FC Chest just gets raded, and GMs can do nothing.

[Galactimus]

This is the fourth thread I've seen on the forums where an FC has been "robbed." In one case an Officer gave normal "Members" the ability to "Promote/Demote." The result was that a player with the Rank of "Member" was able to 'promote' his own alt to "Officer" and rob the FC blind. Oversight by the FC leader? Should a Member be able to raise his own rank higher than his current one?


My point is that people will always find ways to steal from you. GM's are supposed to have your back during cases of destructive behavior even when the normal rules of the game are not broken. I personally find the GM's in FFXIV take an extremely passive role when it comes to such actions.


And I'm not just praising Final Fantasy 11 GM's; it's just the easiest one to relate people to since it's made by the same company, mirror's the same subscription model, and uses so many of the same elements. Rift, Eve, and Everquest Online Adventures had amazing GM's too (SWG definitely having the worst by far.) In Rift they would do anything for you. In Eve GM's would go out of their way and send YOU tells asking if everything was "cool" without you even asking. I've already talked about my Everquest experience in this thread.


Actions taken for the sole purpose of scamming, cheating, or stealing need repercussions. We have all the information logged, we have GM's, and we have people committing offenses for the sole purpose of causing grief. There's no reason why such situations should not at least be investigated at a basic level to deter people from trying to perform the same actions in the future.

[Maracrea13x]

Snip.

Ok, heres how the officers being able to give members the ability to promote, if you give officers the ability to edit RANK SETTINGS then they can change the settings of all ranks in the FC except master. This is the ability that you should always reserve for yourself alone. NEVER give it to any one other then yourself. Promotion is kinda wonky in FFXIV yes. If you can promote you can do any rank other then master in the FC, which I do not like but it is what it is. But if you give permission to promote and demote to officers then it takes stress off of you to have to promote everyone yourself, but members will not be able to promote themselves, if you do not enable this for them.

[joshdavis271]

ummm Who would be stupid enough to give a member the ability to promote/demote? That is the dumbest thing to do and yes that is an oversight of the FC leader. and again taking "SHARED ASSETS" IREPEAT "SHARED ASSETS"!!! is not stealing. again the leader should think carefully about what each permission you give random ranks.

[Galactimus]

And again taking "SHARED ASSETS" IREPEAT "SHARED ASSETS"!!! is not stealing.

Right, however in the realm of "Morality" IREPEAT "Morality"!!! taking or destroying everything an FC owns just before leaving can be EASILY punishable in the eyes of a GM that is allowed to care. "Shared assets" is such a silly scapegoat. However, like I said before, a GM won't always be able to do something. And the victim may not get the result he wanted. But at least he is heard and given a chance.

[Maracrea13x]

Right, however in the realm of "Morality" IREPEAT "Morality"!!! taking or destroying everything an FC owns just before leaving can be EASILY punishable in the eyes of a GM that is allowed to care. "Shared assets" is such a silly scapegoat. However, like I said before, a GM won't always be able to do something. And the victim may not get the result he wanted. But at least he is heard and given a chance.

Why do you think that they want to care? This is a video game, if you really expect people to be moral on a video game then you my friend are in for quite an awakening. All SE cares about is getting that monthly fee from you, nothing more, nothing less.

[joshdavis271]

Whatever you say chief, Since we cannot be held responsible for our own free company, I think FCs should be reduced to that of Linkshells since you cannot comprehend permissions... its to make things simpler for you folk.

[Galactimus]

Whatever you say chief, Since we cannot be held responsible for our own free company, I think FCs should be reduced to that of Linkshells since you cannot comprehend permissions... its to make things simpler for you folk.

There's no need to devolve into rudementary banter. I've never had a problem with permissions. There's nothing wrong with permissions. And indeed people need to pay more attention to the permissions they give to members; especially those who are new. I've already said many times "you folk" are correct about this. However, problems CLEARLY arise. There's no reason why GM's cannot be given the privileges to investigate some of the more ridiculously extreme cases of Free Company destruction.

Stop fighting it chief, you know you'd like to see justice every now and again.

[joshdavis271]

There's no need to devolve into rudementary banter. I've never had a problem with permissions. There's nothing wrong with permissions. And indeed people need to pay more attention to the permissions they give to members; especially those who are new. I've already said many times "you folk" are correct about this. However, problems CLEARLY arise. There's no reason why GM's cannot be given the privileges to investigate some of the more ridiculously extreme cases of Free Company destruction.

Stop fighting it chief, you know you'd like to see justice every now and again.

Well justice would be served if publicly outed, the community will handle it accordingly, if this person is a repeat offender, he wont be able to join another free company for long.

[Galactimus]

It's ironic that your form of justice breaks the Terms of Service Agreement whereas Stealing from FC's does not.

[Nyerieri]

Snip

I can understand, maybe, if a free company was just formed. I cannot understand a free company that was formed in 2013, and did not have its permissions in order.. and only had 3 ranks at that.