Leadership change shouldnt be automatic

[SirLancelotJr]

People arguing about leader change after 14days inactivity. I'm sure they have personal reason and first in line after leader on vacation and wanna surprise him before he back. it shouldn't be less than 30days , people going to vacation for 15days.

I think BB should bring the option for volunteer leader change first, not automatic one. Many people who are also leader, want quit, but they cant hand over leadership, many times they have to give the leader account or players try to continue leaderless.
So put "give leadership" option it shouldn't be so hard because, BB can put that option on their 3moths old new anno game but refuse to apply it on settler.

Plus taken from inactive leader with force? some people may not want to give leadership , maybe they have plan to come year later and continue to play

You will buy bunch of gems use them to upgrade your guild, then you will go vacation in summer and you find out when you come, your assets taken and given some1 else. even its not a grand theft, I'm sure its larceny in many states.

If there is automatic leadership change , there must be settings, must be an option to activate /deactivate this option in guild settings.

Plus even volunteer leadership change is risky and open to many misuse , abuse. Lets say some1 obtained your login info , and transferred leadership to another account, how you can prove it wasn't you? we all know how ubisoft is not good at protecting personal data, we know that from past security breaches and window pop up remind us to change password ,each time we login .

I think best way to make leadership change with " ticket only" with yearly limit.
Lets says only 50+ members guilds can change their leader once or twice a year with support ticket filled by leader account. very few guild will be in this situation with these limits, it wont any serious load to BB support

[SirLancelotJr]

Plus I think we need forum feature that lets readers rate posts , not threads. This way , visitors can see post shorted as their rate. Because I noticed, some people who able to sit on computer all day , always first reply to new threads. They opinion always in first page and kinda they silence other's opinion, and make it looks like their ideas are more accepted.

[The_Director]

... sorry.

So far a poll on this subject has 14 days and 31 days tied for first.

And i agree, 31 days is better.

[Windwalker2012]

I find this topic amusing....if the leader is gone for X amount of time, nothing is preventing the remaining active members from departing and forming a new guild in 24 hours....besides, I know I would be highly pissed if I spent REAL money to buy a guild house and was suddenly hospitalized for 30 days due to a heart attack and return only to find my guild house had been taken from me. I forsee a lot of abuse on this, not to mention potential litigation.....many countries prevent TOS from this very practice whether its in them or not (including the EU)....

[Domesday]

This was my point from an earlier thread and I was much reviled by the masses. Nonetheless, I continue to agree with you.

I find this topic amusing....if the leader is gone for X amount of time, nothing is preventing the remaining active members from departing and forming a new guild in 24 hours....besides, I know I would be highly pissed if I spent REAL money to buy a guild house and was suddenly hospitalized for 30 days due to a heart attack and return only to find my guild house had been taken from me. I forsee a lot of abuse on this, not to mention potential litigation.....many countries prevent TOS from this very practice whether its in them or not (including the EU)....

[Windwalker2012]

See my other post - the individual accepting the leadership position must have their own guild house and the leader who is deposed retains theirs.....

[Moonlime]

See my other post - the individual accepting the leadership position must have their own guild house and the leader who is deposed retains theirs.....

That's good and as long as the guild leader retains control of this and does some pre-planning should anything happen, this feature might be OK in the end. I have seen 2 new guilds form over the past year as a result of inactive leaders so that's the other option too. Who knows, this feature might have helped those guilds.