I find this difficult to understand, you had a significant emotional attachment to this round, obviously it was a well fought out and entertaining round. Or else you would not be quite so sour for being kicked. So it is apparent you find the gameplay somewhat stimulating. And if you are paying for that (dare I say) shit, then you will not get kicked.It certainly rubs me the wrong way when I get kicked near rounds end while being a squad leader. Who wants to pay for that shit?
I'm not a supporting member, but I still am able to enjoy the server. In my mind it's simple either pay, or do not complain about the kicks. You say you don't want it to happen to other people, however apparently thats exactly what you want. You seem to view other players as less productive and inferior to you. What type of self centered attitude is that when you want someone else, who may be having an equally productive and enjoyable round to be kicked instead of you? Maybe they don't have the highest score, perhaps their mission doesn't involve achieving an extremely high point index, it can still be equally essential to the team. Maybe they just joined, they still have the potential to contribute the same as you.
Of course it is not ideal, and if Tactical Gamers could allow more members to play per round while maintaining immersible team play, I'm sure they would. But they can't. It's simple mathematics, the paying members obviously have earned the privilege to unrestricted access to the server, for goodness sakes they particularly own a portion of it! The rest of the slots go to whomever else. And on most nights this is a significant number of slots indeed.
In fact I would argue this setup offers nonsupporting players the most playing time as opposed to more reserved slots. Because reverse slots are basically created on the fly. As opposed to ten slots reserved and dedicated for supporting members we have two static slots and infinite dynamic ones. So if ten supporting members aren't playing, then anyone else can use those spots. Certainly they are subject to the boot, but in most cases there have been people on longer then you for awhile, then after a few good rounds you may get kicked, but are welcome to rejoin.
The rationale behind the longest player on the server to be kicked is simply a matter of fairness, it allows a great many players to cycle through and enjoy a few good rounds on an in demand server, and then after a hearty break, rejoin. And the reason why shortest time on the server, or lowest score isn't kicked is that it would always be the same person. Imagine this, you just connected to a full server and then a supporting member wanted to join. Then you would be kicked right away, either for zero points, or shortest time (On TG PR there are almost no players with negative scores). Assume this person waited patiently for a slot to open and rejoined. Then a minute later a paying member wanted in. Well you can see the faults in this logic, however it is a validate comment, and a thoughtful contribution, but ultimately unfair for that player.
The burden for the cost of operating the server has to be shared. The incentive behind becoming a supporting member is for uninterrupted team play, with the stress on team play. The interruptions can be annoying, very irritating indeed, however they themselves should not be the motivation to contribute to the server.
Players are warned about the supporting member kick apparatus upon joining, and various time intervals during the game.
I generally agree with the poster that suggested language filters are not necessary for this particular game. Their are instances of obvious abuse though, and these are best dealt with by administrators. Foul language and vulgarity are part of modern warfare, no doubt about that, and thusly should be allowed in. Assuming the phraseology is relevant and controlled. Also the language filters neglects the voice aspect of communication, and only focuses on the text. In fact on multiple occasions I have heard TG administrators using "banned words" over voice, sometimes after penalizing the use of the same words over chat. Ultimately this is not a huge issue for me.
Determined, you live up to your name very well, and have some dynamic and thoughtful, not to mention strong opinions. I can only ask that you express them in a more articulate fashion and exclude obvious attacks on character and respect the system that the hard working administrators at TG has set up. You still are welcome to disagree with policy, and are more than welcome to question it, but it is essential to remain realistic and open minded as well as respectful towards others, and you should expect an equal amount of respect back.
