Penalty for leaving guilds

[Lindros]

Hey thought I'd bring up a topic thats been confusing me for a while, and see what the rest of you guys think.


What I have been wondering about is, how come there's such a big diffrence in what you pay for leaving certain guilds?

We have a handfull of guilds that you can leave without any penalty whatsoever(Rangers, Mercenaries,Ogres and Gladiators, perhaps others too?) and then you have the other type where most guilds fit, where you have to take a huge penalty/death to leave the guild, to me that seems pretty unfair.

Perhaps some wizard can explain if there's some wiz reason behind it, or if its just up to the wizard who coded the guild to decide what penalty the guild should have for leaving it? Perhaps its a tax related issue I really have never really thought much about it to be honest.

While I understand it should cost something to leave a occupation, I would think with the global balancing we are experiecing, why not change it so all guilds have the same sort of penalty/or lack thereof?

I always liked the way how Gladiators worked there, either you could take a death or you could buy your freedom if you had saved up enough coin, same with how Old mercs where you had to obtain a certain title and then pay to leave without penalty.

I'd love to see this concept in more guilds to be honest, I think it would give people more options, cause lets face it, even with the death recovery(which is great I think)the time it takes to recover for say a legend is still a long time(hell Lindros has still not recovered from the death he took leaving Rda, over 2 years ago, ofc had a death or two after that as well but still) the time it takes to recover hundred of progress levels , is still discouraging.
If you dont have a team to level at the top xp spots, you'll have to spend hours and hours to get a decent amount of xp.

While I think leaving a guild should never be completely free(I think a smaller xp loss and/or money cost should be standard), I have to say the way things are now is not very good. Why should some people get to leave their guilds at will without any cost whatsoever, while others have to take a death and a long recovery to leave their guild? I think the game as a whole could use some more guildhopping, too many players have grown stagnate in their guilds and instead of playing they go into slumber and log in once a month.
I think encouraging these people switch guilds without taking a huge penalty could help them to actually take the leap and try something new.


Why not make the way Gladiators work standard, where you can choose between taking a death and paying to get out?


Well just my 2 cents on the subject, will be intresting to see how the rest of you feel about all this.

[Rhaegar]

I agree that some guilds are just scary with their penalty.
For example, yesterday I have left Thornlin Militia, where I was signed for layman option...
Parchment in the guild said "small penalty" for resigning.
Very brutal -> extremely touchy after leaving. I think that either the parchment should be changed, or the penalty there, since it was equal to death (it even stated in the stats that without death recovery I would've been very brutal or something).

[Makfly]

All in all it sounds like a pretty decent suggestion.

I'd encourage any wizard going over the leaving penalties, to also look at layman guilds, because there is a huge difference there too, ranging from death to no penalty.

[Tarax the Terrible]

Yes some are even more than a death if I remember correctly.
What's death 25% of combat exp?
Think some penalties are as high as 30%..

However, I actually think it is of benefit to get a hit and be on recovery as this turbo charges experience when you join a new guild.
So myths leaving one guild get the highest title in new guild inside a week for example.
So IMO this is less of a feeling locked in a guild scenario that you talked about before Lindros.

It is tempting in fact to perhaps add a few deaths on as well, since recovery bonus stacks now.
Hovering in the touchy brute area is really going to help guild exp.

There are some guilds where you loose some guild exp by dying (not as much as the death sets you back) so this is also not standard.
I died in BDA and lost a chunk of guild title. I don't think this was because of size decrease (some title being size based) so assume I lost guild exp.
If we are standardising would be good to look at the whole picture.

If currently if you wanted to get 10 links in bmasters for example you could suicide each time you reached brutal and get there very fast.
Good or bad, not sure, still takes a lot of time and work to do it.

[Lindros]

Well Tarax,

maybe everyone does not want to run through all the titles in a few weeks?
Leaves little for motivation later on if you achieve top title in a week, at least thats
how I see it.


Not to mention, wizards capped the effect of guildxp pretty low if I am not misstaken, I doubt you need to take several deaths to reach the cap.

I do like the option of being able to choose by myself though, like Gladiators, either you pay or you take the penalty.
That way people can make up their own mind what suits them best. Maybe it should be real costly, make it based on time in the guild/size or whatever, something for people to spend their money on if nothing else

[Draugor]

Worst one must be Angmar, Xp and skills go to hell and not just yer angmar skills, general skills etc gets boned in the process

[Rhynox]

I believe the Knight has the highest leaving penalty. Not sure if it was updated, but back when Zin was knight, the old penalty for leaving was equal to an "old" death, which would be like 1/3 of combat experience.

Personally, I believe penalty for leaving should depend on the guild. For the gladiators it makes sense to be able to bribe your way out or face death; however, it would be more interesting than being mauled to death... for example, when a gladiator wants to leave, there could be a global call for everyone to meet at the arena... then the gladiator would be forced to fight NPCs, one after another, every time stronger until he (inevitably) dies. I think Kalak would greatly enjoy the show, and it would be a good warning for other gladiators, while at the same time making the gladiator leave as a proud fighter.

In guilds that are considered tight association of individuals (for example, the Clan, the Kenders, etc) the leaders should be able to set the leaving penalty. If I have served the clan well, have done everything according to law, have given a good reputation to the clan and have always fought when needed, I should be able to retire in glory (aka, taking zero or a very small penalty). On the contrary, if I had always been problematic, or I am being forced to leave because I steal stuff from our chest, I should retire in shame (taking a much bigger penalty). This is somewhat what happens now, we have a standard penalty for leaving, however if you leave while exiled, the penalty would be bigger (this is actually how it used to work, guessing it is still the same).

I am also guessing Lindros finally found himself in the position I have claimed most of us have reached in the last year: we are too busy to grind a character back from a death just to (in his case) discover he doesn't like the guild and have to take a huge penalty again to grind his stature back in a few months. I claim that in some guilds it makes sense to have such penalties (if you leave the army, I am guessing they would treat you like a traitor, so you deserve death according to their laws). However, it could be modified so that players are actually given a chance to "bypass" death (for example, in the case of the armies, you could tell Ariakas you want to leave so that he kills you, or you could choose to leave in disgrace, sneaking through a series of tunnels that could be a quest-like experience... you could then defect the armies, but you would be automatically attacked in Sanction or by soldier NPCs around the game for a year).

I think every guild should have three or four ways of leaving, including one where you get no penalty at all. However, this option makes sense for mercenaries and gladiators, but doesn't really for professional guilds like the knights, the armies, the priests, etc. So, if given there should be certain drawbacks.

[Rhaegar]

I like your ideas Rhynox. But I have a different conception for the Armies (can't really say much about the others without experiencing it, but it could be similar) and penalty for leaving them.

Penalty is directly affected by your status within the guild:
- when you've reached highest officer rank, you're able to just <retire> (of old age or whatever) for little to no penalty as you have served your time
- when you're a recruit or a regular soldier, leaving the army is possible in two ways:
a) with penalty (according to your rank, higher rank = less penalty), when you ask for a formal discharge
b) without penalty, if you opt for desertion, but, you will be on the guild NPC attack list and unable to join the guild again forever (so that people actually give it some thought)

Also, high officers should be able to <discharge> (for minor transgressions, penalty according to formal discharge as above) and <dishonorably discharge> (for greater transgressions, maximum penalty applied regardless of rank) members.

[Rhynox]

I was thinking more in terms of RP, where if you serve the Dark Queen, she won't just let you get away from her. Also, note that during a year or so the armies promoted new soldiers to officers to get more recruits. While the Knights have a pretty formal way of promoting (I have never seen more than two Rose Knights at a time, and before Earth they were pretty inactive), the Dragonarmies just promote on whims. For example, Eagledraco has been Grandmaster for probably over 8 years by now, but he is still a Sword Knight (and from what I remember he was Crown still when he was promoted to GM).

I am guessing this is because Rose Knights get some extra advantages (which used to include minor prayers which made them somewhat of spellcasters), but the Armies have never been shy about promoting people to let them get their own dragon.

[Earth]

I was thinking more in terms of RP, where if you serve the Dark Queen, she won't just let you get away from her. Also, note that during a year or so the armies promoted new soldiers to officers to get more recruits. While the Knights have a pretty formal way of promoting (I have never seen more than two Rose Knights at a time, and before Earth they were pretty inactive), the Dragonarmies just promote on whims. For example, Eagledraco has been Grandmaster for probably over 8 years by now, but he is still a Sword Knight (and from what I remember he was Crown still when he was promoted to GM).

I am guessing this is because Rose Knights get some extra advantages (which used to include minor prayers which made them somewhat of spellcasters), but the Armies have never been shy about promoting people to let them get their own dragon.

The KoS have our internal policies and procedures on when and how someone is promoted. Some choose to stay in one order vs another due to one reason or another. Each order has a different focus, and to 'advance' there is some tasking involved. Advancement to higher ranks requires more difficult tasking, in addition to the gaining of prestige, which is slow in itself.

I guess we could just do away with the rules and promote those who wish it, bue we choose not to. Knights have traditionally been as much of a RP guild as a battle one, so my guess is that it will stay that way for the expected future.