I do see that RP played a part in it but you can't tell me that was the only reason. Tell me the names of the big fighters you overlooked or denied ascendance to that wanted it in order to place in your RP ones and I'll give it to you. Honestly, I'll walk off feeling shameful about my assumptions. (Though I'm not sure it completely changes my mind about this whole thing).

And as for Seren...as much as I love you...next to everyone else Gregori & Sarrasri (Nejii was inactive when I first started playing) were the big fighters. I started playing assuming that's why they were VA. Because it's slim-picking there. It's just not a combat-driven organization. Oh and maybe my views are already set because when I was there I remember hearing complaints during raids that one Ascendant was on prime instead of defending (really don't recall who). And I remember thinking...oh, you get raised = you have an obligation to defend and combat.

Nienla

Oh, and to those people who are saying that raising a VA then dropping them for insta-demigod at 500k power loss is a bad thing ... fairly easy to work around. Say you can only drop a VA after they've been raised for 60 RL days, or that they continue to cost you power for that period raised or not, or that you only gain a portion of power back - say 1% per day they've been raised for - capping at 50%. Two RL months is enough to just bash someone up, especially with aetherspace, double xp and achievements especially for someone who's in a position to get 500k power invested in them (and thus probably already a decent level, and with the support of an org in getting demi).

That was annoying.

This thread is utter triumph. I commend both the playerbase and the administration for cooking up such an issue (forums became boring after the death of Rants).

I agree that there should be a cap at Vernal-ship, since inflation in Lusternia is so exponentially staggering already. Upkeep is not the way to go, though - I think the "increasing power cost per ascendant raised" is good, even with a powerdebt for the previously raised ascendants.

You could honestly just cap it at four or something (VA - TA not included) and be done with the issue. I know it won't go that way, though.

Anyone who genuinely thinks this will spread combatants out needs to seriously rethink their position. The differences between guild skill sets is infinitely more potent in impact for influencing where players go and stay than ascendance ever will be. Player grudges/friendships are more likely to play a role in convincing someone to move/stay where they are, especially if orgs are forced to be that much more selective about who they pick.

It's like suggesting that if a big org beats up a small org enough, they will eventually surrender and play out some resolution instead of becoming more and more jaded and just having everyone log in that much less frequently.

Good luck with that.

My two cents:

Sounds to me like the best option would be to split ascendance up into combat and non combat specializations. Though I don't really like the idea of having another type of ascendancy, it might be the easiest solution.

Place a hard cap on the number of 'combat' ascendants to 1 or 2 per org. Give them fear aura, affinity, org rescue and the like. It seems to me that this was what the combat ascendancy was supposed to be originally - someone to rally around in a raid but not something that any one org can stack up in large numbers (not a shot at glom - I'm impressed that you've managed to accumulate so many). Leave the cost to raise at 1 mill and let it bestow demi stats and powers. The demi powers are lost as is all the power if the person quits the org or the council votes to revoke.

Place the cult based ascendancy skills in a different specialization and keep the essence/xp progression of the current ascendancy. If you're not demi when you get it, as you gain xp, you go up in skill ranks. This does not confer demi abilities or bonuses to stats. These ascendants still require power to raise and maintain, leaving it a badge of status and service in the org, but the upkeep is low enough that several can be maintained without too much effort. If you lose this sort of ascendancy, you lose progress through the skillset, but keep the non-demi xp or demi essence you gained while an ascendant.

True ascendants get access to combat and cult based ascendancy, and are not bound to their org.

The only people who lose out this way are top combatants who want the RP cult skills. If you leave it so that they need TA to get these, that becomes a good test of their combat ability and RP skills at mobilizing their org for the Ascendancy event.

There are too many ascendants.

Shocker right? I said it.

Ascendant was a mistake to an extent, and the skills its given have proven highly problematic, to the point wolf totem is still extremely biased (heck HALF of it is worth a dingbat arty, one of the most popular I believe as well, like pogo which is also a totems skill but anyway...).

Instead I re propose the Seal Borne Demigods/Marked Demigods/Fate Demigods.
A demigod can create a bond to a seal/fate for essence, then spend essence into it to develop the bond giving some MINOR ish effects such as minor damage increase for war, health boost for healing, etc. Maybe allow one majorish thing, a passive, and some minor... for instance...

Life/Healing:
+1/2 Con
+Health Regen
+ Heal another of an affliction for eq
+ Heal anothers health for essence
+ Etc

Knowledge might be:
+1/2 int
+Mana regen
+ Improve a random skill of yourself (counts as exceeding trans for damage purposes, does not make thigns like illusions unbreakable)
+ Bless the mind of another, increasing their mental energies even beyond their threshold if they are near their peak.

Etc etc.. more flavour skills to that sort of thing. But nothing like thunderclap or trueheal please.

Would love to give demigods more options and restrict ascendant more

power drain should only come from ascendants for whom org power was actually used to raise

rofl at classic fearaura is a problem, nerf wolf throwback

If the soft cap was moved to allow 5-6 ascendants instead of 3-4, I imagine you'd have a much warmer reception. That way, only the inactives will get dropped as a direct result of the new mechanic. Some non-combatant types might get replaced later, but that would at least be a decision of the orgs and not a hard coded hammer to the face.

EDIT:
1: 0
2: 750
3: 1750
4: 3000
5: 4500
6: 6250
7: 8250
8: 10,500
9: 13,000

That's ... the current proposal. VAs are ones raised with org power. I haven't heard anything touching on costs for TAs, although I suppose I could have missed it in the eight pages of stuff.

It is? Sorry, I tried to slog through 9 pages of posts, but I got about 3 pages in and stopped r eading, so whatever. Carry on

I did raise the point that to the extent ascendants are causing problems TAs are just as important a part of that and as such should screw over their orgs to the same extent. The ability to leave is good enough.

EDIT: P.S placeus has the right idea. Malarious decidedly does not, ahahaha. Blast from the past there.

Xenthos beat Kaervas.

Quite handily, too.

That was, however, the first round. Unless I have my chronology screwed, no-one really knew what ascendance involved then, and most assumed it to be RP-only.

Not to say there aren't other examples, but that one is flawed.

But Kaervas is also an org hopper, and has a bit of a rep from other games. Not the best comparison to make really. (Don't get me wrong, I really like the guy, but I can see where some people might have some issues. I do remember a lot of complaints about him.)

He hopped orgs all of once, ever, to my recollection, as did Xenthos.

...and here I'd just finished calculating a couple of weeks ago that through theater and library alone I've brought about 1,000,000 power to the Mother Tree, so I should be ascended just based on that. How's that for a non-combat way to get ascended. Not that I thought there was the slightest chance of that argument prevailing even before this change, but even so, bah.