Linkshell Management Recognition

[Molly_Millions]

Small LSes are fine, but those that don't want a small LS shouldn't be locked into that option.

[Alothia]

Small LSes are fine, but those that don't want a small LS shouldn't be locked into that option.

Exactly. We have a large LS, and we like it that way. I don't want to have to start turning people away because SE won't let me have more than 128 people in the shell. It sucks for that person, it sucks for me. No one wins by limiting us like that. No one.

[Jaihtmc]

I'm fairly new to the game almost 2 weeks now. When I learned that Ls had break monthly because they couldn't break inactive players shells or had to be in proximity It all seems needlessly complicated and just off. Like they didn't finish the admistrative tools for shell leaders or something. Would be cool to see some progress In that simple as it be.

[Dimo]

"I'm not sure how I'm supposed to hold onto any hope that these "big" changes they are making will be worth sticking around for if they can't get the tiniest and most basic of issues worked out."

Thats the truth, plain and simple. I am baffled as to why these basic issues havent been fixed yet. Sure I can understand a few departments working together to knock out big changes, but cmon now. If the departments are as Yoshi P says, these changes should have been fixed a long time ago.

Regardless, keep up the good work Rhomagus.

[tachikoma]

Add a text command to kick players without a proximity requirement. This is the only thing needed now to solve this thread. The other features to chat in channels /L1 /L2 etc and to have a fancy UI are not important right now. This small feature would solve the hundreds of comments listed here and make linkshell management much easier.

[Elkwood]

Dear SE...

O yeah I brought this one back as well