wasting the leaders' time.
32082, I would contend that they do waste time AAAAANND...
Posted by Pro on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
They might be recommending themselves on the back side.

Mention how great character B is to Player C etc.
32083, RE: I would contend that they do waste time AAAAANND...
Posted by Isildur on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
That would be called "cheating", and they could do that even if each person were only allowed to pledge once. I.e. roll up a non-caballed non-fort-pledge goodie character, then talk up the pledge character to active Fort guys.
32085, Staff priorities
Posted by Valguarnera on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
We're probably more interested in violations of the rules where someone can provide evidence and not merely speculation.

If someone pledges more than one character, they aren't breaking a rule.

They might be recommending themselves on the back side.

They might also be passing gear, but we're not going to bust them unless they actually do, and we have better things to do than monitor a group of 38 people because of what they might do.

valguarnera@carrionfields.com
32096, When I caused the stir after the pwipe...
Posted by Welverin on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
It was because they were looking at all cabals and it looked like Fort was getting more attention that it was. I contend, that i was not the only one that was doing it at that time, just the only one who would admit it. And at the time I had only 5 or so that I remember pledged.
32088, RE: That's my point. I doubt 38 people pledged.
Posted by Hutto on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Some new players roll up new characters after dying a bunch in the mid levels.

This is probably someone who wants to play a Fortress but keeps giving up on characters before getting inducted, and so they roll up a new one.

Hutto, the Sleepy Nitpicker


'Sorry, I'm not 72323slhlst. Or however you say Elite'
-Vynmylak