“Running” vanilla. Do you mean like… genuine vanilla servers? Genuine vanilla is terrible. It does not have
- auto-saving
- The ability for staff to effectively moderate
- Permission tables to prevent server staff from having unnecessary abusive permissions, such as spawning items, vehicles, experience, and so on.
Rocket servers that are like vanilla are the best you will get. And there is not a single Rocket server like that, that is also popular, non-p2w, so on.
I think you have no idea what you’re talking about.
Nothing. But the DLC is an official contract between you and SDG giving you access to servers. That are empty or dominated by elite groups. Nobody would like that, and it looks bad on Nelson and, ontop of that, you dont have to spend money to join a community server.
If they do not work, Nelson gets a negative reputation and so does his DLC. The contract is useless.
What you fail to see is this: Even the most elite groups can be taken down, under the assumption the server is full. Furthermore, with the Better Together suggestion, rival groups of the toxic clan can team up to out-compete them. We are under the assumption that the servers will not be full because they’re worthless, and so again, as I clearly stated in the post
Vanilla. Genuine vanilla. 
What does BE have anything to do with this? The argument here, that I think you mistaken-ed, is that the whole idea of the “passive” protection of pay-to-play is foiled by the assertion that nobody will pay. Theres no players to protect. I can run an empty pass-word protected server and claim I’m “protecting” everyone on it from hackers by making it whitelisted. Does that mean anything?
Regarding BE, I made an entire post explaining that its not working
All games with community servers suffer shitty unfair ones. Some communities like Gmod dont do absolutely anything, and the people who distaste those servers eventually leave the game (like me) while the kids that are fine with it stay. Unturned can surely be like that, and it is like that evidenced in 3.0. The game is evidently dying down more and more, while people continue to call for good servers. A cool person in the community wrote this as a review
And there are many like it. Nobody can find good servers, and Nelsons attempt at providing a fair, fun one at the expense of buying the experience is just a rigged way to avoid dealing with quality control of the server-list.
This argument was already discussed in the linked initial thread. No, there are not. There are TONS of steam accounts playing Unturned that are not premium, IE, they haven’t bought anything on steam.
Some people are brand new to the internet, some people are under-aged and cant get money on the internet, some people only play free games like I did for the first few months on steam, so on and so fourth. Not everyone in your friend group is willing to pay 5$ just for dead servers.
Explained up
An educated guess.
Also, an educated guess.
cool, you see the problem. argument over. I guess we can sail back on home
No need to be rude about it
Haha. Yes. Very effective argument you have there.
“If you don’t like it, leave,” in all its variations, is a coward’s argument. It’s an argument made by people who are afraid of debate, don’t understand logic, and want to escape the fray as quickly as possible.
“If you don’t like, leave,” implies that arguing for change is not permissible.
“If you don’t like, leave,” implies that dissent is unwarranted.
“If you don’t like, leave,” implies that diversity of mind is out of bounds.
I think you are completely missing the point.
Did you… even read the post?
When I first started posting on the forum, I did one comment per reply and that was frowned upon. I apologize that you guys jump the gun and all post in unison before I can even reply effectively to the first person. Sorry, not sorry.