(08-05-2015, 12:44 AM)Kage Wrote:(08-05-2015, 12:24 AM)Flickering Ember Wrote: It's admirable that the RPC respects other servers in this way.ÂIf you would like to continue this topic of discussion, I invite you to start the initiative yourself in a new thread.
However, just like the RPC stepped up and named Balmung and Gilgamesh as RP community servers, the only way an additional RP community is going to gain any traction is if we step up as a group and organize something.Â
When one person tries to step up to that plate alone it results in, well, multiple individuals stepping up to the plate but not working together. There are at least a few threads floating around advertising for new RP communities, all of them on different servers. Think of how much tighter those RP communities would be if they were all on one server.
IMO, RPC would better show its support of co-existence by helping to organize a new community instead of leaving it solely in the hands of a few folks from that server. If this had never happened to begin with, we'd all be spread out and we wouldn't have Balmung or Gilgamesh.Â
RPing as a small group is fine but what I think these newcomers we're seeing are hoping for is an open RP community where RP is not all hidden in guilds and linkshells.
To be fair, it's linked directly to the topic of discussion as a possible solution and compromise that may very well end up solving or at least alleviating the issue. We already know from experience that as the game continues to gain popularity then the window for creating new characters on Balmung continues to shrink in turn.
There isn't a whole lot to do about that yet I was under the impression that this thread was created to discussion solutions and temporary/permanent fixes for the issue. If we're not going to discuss Ember's proposal then...what exactly is left to discuss? Given that we'd then be limited to discussing the possibility of transferring or waiting around for the tiny window that arises before and after maintenance?
Both of those options aren't available to everybody - thus discussing a third option within this thread seems quite logical to me, especially given the term 'discussion' in the title.
