I'm sorry Daomei, I'm not quite sure why you addressed me like that.
This went in no way against Vradden directly or the establishment of the Ranger faction. That on it's own seems to have been handled rather well. The Problem, as has been pointed out by mostly rangers and even yourself, was the handling of the opposition.
And while I am complaining I don't think I was bickering. I gave alternatives and I stand by my opinion, if one can't handle it, don't take it (yet) and rather do it right, than do it fast.
Also thanks for the added information, it shines a different light on parts of this. I haven't witnessed it all, especially the beginning and I probably also went off of Salazar's comments too much.
So far I had the impression that the Rotoa situation was a considerate alternative rather a hostile opposition. More distrust in the rangers abbilities rather than questioning their intentions.
I agree that it is completely unfounded to attack the Ranger's, but there have always been these kinda people in every government ever. If they don't have a reason, they make one. And this one apparently found an ear or two.
I know the Ranger event line was planned well in advance, but you can't just do your own thing and expect your plan to go perfectly when it interferes with other's. So I think it was right that this was dealt with, just not how. As been pointed out there could have been so many ways to resolve this nicely.
In the end they basically said, we don't care what the players want, this is the plan, damned stick to it, or shut up. In that situation some people shut up, and leave.
As for joining the event team? I might actually do that, if they'd even want me.
This went in no way against Vradden directly or the establishment of the Ranger faction. That on it's own seems to have been handled rather well. The Problem, as has been pointed out by mostly rangers and even yourself, was the handling of the opposition.
And while I am complaining I don't think I was bickering. I gave alternatives and I stand by my opinion, if one can't handle it, don't take it (yet) and rather do it right, than do it fast.
Also thanks for the added information, it shines a different light on parts of this. I haven't witnessed it all, especially the beginning and I probably also went off of Salazar's comments too much.
So far I had the impression that the Rotoa situation was a considerate alternative rather a hostile opposition. More distrust in the rangers abbilities rather than questioning their intentions.
I agree that it is completely unfounded to attack the Ranger's, but there have always been these kinda people in every government ever. If they don't have a reason, they make one. And this one apparently found an ear or two.
I know the Ranger event line was planned well in advance, but you can't just do your own thing and expect your plan to go perfectly when it interferes with other's. So I think it was right that this was dealt with, just not how. As been pointed out there could have been so many ways to resolve this nicely.
In the end they basically said, we don't care what the players want, this is the plan, damned stick to it, or shut up. In that situation some people shut up, and leave.
As for joining the event team? I might actually do that, if they'd even want me.
---
The only sane man is the one who considers himself to be insane. Im sane, btw. }¦-)>