He isn't lieng :]

Lol. Keep the conversation on-topic please?

We were using Valikorlian Managers to what we think make good managers. That's ON-TOPIC.

But the way you said "Valikoria stuff" made it seem like that.

:o.

Well, continue then.

To be a good manager you need to have the motivation to get things done with the staff team you have, literally get on their cases about getting things done and constantly check on the progress. Provide the correct rights needed to do the job to that staff member and hire only people who have the talent to do the job. Not many people have this ability because you are doing it out of your own free time and not being paid to get a server developed, hence how staff tend to get lazy on projects because they just can't be bothered to finish it in time or work on it slow because they either have a life outside of graal or just enjoy being a staff member for the power.

Doesen't matter if the manager is mean or nice, it matters how they handle the situations that arrise and take authority.

Well said daz.

Late, but I think Ocelot would do a better job than Sales.
Numerous reasons, one and the largest is that Sales has lost all hope in this Era, he thinks its unable to be repaired therefore he'll waste countless hours building a new one while the state of this one worsens.

While the success rate of his "new" is lower than Paris' Hilton's underwear, he'll still go through with it, and when the time comes to show the fruits of his labors, rather than people deciding if they like it or not, he'll force it on them because understandably, he doesn't like his work going in vein. Even if he is forewarned it might or would.

While Ocelot, speaking out of speculation here, would most likely repair this Era, which is an easier and more doable task. Seeing as this Era isn't as lost a cause as Sales thinks.
The 100 Players a day log on everyday, obviously this Era is doing something right. They don't log on to sit and wait for the new "Savior" being made on the Dev Server.

Don't get me wrong though, two evils. I'd choose the lesser of the Evils, seeing as Ocelot comes jam-packed with his problems. Sales' just outweigh his.

I demand a chart or something showing us Ocelot's problems and Sales' problems.

I can already tell you're not very experienced in development. It's always easier to rebuild then repair if you know what you're aiming for, and have a solid foundation to go from.

I'm not development-stupid if that is where you're getting at. It always depends on the severity of the problem. If a car gets a scratch, I doubt its easier to change that entire section, rather than just having the body shop "repair" the location of the scratch.
Now if a car had several severe issues and is a burdon, it'd be easier to buy a new car rather than fix that one.

Same with Era, Era has problems, but isn't at the point where it'd be easier to make a new Era, rather than repair this one. This is what separates the constructors, from the conductors. Developers will often do unnecessary, insignificant and often mundane things if left to work based on their will. Most of you need people to tell you what to do, and how it all fits together.

This is why I'd prefer my manager either be a conductor, or both a constructor and a conductor. Never just a constructor, the ability to assess a situation, finding the problem and formulating the most efficient way of amending the matter. Whether he amends it himself, or directs a "constructor" to do so.

Sales is a constructor
Ocelot is a conductor

Neither is both.

I just lost all hope in you; you're even more ignorant than I thought.

Are you actually praising Ocelot? Or am I just imagining that?

Yes it is. I neither know nor do I care how Era currently looks, but even when I still worked there, most of the code was in an unfixable way. I literally spent hours digging through it finding out where something is located just to fix a minor bug. Building up organisation out of this mess is almost impossible, so doing that from scratch is a way easier task which is not as time consuming.

Andy did a really nice job rescripting a lot of Era's major codes, but Graal NATs have huge egos. they don't like using code that wasn't designed by them. in the end it winds up wasting time, but what can you do? everything Andy did on Era Dev was thrown away. it's a shame.

Not exactly. You're speaking without knowing exactly what "good code" is, I think. Andy's code worked fine, and was somewhat organized, but it was difficult to build on to, and we wanted to make a lot of changes to the way systems work. We're now way past what Andy did anyway on the former Dev server.