Great news! You guys are on a roll!

I see where you're coming from. It's hard to read these posts in context because often times I'm responding to multiple things. So the earlier post of mine was responding to the question "why let crafters craft top-tier items, because if you do that, ppl won't raid, ranked, etc. -- they'll just quickly craft?" And my response to that was if you make crafting a separate, time-consuming process, then players (those w/out unlimited time) will really have to make a choice between choosing to craft or choosing to play the hardest content. The presumption being that players who enjoy Ops, ranked, etc. would rather do that than craft if it was a true either/or. The post you're responding to above, follows my earlier response and addresses a point made by someone else that crafting mats should be gated behind the most challenging content. In responding to that (tied into my earlier response), the point here is that putting mats behind the hardest content collapses crafting down into a side activity for hardcore players, rather than a separately viable gameplay option (as it was in the past) for those who don't do those activities. Now, I do hold this view in general, and would be willing to flesh it out further later. But in this context, I'm still addressing the point of allowing crafters to craft top-tier items -- and how gating doesn't have to be limited to hardest content (it can be gated by time spent, for example). Does that make sense?

What's In a Coin? (a play by J-) Boss: "Congrats everyone! We want to make sure you all feel appreciated no matter what job you do here. And no matter whether you're a red vest, a green vest, or a blue vest. So starting next week, we're going to be offering everyone Happy Coins as rewards for their work." Worker: "Thanks boss! What are Happy Coins?" Boss: "Happy Coins allow you to purchase stuff from the shop, but especially Elixirs of Happiness (EoH). And we all know how much everyone loves EoH, amirite? Worker: "You betcha boss, I love me some EoH!" Grump: "Nobody cares about anything else but EoH!" Worker: "So how do we get Happy Coins?" Grump: "You mean, EoH don't you?" Worker: "No, I literally mean Happy Coins." Grump: "And by that, you mean EoH!" Worker: (look at this guy) Boss: "That's the beauty folks. You can earn Happy Points for doing any jobs in the company. The more Happy Points you have, the greater the Happy Coins you can get for your work. Worker: "So wait, Happy Coins and Happy Points?" Grump: "You mean EoH - stop saying Happy Coins!:mad:" Boss: "If you have 100 Happy Points and you do and hour of assembly line, you'll get 1 Happy Coin. If you have 200 Happy Points, and you do an hour of assembly line, you'll get 2 Happy Coins. Harder jobs earn Happy Points faster that easier ones too. We want you to be able to do any job here and get rewarded." Worker: "This all sounds great! I'm gonna try out docking bay work with a blue vest, instead of my red vest! I'm getting bored with the red vest." Boss: "Ahhh...that's the thing. If you change vests, you'll have to wear that vest for 75 days to get the 75-day badge before you start earning Happy Points (Or maybe not, we're not ready to say yet:p)" Grump: "You mean EoH! Stop saying Happy Points! :mad:" Worker: "Dude, no one is talking about EoH. We literally mean Happy Points and Happy Coins." Grump: "That's what I said, EoH!" Worker: (this guy). So lemme get this straight. If I work docking bay in this red vest, I will get Happy Points--" Grump: "--EoH--" Worker: "--I will get Happy Points right away no matter what job I do. But if I change to a blue vest, I have to wait 75 days to get Happy Points even if I do the exact same job I was doing in my red vest with the 75-day badge?" Boss: (silence) Grump: "Because endgame" Worker: "Huh?" Grump: "Sorry, wrong play. I mean EoH! Raar, everything is about EoH!" Boss: (silence) Worker: "So that means if I want to work in the Garden of Happiness, I have to wait 75 days before I can start getting Happy Points for that?" Boss: (silence) Grump: "Yep. You know you can't work in the Garden once you have the 75-day badge. Who cares about the Garden anyway?! I don't work there anymore, so who cares? EoH! FTW!" Worker: "But I love the Garden. And all of the new guys work there. And boss says they want us to be rewarded for working anywhere in the company we want to work. But who wants to work there now if we have to wait 75 days till we can get Happy Points for it? If they got rid of the 75-day requirement, then we could really work anywhere we wanted." Grump: "You know you're only saying that because you want EoH. That's the only thing you care about. For you, this is all about EoH. Because since Happy Points become Happy Coins and Happy Coins buy EoH, you must only care about this because you want EoH!" Worker: "Wait whaaa? Bruh, you do realize I have every vest already, each with 75-day badges, and if this was about EoH, I could just swap into one of those...You know what? Nevermind." Boss: (silence) Grump: "EoH, EoH, EoH, EoH, EoH!!!" Tl:dr: The moral of the play is that Grump is unable to distinguish between the concept of wanting all jobs to be a viable path to Happy Coins from the concept of the utility of Happy Coins themselves once they're obtained. Would Worker's point change if Happy Coins couldn't be used for Elixirs of Happiness, but instead only for other items in the shop (like decorations)? Hint: No, it wouldn't.

Thanks for the post Dan! Can you please get us an answer on whether the Renown Crates, RXP, and new currency will be available for characters starting at character level 1? Thanks.

Take a look at the article just posted. It doesn't mention anything about the character level. There will be Renown Crates, and they will be viable from Rank 1 (which is nice). But it doesn't say whether this will happen at level 1 or not. I really hope others can see why having to wait for these until level 75 (again, where a level 75 character can be playing the exact same content as a level one player) will be bad for pre-75 game play. There's really no logic to block this off at level 75, given the way the game is now set to make all content viable...

Lol, umkay

You can gate crafting in other ways. In the earlier game, it was gated by time/resources. Time, in that it took hours of RNG RE'ing to get the best schematics. I was one who got every schematic and all levels, for all skills -- and then crafted every purple in the game and sold them on GTN. It was a full-time job. Resources, in that the rare, purple mats used to come from running and critting high level crafting missions. This also was time-consuming (and costly).Gating the mats behind hardest content actually undermines crafting as a gameplay alternative and defeats the purpose (it really just adds in a pointless side activity: play for the mat for the item you want to craft, then craft the item you want to play for:confused:) The players focused on these crafing (done right) will not be able to focus on end-game, hardcore content -- or practically any time-consuming content. It's nearly a full time job - when I did this (and made a truckload), I didn't have time to do anything else, and I enjoyed every second of it! Now if the hardcore player wants to get my rare, top-tier, crafted item they will have to earn by playing or pay major credits for it. Either is net beneficial to the game. But crafting it themselves isn't an option. That's why it all works....

This may very well be true. But I don't think it was because they were focusing resources on the "hard core 37%" -- in fact, I'd argue that group has the same complaint as above. So this point, well-taken, still speaks to something different....

I'm in the 63% FTR . But you misunderstood the point I was making -- I wasn't making the contributions mutually exclusive, nor saying we (the 63) need only scraps -- that's an over-read (underread?). What I'm saying is that if that 37% is as described, there are numerous, rational economic reasons to focus on delivering content that they would want, even at a higher customer-acquisition cost (CAC). It's an economics argument. Here's an (simple) illustration. Let's assume (for argument sake) both groups bring the same proportional spend, feedback, etc. To keep the math simple, let's say there are 100 total players and each brings $10/month of total "value." 37 "hard core" and 63 "everyone else." Let's also say that the monthly cost of delivering enough content that would keep the 63 happy is $2/player/month. But for the hardcore (37), it's 5$/player/month (and assume they won't sub w/out this additional content). For one year, it costs the studio $1512 to deliver content that satisfies the 63 players. And from that, they'll bring in $6048/year net (7560-1512). The cost of delivering content to the remaining 37 is $2220/year (roughly a 1/3 increase in cost). And for that, the studio nets $2,220 (4440 - 2220) per year. Even with the higher CAC, the studio has the chance to bring in 36% more net gains/year -- no smart company leaves that on the table. And even if you raised the CAC for these 37 hardcore players to $6, 7, 8... a month, it would still be worth the additional spend. In many cases (and this is beyond the scope here) it may even be worth "buying" that 37% at a "loss". I hope it's clear that the concept is basically true even if the 37% is actually 24% or 15%, albeit that it becomes less true the smaller the percentage we're talking about. (Also, please, for the sake of sanity, this is just an illustration and by no means is meant to be representative or accurate -- just merely to illustrate a concept). This is all to say that if the 37% number is accurate, then it's actually substantial economically, and it really makes a great deal of sense for any company to invest the extra resources it would take to capture that group, so long as that didn't alienate the main group (and almost all of the data shows that it doesn't), and so long as the company is getting more value than cost out of that additional group....

Adding my $0.02. As a long-time crafter (for a couple years, I did nothing but craft -- no other content at all), I can say that I'm happy to see crafting is back in focus. It's probably my single favorite thing in the game when it's viable (and it has been gutted majorly over the years). But for crafting to be successful and viable as a genuine gameplay alternative activity -- one that can keep players occupied for long periods of time, it needs three basic things: Crafting cannot require any other advanced gameplay (e.g. PvP, Ops, etc.) to be viable - crafters need to be able to obtain mats by doing "regular" game activities, GTN, trading, etc. Crafting must otherwise require substantial non-gameplay time and resources, making it truly an "alternative" - crafting as a gameplay alternative (I recognize for some like me it is the gameplay) has to require time and resources that someone dedicated to Ops, ranked PvP, HM FPs, etc. wouldn't/couldn't have the time to do. Back in the day, for example, this would require hours and hours of RE'ing for schematics (even before the 60% RNG guarantee). It was painful, but when you got a the rare purple schematic, it was golden. It also requires all the crafting skills on one account (needing multiple toons). No one doing hard core activities has that kind of time, or at least they have to make some choices. Crafting as a concurrent "side-activity" to hardcore play is the death of crafting--it must be an alternative. Crafting must be able to offer the "best," i.e. highly-desirable, items in the game - again, one of the things that kills crafters is when our items aren't desirable. This doesn't per see mean BiS (though in the new horizontal system it does mean highest-tier), but crafted items have to be desirable by the players who don't have the time (see point #2) to craft. If not, again, it may as well not be in game. There are other nice-to-have things as well (for example, restoring gear value to leveling) but the three above are necessary conditions without which will make crafting nothing more than an annoying side activity....

Great points overall, but this one is especially good. I really do find that the best people at what they do, in anything, tend not to be elitists at all, for the reasons above (and by analogy similar reasons in other contexts)....

This is a good point. I pointed out two general categories but there are a number of "hybrids" of the two. This case though seems to be just pure horizontal which is really just an extreme version of ends-based/horizontal gearing. A game like this would really have to keep content fresh or have rich replayability in order to keep people coming back....

I'll assume the numbers above are accurate for the purposes of this response (they seem high, but I trust DS ). If these numbers are in fact accurate, I assure you that 37% of a the base is a very large and meaningful number. Alone, 37% is such a substantial number that any business would be insane not to allocate a robust array of resources to serving that population, whether it's clothing sales, TV content, fast food, etc. But even moreso, a business, studio, content creator, etc. wouldn't just look at 63% vs. 37% in the abstract. If 37% of the population is engaging in the "stickiest" and "most lucrative" type of content, then that's an additional reason to focus resources toward that group (even if that content is more expensive to produce). For example, if these groups (the 37%) are more likely to keep long term subs, buy microtransaction items, publish guides, run guilds, provide dev feedback, log in more, play longer, etc. then they are likely to be more lucrative/value-added to the business than any other group. They are literally driving revenue to the venture in so many different ways, more than justifying the investment. Lastly, it is also quite likely that the 63% would pay their money for a wide variety of different types of options, so long as some basic needs were met. If the 63% are likely to pay regardless, but the 37% is only likely to pay if the game delivers the content they are looking for, then this is another reason (additional to, but also separate from the above) to focus substantial resources here. If you have an opportunity to capture 63% regardless of what you put out, then from a business perspective, it really only makes sense to focus resources on capturing that remaining third of population (again, even if it's at a higher customer acquisition cost)...

With the details of 6.0 beginning to be released, I've seen the resumption of the classic "why do casuals need the best gear"? It got me thinking that there seems to be confusion about game design philosophies. But the tl;dr is that for SWTOR 6.0 is the the "why do 'casuals' need BiS gear when they don't do the hardest content?" question is invalid. There are two general philosophies (and many hybrids) of gearing in an MMORPG--and, for the most part, if a game chooses one type, it does so at the expense of the other. Neither is inherently better for the genre, each has its strengths and weaknesses. Type I - Means-Based Gearing (Vertical) In general, this type of gearing encourages a player to progress through content. The idea here is to get better and better gear as a means to being able to tackle the most challenging content. Thus gearing is a reward, but also the means to the reward (i.e. prestige, achievements, sense of accomplishment, etc.). In this type of system, there is a concept of "best in slot" (BiS) which funnels players essentially to a single, pre-determined build type that is generally deemed "best" for the content. In a truly means-oriented, vertical system, BiS gear is really only needed by players tackling the content that requires it. Under this philosophy, only players who need BiS gear will get it, not because it's the reward for completing the hardest content, but because it's gated behind the completion of that content and so only players who take on such content will ever see it. Type II - Ends-Based Gearing (Horizontal) This philosophy of gearing focuses on gearing as the ends itself--the reward. You play more, you play harder, you get better gear as the reward. In this type of gearing system, there is less of a focus on BiS - and in fact may not even have a BiS because the content offered doesn't require any specific gearing level to conquer it. So in an ends-based, horizontal system, it isn't necessary to gate gear behind the most challenging content, because the gear isn't required for it. As such, based on the preference of the devs, any player can be rewarded with gear from any activity and still be consistent with the philosophy. SWTOR 6.0 Focuses on Ends-Based Gearing We don't need to question which type of gearing system SWTOR is using - not for 6.0 at least. They've been clear that they are focusing more on ends-based, horizontal gearing. They've stated this multiple times, including in recent livestream (~25:30):

Maybe in the "The Eternal Alliance Needs To End" thread? Btw, thanks and keep up the good work Vulkk!

Appreciate the response, btw. But just to clarify - one of the things that the Master's Datacron does is level you out of low/mids PvP, which as I mentioned is a game within the game that's really enjoyable for a certain group of players. That, and the MD is immersion breaking for RP (at least for me). Having all abilities at lvl 1 when you're a padawan is just odd (for me). But yea, I don't see the downside to starting the RXP and currency acquisition at level 1...

Not About Gear As to being argumentative, I felt as if you were. But then I saw this last part and I understand. So, on this we're cool. I'm not trying to argue, not trying to prove anything. I actually hope I'm wrong about my interpretation of the livestream. But again, I don't see how I can be clearer that I'm not talking about gear. Even taking the parts you quoted that are "riddled" (i've edited them out for simplicity), I'm repeatedly talking about "RXP" and "currency". Over and over and over again: "RXP" and "currency." I actually went back and looked at the post and the only times I mention the word "gear" is in the section on "counter arguments" that I wanted to address up front. I don't see how it can be any clearer that I'm not focusing on gear than the fact that I don't even use the word. So again, this really is not about gear, other than the fact I suppose since this is an MMO - everything is about gear in some way. If that's your point, fine. Noted. But let me try again (since you say I've done a "very poor job") to explain what this is about. Different Rewards for the Same Gameplay Let me offer an illustration that you can think about over the rest of the post. Starting with GC (and especially with the Master's Datacron), you could take a toon, start it at level 70, and do nothing but base class stories from Tython to Corellia and earn CXP, UCs, crates, etc. just doing this content, i.e. without doing "endgame" content. Another player, doing the exact same content, but doing it at level 1-69 wouldn't earn any of these things. So again, 'endgame' and 'max-level' are not synonyms. The devs intentionally wanted people to be incentivized to play any content they wanted to in the game -- and that's a good goal. But doing the same content and getting nothing does not create the same incentives as doing that content and getting at least something. This made doing content pre-70 feel unnecessarily walled off, and discouraging. The Base Game Playstyle What Trixx, Lhance, and others have pointed out is that there is a playstyle out there (I'm not alone with it) that involves re-rolling toons and trying new things in the base game. For me, it's replaying class stories, leveling slowly, doing low/mid PvP. Low/mid PvP was one of the most fun parts of the game for me (as someone with very very little time to play) because I could try out new classes and styles while leveling. It's also worth noting that low/mids PvP requires a different set of tactical considerations, and actually is a unique gameplay option in it's own right from lvl 70 PvP. That's what's kept me subbed since launch. If this isn't your playstyle, you may be unable to empathize. I know many people think of this game as the game after level 70 (usually for endgame "content" reasons). I get that. And understand it. But there is a substantial portion of the player base (not a majority prolly, but more than a trivial minority), that think of this game mostly as vanilla class stories, heroics, and mid/lows PvP. For us, the game kinda dies after reaching max level, and so we re-roll and start over. We enjoy this playstyle. But, like many, we also enjoy parts of the "endgame" so we'd like easily pivot to the endgame (where it actually would be more about gear) whenever we decided to use our currencies and not feel like our previous play was 'wasted.' This is quintessential "play as you want." Why 5.0 Was a Step Backward for the Base Game Now, recall the illustration above. The principle problem with 5.0--for my playstyle--is that there were new game currencies, rewards, ranks, and XP that were only available after level 70. To be clear, we've always had gear that was only available at max level (hence why this isn't about gearing), and we've always had content that was only max-level (hence why this isn't an "endgame" issue). What 5.0 did that was new, and IMO a step backwards, was that it: a) separated the ability to earn game currencies from pre-max level players, and b) actively discouraged playing base game content before being a 70 (for at least the reason in "a"). Which leads to the final point. This Simple "Fix" Hurts No One This has had a substantial negative impact on the game pre-70, particularly in low/mid PvP, but not only there. It made leveling to 70 feel like a chore, because, unlike pre-GC, you couldn't progress your toon. And this 'gating' doesn't do anything to make the game better for people of other playstyles, so it's one of the many areas where the fix I'm requesting doesn't harm anyone, but it could help some. I usually advocate for these. So my ask is to please make the currencies and RXP available from level 1....

You're still not getting what the OP is about. It's not about whether GR is primary, supplemental, etc. It's not about gearing...

Whether it was your intent or not, that was funny:D....

I've argued many times for a separate unranked arena queue. This is a slightly different point from the OP (I actually do like having arenas mixed in the regs queue too). My reasoning for this is because we need a place to be able to test out and learn the arena playstyle before jumping into ranked. This is especially true when trying new ACs, etc. Right now, no matter how good you may be in regular 8v8 maps, you can't learn all that much that's useful for ranked because arenas are a completely different playstyle....

I emphasized the white part from your post above. This is actually the question here. It's the point. And it was not answered in the livestream (as you agree with). I didn't miss any details from the stream. I watched it closely. The portion that starts at 46:40, where they explain what "play as you want" means, leads in with a slide that refers to "acquiring items at 75" which strongly suggests (but does not prove) that the RXP begins at level 75, as it is today with CXP. Would love to be wrong here. And I'm not really talking about gearing in the abstract, or gearing just for endgame (if you get a chance, please read the OP). I'm talking specifically about the effect of introducing a new XP and currency that can't be earned prior to 75. And how that discourages players from doing pre-75 activities such as lowbies PvP and FPs. There's no reason why an item-rating based gearing system can't start awarding gear, giving RE opportunities for that gear, and allowing the the RXP and vendor currencies (obviously in smaller amounts) that will useful at max-level to begin accruing at level 1. We've had this before too...

SMASHED BY A MACK TRUCK I stopped playing (but kept subbing) with the announcement of Ossus because [reasons] (stated many times in earlier posts and irrelevant to this post). I've logged in a couple times since then, lurked around here on and off, and generally just stayed loosely tracking. But the rededication by the studio to investing in this game and taking feedback has been refreshing, and so I finally watched the the livestream which was overall great. I pretty much loved every single part of it--everything--until a mack truck came and blindsided me at ~46:40. It was roadkill for me after that. The runaway truck was a slide that read "Acquiring Items at 75." Alas, it seems that Galactic Renown XP (RXP) and the "new currency" won't be obtainable until level 75. This is a very bad design decision. For me as a "casual" RPing, story-loving, PvPing, altoholic player, this sort of "RXP-Gating" is game breaking. THE STATE OF AFFAIRS PRE-GALACTIC COMMAND The worst part of GC/5.0 for me was the effect on base/vanilla game play. I cannot emphasize this enough. Prior to 5.0, the base game was integrated with the max-level game. You progressed from level one to the max level, earning better gear, currency, knowledge, crafting, etc. along the way. You could never do everything of course, but that was never the point. For example, in PvP, you could earn comms while leveling that were usable at max-level. In PvE, you could earn crystals that were usable at max level. As a crafter, I could craft and sell the best possible items before reaching level max. This created a seamless connection between leveling and the max-level game. You never felt like leveling/re-rolling was "pointless." XP-GATING AND THE LAW OF UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES 5.0 changed that and erected an arbitrary brick firewall between 1-69 and 70. Until you hit level 70, you couldn't do anything in the base game to earn CXP, currency, etc. toward the max-level game play. And then, at 70, you started all over again with CXP from level 1. Now it will be RXP, and you will be starting from scratch at RXP level 1 after grinding 74 levels (or maybe buying a Master's Datacron). This is not trivial. The legacy of 5.0 is that it created two separate games. One that's pre-70, and then one that happens post-70. And with 6.0, you'll now have to level 74 levels before anything you earn pre-75 counts for anything. For example, this means that low/mids PvP will remain shriveled as happened with 5.0. Low/mids PvP is an enjoyable part of the game for many people, but why invest in it if you can't earn any useful rewards/XP/currency from it? That's not a hypothetical question--Galactic Command killed low/mids PvP (and many of us have shown our data for this in the past). This isn't just about PvP, it's about class stories, FPs, GSF, heroics, and all the awesome stuff in the base game. It's all "unrewarding" (back off you "the game itself is the reward" types:p) until the arbitrary level 75? Why does this need to be the case? END GAME AND MAX LEVEL ARE NOT SYNONYMS This should be obvious, but it's worth pointing out that "max-level" game play isn't necessarily synonymous with "end game." It depends on what one considers "end game." If it's merely the arbitrary gate between a level and a piece of content, then that's one thing. But if "end game" is that point in the game where you've completed the story, side quests, low/mid PvP, knowing the class, or whatever else, and then are ready to take on "recyclable" and more challenging content, then that's totally separate from any arbitrary character level. A newer player could reach 70 at some point well before finishing all the story, knowing nothing about the end game content. And a seasoned player might be able to buy a Master's Datacron and immediately jump into ranked PvP without touching the story. And everything in between. So "max level" is not some inherently meaningful transition point, some indicator of achievement or readiness. It's just an arbitrary number that by itself indicates nothing. So there is no good reason to lock ("AND ENJOY IT") IS IMPLIED IN PLAY WHAT YOU WANT Devs, you are claiming a goal of "Play What You Want." This is a great goal. For me, and I know I'm not alone, the vanilla class stories are the best part of the game. My favorite thing to do is re-roll a new toon, starting at level one, and then slowly level that toon through class story, heroics, planetary arcs, FPs, and lowbies/midbies PvP. But if I can't earn the 6.0 goodies by enjoying the parts of the game I love--things we've been rewarded for in the past--then "play what you want' rings hollow. I'll try to address some of the weaker counter arguments up front: "But leveling is faster than ever before" - on hand hand, it's not fast enough if your playstyle includes class stories. These basically have a speed limit associated with them if your goal is to complete them (as an RPer, that is a goal for me). But on the other hand, leveling is too fast if you want to play low/mid PvP. I actually use the White Acute Module so that I don't level too fast. "But Master's Datacron" - when I first saw this, I was like 'i'm gonna buy tons of these". But I didn't because I soon realized it blocks you out of low/mids PvP. And it's immersion breaking (for me) to have all my LvL 70 abilities on Tython. (Now, if they offered a datacron that allowed you to start earning RXP and currency at level one, there might be some appeal in that:rolleyes:) "But you just wanna get gear the easy way" - yeah, maybe. I dunno. I guess that's the meaning of "play as you want"? "But you should just play for the inherent fun, not for gear" - this one...is just not worth responding to. So in sum, it shouldn't matter if everyone agrees with my views of how I like to play the game. Play what you want must imply "enjoy" playing what you want and I enjoy playing from level 1. Does that mean that every idiosyncrasy has to be indulged by the devs? No. But I'm far from alone in thinking that the vanilla game here is fantastic and integral. And so at least that should be included in "Play What You Want ("And Enjoy It")... Tl;dr: devs, please drop the RXP-gating firewall at level 75 and allow us to earn the new XP and currency from level one (and if you've already planned on doing that, and I misunderstood:o, then bravo and thanks!)

Eric confirmed this today on the livestream. ~30:03.

This is a scenario where it's helpful to think about what the goal from the studio's perspective is. To start, a guild is not viewed by BW as belonging to any one person. This is why 4 different accounts are required to form a guild. The guild belongs to all the members, and leadership of the guild is determined by those players. Secondly, members are not kicked out of a guild when they go inactive. All that happens is that the guild master changes. Now it is true that ehe new leader can decide to boot you. But if that new leader is a friend, he/she would say "happy you're back and healthy, here's the guild leadership back again." Problem solved. If your guild members are not friendly, then you are really just rolling the dice that nothing like this ever happens. This latter scenario is beyond the control of any studio. It's wonderful that you're out of the hospital, and I hope you're doing well. But there is a good reason it's this way. There are certain powers that only the guild master has. For example, only the guild master can boot people. There are many other roles too. If someone is gone for a long time (e.g. >30 days) then the other members of the guild (highest ranking sub who's logged in recently, then preferred, then F2P) takes over. Now let's imagine a different scenario. Say you didn't ever come back to the game (for whatever reason). All the other members would now be stuck in limbo with a guild with no master -- and obviously bad outcome. So there has to be a mechanism to automatically transfer leadership in these situations...

The irony is strong here...