Search results

Even if this becomes a rule then people can just get on foundation and then get on the SCP, there's no point in the suggestion.

There's no anger, I'm saying why are you guys complaining on the forums about something thats already against the rules.

That makes zero sense, in that case CI could get onto foundation then flag on SCP.

once again, its already against the rules, call a sit instead of complaining on forums.

100% agree, trying to stop 1 regiment from playing SCP's is absolutely WILD, and instead of reporting an already broken rule you want ANOTHER rule to stop a rule break instead of just calling staff... like bro what???

Ah yes, make it fail rp even though it has nothing to do with RP. Your saying nobody can play SCP's just because their CI too???

-Support -Maybe just call staff if a CI is ignoring us???

-Support D Classes goal is to escape, they have been locked inside a facility, it doesn't make sense that they would help the people who are shooting them and their fellows, and them risking they lives when they are trying to escape the place.

+Support - I am tired of CI's model looking like a booger.

-Support no

-Support - Heard lots of stuff about you, just don't find you fit yet.

+Support

-Support - This is litterly the only time 173 is useful and it gives a reason for someone to breach him. Otherwise there are just useless SCPs that take up space.

What does this suggestion change/add/remove: - This would change how long raids would take, and add more fairness. Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?: - Not 100% sure but I plan to give good points on why and how this would be better...

+support - only accept him if he promises to be unethical, I wanna see all the cadets with matadors shooting d class.

+Support -Best ECM -Tiggle -Tiggle -Tiggle -Tiggle on top

+Support | Get this man in right now!!!!

+Support

-Support -Rarely ever seen. -Short application. -Recommend getting CL4 experience first.

+Major support