Thu Oct 6 08:40:28 2011 by 'Baerinika' at level 51 (158 hrs):
I dislike leaders who have decently houred, calbaled alts. Looks wishy washy. And unfair to the cabal you lead

Anyone find this funny coming from someone with three Imms? :P

Same as now not allowed to have two chars in the same cabal, i think leader positions shouldn't be given to a player who already have a leader in another cabal. Reasons are obvious.

She's not saying another leader though, she's saying not to have another character with any amount of time on them if you have a leader.

She said decently houred, caballed character alts were lame. And I agree, I think taking on other projects in other cabals while you have leader position is irresponsible. Especially when your cabal is in the ####ter, as battle was for a good while. If you want to roll alts, go ahead, but step down from leader first.

With imms, its different. Not as many conflicts of interest. Doesn't bother me nearly as much.

I made a necromancer when the greater undead announcement came out to check out some of the greater undead.

I probably should have deleted the leader first, because I was bored with the ranger class. But I still was around a fair amount.

When you can CF as much as you want in a day, sometimes you don't want to spend 8-10 hours on the same character. I personally always have 2, because the amount of time I can and do sometimes spend on the game makes me burn out on a single character pretty fast.

Battle is not in any way, shape, or form in the ####ter right now and thats because of my mass inductions as Nuk. Don't hate, I did just fine as commander. Some days I would log 2-3 hours of Nuk and 2-3 on the lowbie alt. Some days I logged Nuk an hour and the alt 3. Some days I logged Nuk 6-7 hours and the alt one. The point is I played both, I don't think there was more than one incident where I didnt log Nuk in for over 48 hours, and I was out of town that weekend. If battle is in the ####ter, its because half of the cabal is just someones alt, and nobody ever plays their rager. Theres damn near 30 ragers, mostly all berserkers in the cabal.

Leaders probably shouldn't have 2 characters. If I took another leader position I wouldn't play an alt. And I deleted the alt in pretty short time, I think I spent a whole 40-50ish hours on him. Sue me for taking a minute to check out something new that got put in the game.

Actually, i see your point. When i had a lot of time, i've been playing 8-10-12 hours per day and i just HAD to have an alt or my main would agedie in a 2 months.

Hate this thing with the age. If not age, i'd play only one character much more (and probably only him). But guess it will never change, so i take my sugesstion about not allowing playing alts back, heh.

One is simply a matter of taking on extra because it's got to be done. If anything, it reduces the potential for a conflict of interest.

The other increases the potential for a conflict of interest and is being done for the benefit of the player in question alone.

I leave it to you to work out which is which.

I see what you are saying. However I disagree that the player has multiple characters does it just for some kind of advantage. I think many players get burned out only having one character over a period of months and need another outlet into the game. I don't understand why it seems to suddenly be such a big issue and frowned upon as it has gone on as long as the game has been around and quite commonly. Also for the Imms in the past saying they rarely check IP's there seems to be a lot of comments lately that make it seem like they regularly check IPs and judge people based on it.

Blame Nepenthe, not her. He's the deadbeat who can barely find time to code cool #### :)

PS He's not even the worst offender of said crime btw :)