Leaving Lusternia

Lilyin!

Do you see yourself leaving/retiring from Lusternia within the next year?

I've made the poll anonymous so no one can see your vote.

If you would like to discuss why you might be leaving please keep it civil.

Kagato

I answered no, mainly because I have *attempted* to leave several times, but ended up coming back for various reasons. :P

Lilyin!

If Starmourne is everything I'm hoping it to be I could see myself possibly leaving, but probably not.

Anita

I answered no, mainly for the fact I've been playing Anita for a definite 4 out of the 6 years she's been created. I have way too much time and money invested into her, enjoy her character arc and am pretty darn pleased with where she is at now. PVP isn't the be-all, end-all for me in Lusternia - which is for a lot of people. I love shop-keeping, I love designing, and questing and all the RP interactions I have. There is a lot of rich lore behind quests, cities, communes, guilds - even where we as players get to create some of that, too! There's so much going for Lusternia, and for me as a player. I could never bring myself to leave fully - I might take a break now and then, but it is inevitable that I will return. And as my RL family and bf will tell you, I am addicted >.>

It sucks that a lot of my friends have stopped playing along the way, recently stopped and / or are planning to, that kinda hurts and makes me sad, but I understand their reasons, too. I hope they can be happy wherever they end up, and that's that.

Versalean

I'm not leaving because Lusty is bane, yo. WHUT WHUT! In the last couple of years three people who I genuinely care about joined Glom. Further, a player I look up to for being a seriously positive impact on the game, a supportive and patient teacher, and somebody who has worked harder than any other person I know to really understand combat, has just Ascended. We have some serious dicks in this playerbase (e.g. Me), but there are just too many amazing people in my life BECAUSE OF LUSTERNIA for me to quit right now. Plus, if there is a game anywhere on earth where the Admin are so genuinely concerned about the player experience and put themselves out for us (at crazy hours, too), then I'll eat my scarecrow hat. Never anywhere else on the internet have I seen a BUG report come back in under 60 seconds.

Plus, if I leave now I won't win Ascension 2019. COMING FOR YOU, BEAUTY SEAL.

Yes button can go slap its momma.

PEAS OUT.
The He-She V-Tree

ETA: killed the random comma

Shaddus

I answered no because I keep trying to quit, but y'all keep pulling me back in. Every time I retire someone and try to move to some other IRE, I can't help but think about how it's just not Lusternia.

Xenthos

I answered yes.

Maybe?

Okay, no.  :losewings: I can't seem to leave you, Lusternia.

Esoneyuna

Xenthos said:

I answered yes.

Maybe?

Okay, no.  :losewings: I can't seem to leave you, Lusternia.

The Xenthos bounding ritual worked, excellent.

I do not plan on leaving, however if I feel I become too invested in the game emotionally again I will probably leave it again without warning for however long is required, I am happy in my more healthy relationship with the game though so it should not happen soon.

Tremula

I voted maybe. If the story ends for me, then I may find that I can't invest as much in another character as I have in Trem, and go quietly into that soft night.

Arix

I've been playing for 12 years, what do you think?

Lilyin!

Shaddus said:

I answered no because I keep trying to quit, but y'all keep pulling me back in. Every time I retire someone and try to move to some other IRE, I can't help but think about how it's just not Lusternia.

Lehki

I've left a couple of times, but just keep coming back eventually. Just too invested at this point to ever completely abandon Lusternia

Estarra

You make Estarra sad face with talk of leaving.

What I'd like to know for those who are thinking of leaving is what could we do to make you want to stay?

Alaksanteri

Estarra said:

You make Estarra sad face with talk of leaving.

What I'd like to know for those who are thinking of leaving is what could we do to make you want to stay?

I voted maybe.

In my case, it is affinity. The topic was already covered at length in another thread a year ago, but it is still a major problem for me. I remember @Xenthos had proposed much better alternatives to modify it but they were ignored.

I stopped playing for an entire year because I didn't enjoy myself anymore. I am not certain if want to continue neither. Affinity drain swallows my gaming time here and makes it very insipid.

Estarra

I don't recall what Xenthos suggested, but Affinity is a very tricky. Gods should not (as a rule) have followers outside of their organizations for reasons I've gone over before. Therefore, any changes should still discourage gods from having 'rogue' followers and certainly carry burdens if followers are in a different city or commune than that god. In Lusternia, gods are tied to their orgs, if not psychically or phsyically, then through their ethos and lore.

Lilyin!

Estarra said:

I don't recall what Xenthos suggested, but Affinity is a very tricky. Gods should not (as a rule) have followers outside of their organizations for reasons I've gone over before. Therefore, any changes should still discourage gods from having 'rogue' followers and certainly carry burdens if followers are in a different city or commune than that god. In Lusternia, gods are tied to their orgs, if not psychically or phsyically, then through their ethos and lore.

I know some people tend to follow gods in other orgs due to the fact their own org very rarely has an active divine, and I've seen some do pretty well in foreign orders. In some help files it also states that these divine have followers across the cities and communes, so why is that mechanically punished when the lore seems to encourage it?

Alaksanteri

@Estarra Alternatives were about removing certain of the burdens. The combination of both the daily drains and diminished value of offerings is too much of a burden to be played in a way that can be enjoyable, I find.

My own preference would be to remove the daily drains altogether and to keep the diminished offerings (or even raise them if you think you have to make it super hard to play), at least I will be able to offer whenever I feel like doing that without having to watch my offerings spiral out of control (ex. when I want to take a break from that and RP instead or whatever else).

Estarra

Lilyin! said:

I know some people tend to follow gods in other orgs due to the fact their own org very rarely has an active divine, and I've seen some do pretty well in foreign orders. In some help files it also states that these divine have followers across the cities and communes, so why is that mechanically punished when the lore seems to encourage it?

Show me these help files and I'll fix this immediately!

Estarra

What we really want is to discourage players to follow gods and not be in their cities and communes. I completely understand why some may not want to; but again, the goal is to make that the rare exception rather than the rule.

Alaksanteri

@Estarra I understand what the aim is and it is not my main issue.

What I am criticizing are the means employed through a draining mechanic to achieve it. Since it demands so much time that I do not always want to give to a game, I am suggesting that it should be modified or substituted to another one that would be less intrusive OOCly.

Morgfyre and Raezon are some of the files you are looking for.

Estarra

Thanks! Raezon's help file is updated. I don't really see anything in Morgfyre's.

In my mind, the draining mechanic is what is the true disincentive for a divine to take followers not aligned to their city/commune. Honestly, if a divine allows it, it is the divine's problem to pay for this upkeep, that's the price he/she takes. The follower is under no obligation to pay it. Again, if that's removed, I really don't see any disincentive for a divine to be reluctant to take a non-affiliated follower.

There should be a PENALTY TO THE DIVINE to accept a non-affiliated follower. To me, essence makes the most sense. Maybe the issue is that followers know specifically who is draining the essence? Should that be hidden?

Alaksanteri

@Estarra I think that lowering the value of what is offered even more than what it currently is standing at could still be a very good way to discourage non-affiliated followers while not being dramatically unpleasant for the ones who are in that situation. Maybe add another more reasonable restriction that does not ask for a lot of time could be added instead, if the first one is not enough.

I liked what someone said about the degrees of closeness that a divine has with each city/commune. That could be an interesting way to add or not certain restrictions. 

It mostly looks like I am the one receiving a huge penalty for this as I am the only one who can make up for the drain or not. If the aim is really to discourage a divine then maybe the affinity system should be removed and then there should be something else behind the scenes that is not essence and that we can't be aware of, when they make their decisions. But I am digressing from the thing that really bothers me.

I prefer being able to see the drains and I do not mind that others have access to that information.
Well, it depends on how it would be hidden. If only the divine has access to that, it could be similar to that 'behind the scene' mechanic that they see when they make decisions.

Aeldra

Estarra said:

What we really want is to discourage players to follow gods and not be in their cities and communes. I completely understand why some may not want to; but again, the goal is to make that the rare exception rather than the rule.

@Estarra I completely understand ( I think ) why it's being discouraged on an OOC level and yet, to give my own two 2 cent ( without hopefully derailing this thread too much ), to some people, like myself, an order is a huge deal of who their character is and for that to work, their divine should be at least semi active.

For me, it also so happened that I found a divine in another org that I feel resonates really well with my character, but that set aside... Celest hasn't had a divine active in it for the 3 years that I'm playing, except for the short time that Weiwae was active, at least not in any of the times of the day that I play.

I don't know how it is in the other cities and communes, but if you're seeking to be active part of an order, it's extremely difficult if you don't have at least one or two choices as not every divine / order will resonate with you ( as it should be ), as not every org will resonate with you.

In short, am wanting to say, I do get the discouragement, but I also want to highlight that for some orgs/people, it may be the only choice if they want to be part of an active order. That's not to discourage the work of any divine, even if they don't resonate with me or my character, am still constantly amazed at their work and dedication .

Shaddus

Estarra said:

I don't recall what Xenthos suggested, but Affinity is a very tricky. Gods should not (as a rule) have followers outside of their organizations for reasons I've gone over before. Therefore, any changes should still discourage gods from having 'rogue' followers and certainly carry burdens if followers are in a different city or commune than that god. In Lusternia, gods are tied to their orgs, if not psychically or phsyically, then through their ethos and lore.

 This is a great attempt  at trying to enforce rp, but does fall flat when you consider that many gods would fit in with other orgs. Consider gods like Crumkane (who, even though he was predestined to join Gaudiguch, still held a cooking contest to see who he would join), Lyreth, Elostian, Darvellan, Raezon, and more; each of these might easily find followers in almost any other org. 

Shaddus

In fact, Raezon was widely known (so to speak) for having followers everywhere. Removing that really does him a great disservice.

Karlach

Instead of a drain, why not cap the number of out of town followers a God can have? Either a fixed number or a variable of 1 per how many followers they have in their city.

This shows the limits of their influence outside their patroned organisation and forces them to choose who they want to retain, rather than just accept anyone and everyone, because their regular essence intake overwrites the drains.

Versalean

I'll stick my oar in, but as I'm not involved in Order-anything I think it's fair to weight my comments accordingly:

How about having a small number of universal slots for unaffiliated followers? So total of [10?] of them across the game. Then make Orders compete for them. Link it to shrines, sermons, whatever, order essence rankings, whatever.

Again, possibly because I'm not in an order, but I don't see nearly enough Order conflict in Lusty other than the odd interchange in shouts.

Lief

I do get the idea is to penalize the Gods and not the followers, necessarily! Given that, it might be a good idea to conceal affinity related things from player characters and make it a consideration for the god alone like suggested if this is otherwise a non-negotiable thing.

That said, I really like both @Karlach and @Versalean's ideas. Order wars are a mechanical option, right? It could be fun to put that to more use to compete for who can have followers from outside orgs, and Orders that would rather just not have them wouldn't be stuck with random spots.

Xenthos

Estarra said:

I don't recall what Xenthos suggested, but Affinity is a very tricky. Gods should not (as a rule) have followers outside of their organizations for reasons I've gone over before. Therefore, any changes should still discourage gods from having 'rogue' followers and certainly carry burdens if followers are in a different city or commune than that god. In Lusternia, gods are tied to their orgs, if not psychically or phsyically, then through their ethos and lore.

This was one of my posts:

Xenthos said:

The biggest thing that irks me about affinity is the halved offerings, simply because it makes zero logical sense.  "Someone who is not even in the Order... and even if in an enemy organization & enemied to the Order...  gets normal-sized offerings, but by being in the Order and NOT the organization, their value is somehow halved".

I really feel it needs to be made consistent.  Either:
1) Remove the malus outright.
2) Make it so that everyone who is not in the organization of the God has the same 50% malus (so org-members get full, outsiders do not, and are equivalent to the affinity-wracked).
3) Remove the malus, and then give a buff of between +10% and +50% to people who are in the same org as the God (this way nobody has "penalties," but there is incentive to stay close to home because you get a reward).

This is one of those things that is terrible because it is very specifically applied to certain people, instead of being implemented in a fashion that actually feels consistent (and thus ends up feeling very unfair).

If it's meant to be a punishment to the God, that's not how it comes across as currently implemented; it feels more like a punishment to the person, because their name is attached and they feel like they have to counter the drain (and have to work twice as hard to counter that drain due to halved offerings).

If you just took affinity out of the offerings side of it entirely and made it visible just to the God, then it's entirely on the God-side and gives them the choice on whether they want to shoulder the burden or not.

Kagato

Aeldra said:

Estarra said:

What we really want is to discourage players to follow gods and not be in their cities and communes. I completely understand why some may not want to; but again, the goal is to make that the rare exception rather than the rule.

@Estarra I completely understand ( I think ) why it's being discouraged on an OOC level and yet, to give my own two 2 cent ( without hopefully derailing this thread too much ), to some people, like myself, an order is a huge deal of who their character is and for that to work, their divine should be at least semi active.

For me, it also so happened that I found a divine in another org that I feel resonates really well with my character, but that set aside... Celest hasn't had a divine active in it for the 3 years that I'm playing, except for the short time that Weiwae was active, at least not in any of the times of the day that I play.

I don't know how it is in the other cities and communes, but if you're seeking to be active part of an order, it's extremely difficult if you don't have at least one or two choices as not every divine / order will resonate with you ( as it should be ), as not every org will resonate with you.

In short, am wanting to say, I do get the discouragement, but I also want to highlight that for some orgs/people, it may be the only choice if they want to be part of an active order. That's not to discourage the work of any divine, even if they don't resonate with me or my character, am still constantly amazed at their work and dedication .

@Weiwae is still active, just for reference.  I'm not at liberty to divulge what has been keeping Him busy (given that I only have a vague idea myself :P) but He poked His head in just after Ascension ended at the Pool of Stars and hung around for a little while, talking to those of us that were there.  That being said, having only one (or even no) active Divine DOES pose issues, especially when a Divine goes dormant with little to no warning.

Example: @Darvellan is still listed on the left side of HELP DIVINE, though as far as many of us are aware, He is dormant, given that He reportedly has not responded to prayers or messages for some time now.

Shaddus said:

Estarra said:

I don't recall what Xenthos suggested, but Affinity is a very tricky. Gods should not (as a rule) have followers outside of their organizations for reasons I've gone over before. Therefore, any changes should still discourage gods from having 'rogue' followers and certainly carry burdens if followers are in a different city or commune than that god. In Lusternia, gods are tied to their orgs, if not psychically or phsyically, then through their ethos and lore.

 This is a great attempt  at trying to enforce rp, but does fall flat when you consider that many gods would fit in with other orgs. Consider gods like Crumkane (who, even though he was predestined to join Gaudiguch, still held a cooking contest to see who he would join), Lyreth, Elostian, Darvellan, Raezon, and more; each of these might easily find followers in almost any other org. 

@Isune was a Celestian Divine for a long time before She booted all her Celestian followers upon Her return and moved to Hallifax, so she would be another example.

I agree with the suggestions that the penalty for offerings should be scrapped - Affinity drain could be bumped up a little to allow for this, but it means that one who leaves the city/commune for any reason and doesn't leave the order has to put in at least double, maybe triple (depending on their rank in the order) the effort of someone that is an order member and a citizen.

The other option is to scrap the 'affinity' section of LISTOFFERINGS SUMMARY completely or make it invisible so that only the Divinity (and maybe Inner circle, or those that have the privilege) are able to see it, so it falls completely on the Divine how they want to handle Affinity rather than have someone worry ICly or OOCly over the impact their affinity drain may or may not be having, on top of offering penalties.

EDIT: That's the other thing I've noticed about affinity.  If you are a higher rank and a non-citizen you correspondingly get a higher affinity DRAIN, but regardless of your rank within the order, you only generate 1000 essence per weave if you are a citizen. :P  I understand the reasoning behind the flat rate of 1000 essence perfectly, but at times it feels a tiny bit silly that someone can generate 1000 essence if a citizen, but DRAIN 20,000 or more essence simply because they are not a citizen.

Kagato

Oops, doublepost. Sorry.