Alliance Leadership on abandonment |
Post Reply  |
Page <1 4567> |
| Author | |
KillerPoodle 
Postmaster General   Joined: 23 Feb 2010 Status: Offline Points: 1853 |
 Post Options
 Thanks(0)
 Quote Reply  Posted: 09 Feb 2016 at 02:01 |
|
Mark the account as abandoned, pass the controls of the alliance down as you would after it disappears, leave the account up as long as it has incoming as normal.
Problem solved. KP |
|
|
"This is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it." - endorsement by HM
"a little name-calling is a positive thing." - Rill |
|
 |
|
| Carbonara
New Poster   Joined: 19 Aug 2015 Location: Perth,Australia Status: Offline Points: 27 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 09 Feb 2016 at 02:06 |
|
@abstractdream
well, because some players might miss out on getting a city - you cant always help everyone at once, and you may need time to rebuild the clearing armies in order to help another player each time.. Clearing armies aren't always successful either, and not all cities are close to the alliance hub, some are over a week away.. if anything, the time an account sticks around after being abandoned should be increased! lol plus, how does this solve the problem of alliances not being able to access their alliance resources if their leader is MIA? Edited by Carbonara - 09 Feb 2016 at 02:08 |
|
|
|
| Carbonara
New Poster Joined: 19 Aug 2015 Location: Perth,Australia Status: Offline Points: 27 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 09 Feb 2016 at 02:09 |
+1 for this idea |
|
|
|
| Brandmeister
Postmaster General  Joined: 12 Oct 2012 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 2396 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 09 Feb 2016 at 03:14 |
So some players miss out on getting a city. Is that so bad? The map is littered with cities and accounts that are being held in place by a single recycled siege. Most often that is done to lock up a valuable location. Is that gridlock contributing to the game? The solution to the missing leader problem seems obvious. Zombie cities probably deserve a thread all to themselves. |
|
|
|
| KarL Aegis
Forum Warrior   Joined: 20 Aug 2010 Location: New York Status: Offline Points: 287 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 09 Feb 2016 at 03:43 |
|
Have the alliance leader be able to designate a replacement if they are ever incapable of leading the alliance themselves. Possibly use some of the code in use for the sitter system.
|
|
|
I am not amused.
|
|
|
|
| Carbonara
New Poster Joined: 19 Aug 2015 Location: Perth,Australia Status: Offline Points: 27 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 09 Feb 2016 at 04:13 |
Don't you think its a good thing that new players are getting all the help they can from existing players? Why change anything that would limit their growth? The faster they grow, the quicker they can help even newer players. Encouraging new players to grow by giving them as much help as possible, which can contribute to their decision to want to stick around and play Illyriad for the long term, can really only benefit the game as a whole. Are zombie cities really that much of a problem in Illyriad, on such a large scale as to require their own thread? |
|
|
|
| Brandmeister
Postmaster General Joined: 12 Oct 2012 Location: Laoshin Status: Offline Points: 2396 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 09 Feb 2016 at 04:37 |
|
I have seen a lot of dead accounts being kept on artificial life support by a marker siege or holding blockade. It is not a question of helping new players. Those alliances are keeping all those locations locked up for their own personal use. If they had active new players with enough population to add another city, they would not need 90, 120, 180 days to capture. I think the broad population of all new players would benefit strongly from access to good locations currently held by zombie accounts. That benefit outweighs the current small benefit of allowing sizable alliances to use zombie accounts to fence in desirable locations for the exclusive use of their own members, on the off chance that a city will occasionally be needed.
|
|
|
|
| STAR
Greenhorn   Joined: 11 Jun 2010 Status: Offline Points: 99 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 09 Feb 2016 at 08:59 |
|
After reading everyones post, I agree with the "what aint broke dont fix" motto
but I also think that game mechanics shouldn't be exploited/used in order to keep a hold over territory whether it is for personal gain or not.
Game mechanics have been put in place for those who have "RL" situations or unexpected things come up by leaving someone to sit the account for a maximum of 90 days and they also have another 90 days before their account is listed as abandoned, so considering those numbers thats upto 6months, if you add on the game mechanics of fake seiges that can drag out that period even longer.
Most alliances have multiple leadership in place and should be communicating with each other on circumstances that may effect their ability to play and therefore have something in place anyway.
As for sole leadership alliances, there could be an option listed under "Petitions" for inactivity leading to an Abandoned status in place for the alliance if the leader has failed to log in during the 90 day period, this option should be available for all active members in the alliance to be able to lodge but only the three most active players would get a temp super-user (30days) So once the "petition" is lodge a "new leadership mail" with the three most active players as the choices for new leader/s would be sent to all active members to vote in the new leader/s of the alliance with the "majority" rules regardless if they vote or not or If no vote is lodge then all 3 will win by default
Despite how long a person has played or put money into an account, the decision to leave was the owner of the account, there are options already in place if the owner needs time to do RL stuff, the account can be sat for upto 90 days, if more time is needed,
Not sure if this is possible but the owner could appoint another sitter. Alliances also have a policy on being active
The account can be inactive for another 90 days before being listed as abandoned, rather than delete the account or have the account exploited or manipulated using game mechanics, to strongly motivate alliances to capture their players cities, could maybe add on another 60days, after that time, if the players account has any remaining cities could mayb default back to unaffiliated player (regardless if the cities are under seige or not) The remaining cities can be available to anyone to capture for a 30day period before the account is deleted
Just some suggestions, I know most alliances claim all their players cities but an Abandoned account is an Abandoned account
|
|
|
|
| Starry
Postmaster   Joined: 20 Mar 2010 Location: California Status: Offline Points: 612 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 09 Feb 2016 at 13:54 |
+1
The game mechanics are in place to prevent this issue, multiple superusers are allowed in the game, which would prevent this issue. I'm going to suggest that an alliance leader, who does not avail this alliance of these options, either did so intentionally or did not understand the game mechanics of alliance management. KP's suggestion would resolve this issue without impacting other areas of the game.
|
|
|
CEO, Harmless?
Founder of Toothless? "Truth never dies." -HonoredMule |
|
|
|
| TheBillPN
Forum Warrior  Joined: 03 Jun 2014 Location: England Status: Offline Points: 305 |
Post Options
Thanks(0)
Quote Reply Posted: 09 Feb 2016 at 14:08 |
|
For the alliance leadership issue: Hand over Superuser controls to the next highest ranking member who logged in the most recently, delete the account after the allotted time regardless of incoming military units.
For Abandoned accounts, Delete the account after the allotted time regardless of incoming military units.
For Suspended account (by the DEVS for breaking rules etc..), Delete after the allotted time regardless of incoming military units.
For the unfortunate circumstances - e.g. car accident. health problems, small-scale invasion by another country, large-scale invasion by aliens - at the start of the game you are advised to look round the forums and at the game website, where it tells you about the deletion protocols. If you aren't willing to live with the fact that your account may one day be deleted due to unforeseen RL circumstances, either don't spend money on the account or don't play the game.
I myself am coming up on my 2nd Illyversary, and if i get incapacitated for three months, I wouldn't have much of a problem. Firstly, my account isn't the most brilliant, and i haven't spent a lot on it.
Secondly, I have left notes for people to read in various situations so my account would be taken care of by my family until such time as I recover or die. i have listed who my cities would be taken by and how long to wait for this to be dealt with.
I'm sure there are ways to deal with any situation that comes up, so Don't Panic, and make sure you have your towel.
|
|
|
|
| Post Reply |
Page <1 4567> |
Tweet
|
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions
You
cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Topic Options
KillerPoodle wrote: