Alliance Leadership Insurance

[Fyrd Argentus]

Maybe you know a way to check the loyalty of a non-allied player before you invite them into an alliance - just in case they might have enough loyalty to take over the leadership slot. Maybe you don't.

I didn't, so I set up a clickie for this purpose.

If you are concerned, ask your candidate to go to the special tile to the west of the Fountain of the Lost Path (MDA garden) and click on this "Loyalty Touchstone". (Password: Look)

Then you can get a third party confirmation of their claimed loyalty score.

That is, if you trust ME...

Edited November 30, 2010 by Fyrd Argentus

[Grido]

Either I've misread your post, or you don't know a part of inviting people into alliances

Firstly, if you invite someone who has a genuine interest in joining, pretty sure they'd be happy to tell you their loyalty value.
Secondly, when a player joins an alliance, if they are above, or close to the loyalty value of the alliance leader, they automatically drop to 50 (I think) points below the leader loyalty points, meaning they won't have control over it when they join.

[Udgard]

[quote name='Grido' timestamp='1291084744' post='73743']

Firstly, if you invite someone who has a genuine interest in joining, pretty sure they'd be happy to tell you their loyalty value.

[/quote]
Grido, I think the concern is with people with genuine interest in joining, just no interest in letting the current leader keep his spot

[Fyrd Argentus]

I did not know that loyalty dropped, but 50 points is almost nothing.....

I know of at least 3 instances of unexpected leadership changes in recent times .... (Archives, Woodcutters, Necrovion Sentinels)

Yes, I'm concerned about hostile take-overs ....

[Curiose]

Fyrdy, you also have to take in mind activity, too.

If there is an inactive leader, someone might as well step up to the plate and take over, ja?

[Rendril]

With a little effort one can take over an alliance quite quickly. The Loyalty Touchstone can be helpful, just don't forget that others might not require it on inviting

[Kyphis the Bard]

Burns might be willing to integrate this into his usefull tools at the park, might be better more centralized.

[Yrthilian]

well even a drop of 100 or 200 is easy to make up in a single day
if a person has the right access and the information it is easy to gain up to 900 in a single day
the thing is you would have to work on trust and that is few and far between because of all the issues
and in game fighting.

[Shadowseeker]

There is no such thing as insurance.

It is part of the leaders responsibility- but you care for it in the wrong way anyways.

The only truly effective method would be the leader himself, having so much loyalty that he can't be topped.

[Grido]

Legend Speakers is also a guild, not an alliance, mechanic wise this makes no difference, but it does in terms of take-over.

Guilds have a set purpose, if the purpose is not being fulfilled "something" will be done, like the Advertisers, they stopped doing advertising things and it got disbanded, it's generally objective what's considered to be fulfilling the role, but what i was getting at is that someone who wants to/does take over LS would have to do so with the intent to run the guild as it's meant to be run (in the broad sense), in which case you shouldn't worry because you'll both have the same interests towards the guild.

[Muratus del Mur]

just a thought:
what if members can donate from their loyalty to the leader, except alt. That way the ally can support its leader in case its needed, or maybe as a condition set by the ruler to join.

[Fyrd Argentus]

Let me observe that it would be VERY hard to lead an alliance as MP6. MP6 can't worship for loyalty, and has restricted fighting opportunities.....

Mur's suggestion would change that equation.

[Metal Bunny]

While there is always the boring and time consuming option of sacrificing, I do agree that for mp6, it'd be easier to get loyalty through donation. You can donate heat, why not loyalty?
Loyalty, opposed to heat, isn't that really necessary for non-leader players, except when they want to buy certain items in mdshop.

[phantasm]

indeed, a very good suggestion. If a leader is truly embraced by his alliance there should be no reason why an alliance leader shouldn't have a dominating force of loyalty. After all loyalty isn't much good in a game mechanics point of view besides that.

[Yoshi]

Giving loyalty to the leader would be kind of abusable... but interesting

[Firsanthalas]

At the moment, loyalty only seems to have two uses. First is you need it for some shop items. Secondly for determining alliance/guild leader positions.
On a personal level, I've never liked the idea of hostile takeovers purely based on a stat, particularly from outside influence. I just don't think that it makes that much sense really. real loyalty and dedication to an alliance/guild can't really be measured by a stat, neither can the loyalty/support of its members for the leader. The leader having the highest loyalty stat does not actually equate to that meaning they have the support of the rest of the alliance/guild.
Personally, I feel that this harms the idea of alliances and guilds as it creates a situation whereby they can be held by someone that just happens to have an awesomely high stat. Furthermore, leaders of alliances and guilds have little control over anyone coming in from outside. One disgruntled or over-ambitious member can invite an outside influence in while the leader is away and they can gain the required loyalty needed in an amazingly short time. Again, this does not equate to the masses of an alliance or guild loyalty or support for the leader.
Fast loyalty gain can also be much easier for stat grinders, who can be at odds with the concept of an alliance or guild. For instance, woodcutters and crafters are not alliances based on martial ability or function.
I've said before that while some people find alliance take-overs and attempts to ransom them as funny, I personally find it saddening. I really believe it cheapens the idea and reasons for them.
One option may be to cap loyalty points for non-alliance members. You only need a small amount of loyalty for purchasing items and I don't think that people should be using non-alliance status as an opportunity to grind the loyalty stat so that they can be invited in for a hostile take-over. That would at least keep loyalty take-overs to in-house affairs, or make it much harder for outside take-overs at the very least.
Just a thought on it.