Canadian-bacon

Please read the rules page and familiarize yourself with them.

Thank you for applying to the Diverge Networks staff team! It is my pleasure to inform you that your application has been accepted. Submit a ticket on our Discord for training and to get setup.

Thank you for applying to the Diverge Networks staff team! It is my pleasure to inform you that your application has been accepted. Submit a ticket on our Discord for training and to get setup.

Thank you for applying to the Diverge Networks staff team! It is my pleasure to inform you that your application has been accepted. Submit a ticket on our Discord for training and to get setup.

Thank you for applying to the Diverge Networks staff team! It is my pleasure to inform you that your application has been accepted. Submit a ticket on our Discord for training and to get setup.

Phones are overdue for a total recode, it's on the theoretical 'to-do list'

I tested this and could not reproduce.

You're missing the point of my reply entirely. I simply explained how the system works and detects. I have no problem accepting this but you're oddly battling every reply in the thread as if it was some malicious unjust ban done by a human.

i mean totally in theory but it could be configured in a way where 1. Font is different, text colour is different, text is physically smaller and more lowkey 2. A character limit which cuts after x so its useful to see who has said what but still need to read it in chat. "Hey dude, so i was [...]" 3. Only have it activate when you're in range of x number of people. so if there is 2 or less people near you it would not need to activate, but 3 or more it would. 4. A Cooldown so it can't stack or spam over someone's head. But it's a huge change and leap that would impact the game visually. I don't imagine most people would want it.

I'll take these points into consideration, better than just ignoring the thread. For what I outright agree'ed with, we can see about amending that soon. Feel free to message me directly if you want to discuss further. I'll label this as 'partially' accepted otherwise.

I don't see how this rule isn't followed, faction alliances are very clearly defined and there's a maximum 5 factions in each? What proxies exist? If you mean puppet factions those have 'existed' or have been a thing long before conflict rules existed. Maybe, I plan on making more direct definitions for certain things, like territory, in the future, but some of it is blocked by development timelines. Unfortunately people need to confirm with us because in the past they just act on their own which generally means Mass RDM or a fail conflict, I also think level 0 is good because all you need to do is inform us of your intentions and we can look into the matter in case there was some sort of rulebreak in the initial scenario. Let's us get ahead of something developing before it's properly approved, I think it's more annoying for your RP to commence then need to be voided later. This is a good idea. I'll look about defining them. We don't really mediate unless absolutely necessary, it's listed in the thread but the two sides should agree on a third party mediator, if they fail to agree on one because neither trust the other instead of letting the RP stall or die we offer UA to possibly be an ingame mediator since we're meant to be completely unbiased. They can also opt to not have a mediator if it's necessary. Technically this is higher than the current requirement of failed sitdowns involving a mediator, is your intention to raise the number of required sitdowns? In the escalation themselves it says that if it continues it can exceed the max, for instance of a territory dispute hits the maximum escalation and one of the escalation options is to PK an opposing rival then it becomes a new offence (Murder) with a higher max esc cap, they can still begot bad blood, but the point there is if two factions start having issues one minor incident should not lead to war, factions should be rivals for a while before a war, at most here I can see editing around the definitions for max esc or the levels, also a lot of these offences are just examples, there's other reasons that aren't listed that can occur. Smaller less serious conflicts can maybe take place instead for instances of lower escalation, like instead of a bar fight leading to an all out 5v5 war the two factions can have a 1v1 conflict of firebombing / bar fights for a week.

This is your one chance, don't attempt to alt again.

Obviously the account that shared your IP tried to join the server while the other account on the same IP was banned causing the console to ban them for alting. This isn't a unjust or false accusation, you need just need to acknowledge that when someone is banned that another person in the household should not attempt to access the server.

Regardless, the ban has expired.

Sell prices increased by a margin of like ~10% on average

This is the original account https://steamcommunity.com/id/ttdfghfgfgfgfgfvfgfvgfgfgfgf/ It's listed on your friend's list.

Your ban appeal has been reviewed and denied. We have determined this ban to be reasonable and/or justified. Ensure you have read our Server Rules.

Ban length changed to permanent due to ban evasion attempt on SteamID, STEAM_0:0:518428298 2025-02-12 08:28:34

Hey man! Don't play on two accounts! Just stay on one! Thanks

Man was on Nazi Larp at 13 or younger, wildin'

https://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198328539141 ? You were banned and then tried to log into a different account to avoid the ban? That is ban evading.

Seems a little OP to be stun locked mid taze. Tazers are not necessarily 100% effective at subduing a target and prongs can easily miss. It is not outside the possibility that a suspect could resist while being tazed. Armed shooter about to blow a cop's head off but the cop gets a lucky taze and the dude is stun locked unable to react? They get frozen when the taze is complete, this is an easy no from the judge's panel.