Denied Bring back USSR

This suggestion has been denied and will not receive development.
Status
Not open for further replies.
May 23, 2022
242
66
91
What does this suggestion change/add/remove:
Reverts the NWO faction entirely back to USSR.

Has something similar been suggested before? If so, why is your suggestion different?:
Yes it has been suggested before, It is different this time because there is nobody online past the second war of the day.

Possible Positives of the suggestion (At least 2):
1. Revives NWO
2. Possible incentives for newer players to join a war server, not every terminally online person knows 1984, USSR is more accessible.


Possible Negatives of the suggestion:
Development time, I believe most models/images etc are already present from when it used to be USSR (assumption).

Based on the Positives & Negatives, why should this suggestion be accepted:
So the server doesn't die, NWO players get what they want, and Civil Networks generates more revenue.
 
Upvote 11
This suggestion has been closed. Votes are no longer accepted.
Apr 2, 2022
360
72
71
UAN was changed to NATO because NWO was dominating WAYYY too hard, now NATO is dominating and Im sure this change had some impact on that

I don't really like the idea of recycling old content and removing the new content but if it means that the server will have a better playercount and the factions will be more balanced then its a + support for me but honestly I think reworking the new shitty war types would impact the playercount more than changing some playermodels

KC - pure trash, waiting for it to be removed / replaced, whenever its this war type I personally just log off

SnD - It should not take territories from other factions when this wartype is selected, there is also a bug where the territories arent given back after war

CTF - It should not take territories from other factions when this wartype is selected, there is also a bug where the territories arent given back after war., also make it so stolen flags are reclaimed by touching them and not by waiting a timer, I keep seeing people throw smokes on the flag and then just running in suiciding just to reset the timer and its fucking cringe
 

shaun11103

MRP War Veteran
Mar 13, 2022
266
72
91
+Support of course
the overwhelming amount of support is pretty obvious when it comes down to it there is a low chance of NWO actually coming back to a decent side as no one wants to play it and old players who would or could come back have no attachment to NWO unlike USSR
+- Neutral support

Dont get me wrong as I like USSR getting back but its a bit of a cope suggestion in my opinion.

NWO lacking the last weeks is not because of the name but a lack of leadership/SC activity.
NATO has been in this state before aswell with almost no activity, losing campaigns in the first week because we got dominated and all that because there just was a lack of HC.

I can see that new players might join CG MRP because it will become a NATO vs USSR server in the server list as I said this is a bit of a cope reaction.

Edit: Just reading through some replies on this thread and I'm actually confused by people saying its not SC/regiments fault of NWO's bad performance so @Solaz I'd just like to ask you, if it's because of the name of the faction how was NWO so dominant last year?
If you believe that its a cope suggestion you must not have been here very long as we have wanted it changed to USSR for the better part of a year
 
  • Like
Reactions: hj10wen
+Support of course
the overwhelming amount of support is pretty obvious when it comes down to it there is a low chance of NWO actually coming back to a decent side as no one wants to play it and old players who would or could come back have no attachment to NWO unlike USSR

If you believe that its a cope suggestion you must not have been here very long as we have wanted it changed to USSR for the better part of a year
Homie I know everyone wants it changed for the last year but blaming NWO's bad state on just the name is cope.
Read it better next time :skull:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.