02-15-2010, 11:36 PM
I'm all for having players logging in, in order to keep something if they want it really but looking at it from both ends I can see how it would be messed up to take away something that was promised.
As for statics, I'm pretty sure all INR statics were transferred as soon as the merge happened. This involved those players actually logging in here and paging for it to be done so its not like they are owner-less.
Adding a rule for new statics is fine in my opinion but since everyone is always so damn stubborn about what was promised, I don't think that transferred statics should ever decay or be forfeited, as that wouldn't be very fair.
One thing to keep in mind here is that a static that was seemingly abandoned for a long time recently had its owner return. If that static was gone when he came back, I doubt he would have stayed and I guarantee he would have been quite pissed.
As for statics, I'm pretty sure all INR statics were transferred as soon as the merge happened. This involved those players actually logging in here and paging for it to be done so its not like they are owner-less.
Adding a rule for new statics is fine in my opinion but since everyone is always so damn stubborn about what was promised, I don't think that transferred statics should ever decay or be forfeited, as that wouldn't be very fair.
One thing to keep in mind here is that a static that was seemingly abandoned for a long time recently had its owner return. If that static was gone when he came back, I doubt he would have stayed and I guarantee he would have been quite pissed.