Klavigar

+1 I mean sure why not. I am pretty sure that the bank storage is used a lot so this would help.

+1 I do agree with this, as most of the times the new CTs can't even figure out how to get to a TR without other people showing them the way, so having a minimap in base maps would really be helpful for new players.

-1 I think we all know how cuffs are used on BS and ABS, so this wouldn't be much different.

Overall it is an interesting thought. As Silent said the main reason why we do the faces | formations | questions tryouts is to prevent minges from joining regiments with some powerful equipment that can be easily abused, but I do agree that the tryout system is quite dull. I agree on the idea that each regiment should have a special type of tryout depending on what their role is. Like 41st would have a recon part of a tryout, 501st would have a breaching part in their tryout etc. This would however make tryouts with more than 1 people pretty long. A good idea never the less.

+1 Please I really want a vehicle for CG, so we can stop being so dependent on Battalion and CE whenever someone leaves MB.

+1 I like this one since I also feel that you wrote this with honesty and a year has passed so I think that you are eligable for an unban. (not sure of player pulling is comm ban thou)

-1 I am gonna be honest no. This is a very intersting addon for sure, but the amnout of content in it is way to much and I highly doubt that everything from it would be used or used in a proper way (this also cost money). Most of the stuff would be forgotten pretty early on as there is just way to much content in it, also as people said this could very easily be abused by 74th that would be able to modify a CT ET into something that would be able to dominate even RC and from what I read from the reviews this addon has a lot of bugs, which combined with 90+ players at once would create an absolute shit fest. To top it all of there is a server wide weapons changes and balances on the talk and this addon would make that talk pretty much redundant. 74th already has a ton of medical RP options, just use /me the most powerful RP tool for medical stuff and use it with what you already have.

-1 Like come on. It has been explained in your previous suggestion, that CT is the basic regiment and I think you knew that damn well when you decided to become CT NCO+. Vehicles as a whole kill the purpose of CT, which is to lead the new people and these people aren't usually in the TS with you, making any leading with the AT-TE way to confusing for both the ETs and your NCO+, which in the end will be counter productive. One last thing is that there will be a server wide weapons changes/reballances, so you might be getting something new or you will get a buff for your current weapons.

-1 The same. Try to get a higher rank and get yourself be known on the server a bit more.

+1/Neutral You indeed have a lot of eperience, but you haven't been hierarchy yet. You are very devoted to becaming Battalion. CE isn't exactly in the best shape now, but I am not gonna prevent you from becaming Battalion. Good luck.

+1 Really just an all around nice guy and also has a decent amount of experience. Good luck

-1 Then why are making an unban request. Pretty much what Jendo said, you should have known better.

Neutral Let me explain 1) Well this answer is pretty much correct, but there isn't a mention about using the logs to check for damage to see, if the player in question was acually killing anyone, since they don't always have to been in the act of committing an offense. 2) No this is not how you should treat this. You have to remember that you are punishing them by OOC punishments and as such you can't demote them, if you aren't their superior IC. The most you can do is report them to their higherups as you mentioned in the second case. Another thing is that IC ranks don't matter in the outcome of a punishment their playtime and the offense does. 3) The only thing you should do in this situation is to prevent the player from spawing any more props and then perma ban them afterwards. 4) A better way to describe Combat Baiting would be an situation where a player tries to intiate combat without a proper RP reason to do so. 5) This doesn't exactly make much sense to me. The best way to descrice FailRP is "anything that wouldn't make any logical sense in real life." or in this instance in the Half–Life universe, also for the names you are free to create any name as long as it doesn't fall under the FailRP Name category. Overall not a bad application, but not the best one either. I also suggest giving it a few checks before sending it to correct any grammatical errors and the overall structure. Never the less good luck. (if you wanna ask me anything dm me)

+1 Don't see a problem here, but I know that STM as Shepherd said will take this as a joke.

-1 CTs main thing is overwhelming numbers which combined with the TL-90 can dish out a lot of damage, after all you are the basic regiment, which focuses on training new people and leading these new people. When you need transport just ask CE or anyone else that can fly and for pushes vehicles are rarely used, so there isn't a need for you to have vehicles.

+1 Would be nice to have them, as they were used quite often by 212th and RC and they weren't that op as you need to set up a decent amnout of them to do big damage.

+1 Honestly I like them and I think it wouldn't be a bad idea, but I do agree in some way with Aleks that they would be soon forgotten about, if they are added.

I am not gonna drag on this conversation anymore. You killed him, you face the punishment for it.

it really doesn't matter, as even if the person survived. You would still be perma banned, since as Blaster stated in you previous ban request: "but keep in mind any rule breaking or attempt to find a loophole will result in the reinstatement of the permanent ban.", so it doesn't matter in the end if it was an ARDM or RDM the result would have been the same.

-1 No just no. You got your 2nd chance and you wasted it, enough thou you knew that you were on a sigle warning condition. This is by no means a valid excuse for RDM.

This does sound off, as I am pretty sure that you don't get perma banned for prop flight and saying "this server is boring" to the admins durring a sit. @TOON2121 can you check his steam ID, to see what he got banned for?

-1 As people stated above, since you didn't make any form of an opening system for the door to be open by someone else then you, it classifies as prop block, making the warn valid.

You can never too sure.

There isn't such a thing as "potential friendly". Who did your NCO?

+1 I mainly like the secure comms, since it would really help againts metagaming in events. The advertisments comms I am too sure about how those would work out. Never the less a good idea.