Renown Drop on low lvl guild

[mudfud]

Perhaps there is a bug involving changing guilds and counting as a recent departure from more then one guild?

I remember long long ago when guild renown first came out. Could be mistaken but pretty sure it was a dev who said constantly changing guild would shut off renown (set time) kinda like how it shuts off for doing quests WAY below your level. Pretty sure it was implemented around the same time as the renown for quests got fixed (lvl 20 no longer ransacked ie: irestone for renown)

[Cyr]

I remember long long ago when guild renown first came out. Could be mistaken but pretty sure it was a dev who said constantly changing guild would shut off renown (set time) kinda like how it shuts off for doing quests WAY below your level. Pretty sure it was implemented around the same time as the renown for quests got fixed (lvl 20 no longer ransacked ie: irestone for renown)

That might be true. I would be curiuos as to why this was a desirable game mechanic though.

[Hendrik]

That might be true. I would be curiuos as to why this was a desirable game mechanic though.

Stop someone from 'harassing' guilds by joining, gaining renown and leaving with it, over and over?

[Rydlic]

I would not go so far as to say desirable, but it could be used as a way to 'punish' those who either get booted alot or just want to keep jumping. Also, your id is being tied to another guild as penalty, i can see the logistics of it not wanting to handle the same acct id for renown drop and just tag the acct.

Give it 14 days and you should see and return would be my guess.

[Cyr]

Stop someone from 'harassing' guilds by joining, gaining renown and leaving with it, over and over?

That is illogical.

You have to be invited to a guild and if you leave you still leave some of your renown in that guild. Someone who did this over and over again would have another much more important aspect then guild renown from stopping them in the future, word of mouth.

[Chai]

That might be true. I would be curiuos as to why this was a desirable game mechanic though.

It encourages people to find a guild and stay put, rather than leaving and rejoining when its convenient.

Its also blocking the OPs ability to get re-established after someone came back after a three month hiatus and destroyed their guild.

This whole renown business is all fine and dandy when everyone is cool, but all it takes is one person to forget taking their meds one morning and a years worth of work can go down the drain in a single decision. Theres no reason to hand players a griefing button in a semi anonymous gaming world. Its just asking for something bad to happen.

[Cyr]

It encourages people to find a guild and stay put, rather than leaving and rejoining when its convenient.

Doesn't the guild renown penalty and recent departure penalty already do a much better job of encouraging people from hopping in and out of a guild?

[mudfud]

Recent Departures affect guild size also, maybe that's why. After 14 days it resets, maybe thats the same with constantly leaving like ransacking.

[9Crows]

thinks its 14 days recent departures get figured in to decay when i roll up vets for favor farming get between 1 to 5k a run out of irestone scaled at n/h/e first couple runs with fresh toons through new quests seem to drop good renown

[Chai]

Doesn't the guild renown penalty and recent departure penalty already do a much better job of encouraging people from hopping in and out of a guild?

The deactivation mechanism is more absolute. The penalty can be made up for in a small amount of time in most cases if someone were to leave without hard feelings, and if they join up again then leave again they arent gaining much renown in a day or two, so the penalty isnt that harsh.

Stopping or curbing renown gain is a much stiffer penalty. It is also another potential griefing mechanism. If someone wanted to screw a guild, they could have an officer alt keep tossing a member alt mail invites and keep leaving and re-entering the guild until this happened, then remove a bunch of people (if applicable) then bounce. Now the guild not only has much less renown, but it also has no way to make it up for a period of time.

When these mechanisms were put into place, I feel that not enough thought was put into the griefing potential these tools could grant one person. I see Turbines side, as to why they would put something like this in, but I also see the HUGE griefing potential many of these things could cause, and I dont feel the ends justify the means. All it takes is one person to get ticked off, and the entire guild is screwed, as seen in this instance with the OPs dilema.

[mudfud]

The deactivation mechanism is more absolute. The penalty can be made up for in a small amount of time in most cases if someone were to leave without hard feelings, and if they join up again then leave again they arent gaining much renown in a day or two, so the penalty isnt that harsh.

Stopping or curbing renown gain is a much stiffer penalty. It is also another potential griefing mechanism. If someone wanted to screw a guild, they could have an officer alt keep tossing a member alt mail invites and keep leaving and re-entering the guild until this happened, then remove a bunch of people (if applicable) then bounce. Now the guild not only has much less renown, but it also has no way to make it up for a period of time.

When these mechanisms were put into place, I feel that not enough thought was put into the griefing potential these tools could grant one person. I see Turbines side, as to why they would put something like this in, but I also see the HUGE griefing potential many of these things could cause, and I dont feel the ends justify the means. All it takes is one person to get ticked off, and the entire guild is screwed, as seen in this instance with the OPs dilema.

While I agree with your thoughts +1, and how it can get out of hand, that's why Turbine made us as players in charge of who we allow in a guild, who we make officers. So the penalty if this is why should only be on our heads. Though they could reiterate it somewhere that it will happen. Goes to show that only trusted people should be made officers so this doesn't happen.

In the case of the OP, he left/dropped/dismissed from his original guild, but nobody then told them to create "another" guild to "discuss" what there permanent guild will be called, then drop/disband/kick everyone from said guild and go into a 3rd permanent guild.

The only thing that Turbine should do differently is have something stated somewhere (compendium,faq) that if this is the case that it will happen, so for future references more people will know.

[Cyr]

The deactivation mechanism is more absolute. The penalty can be made up for in a small amount of time in most cases if someone were to leave without hard feelings, and if they join up again then leave again they arent gaining much renown in a day or two, so the penalty isnt that harsh.

Stopping or curbing renown gain is a much stiffer penalty. It is also another potential griefing mechanism. If someone wanted to screw a guild, they could have an officer alt keep tossing a member alt mail invites and keep leaving and re-entering the guild until this happened, then remove a bunch of people (if applicable) then bounce. Now the guild not only has much less renown, but it also has no way to make it up for a period of time.

When these mechanisms were put into place, I feel that not enough thought was put into the griefing potential these tools could grant one person. I see Turbines side, as to why they would put something like this in, but I also see the HUGE griefing potential many of these things could cause, and I dont feel the ends justify the means. All it takes is one person to get ticked off, and the entire guild is screwed, as seen in this instance with the OPs dilema.

/shudder

Yeah, that would be a nightmare scenario all right. I would think that such behavior when discovered by guild would be grounds for a harrasment complaint and ban for the offender, but the damage would be done and the odds of getting a GM to fix something like that are slim to none.

[TimoteoDeLani]

Can't comment on the whole leaving guild/not getting renown, but I have noticed that I get a lot less renown on my high-level (17+) toons running level-appropriate stuff (Vale, Reaver's Refuge) than I do on my low-level toons for the number of chests I get.

I'm more likely to get Impressive and Legendary on the higher-level toons, but when a single run of Irestone Inlet nets me more renown (via Heroics only) than I got in an entire day with my high-level toons ...

[Chai]

While I agree with your thoughts +1, and how it can get out of hand, that's why Turbine made us as players in charge of who we allow in a guild, who we make officers. So the penalty if this is why should only be on our heads. Though they could reiterate it somewhere that it will happen. Goes to show that only trusted people should be made officers so this doesn't happen.

In the case of the OP, he left/dropped/dismissed from his original guild, but nobody then told them to create "another" guild to "discuss" what there permanent guild will be called, then drop/disband/kick everyone from said guild and go into a 3rd permanent guild.

The only thing that Turbine should do differently is have something stated somewhere (compendium,faq) that if this is the case that it will happen, so for future references more people will know.

I agree its really hard to say that a company should put mechanics in a game that dont allow people to ruin other peoples gaming experience, as it seems rather childish that the company should have to micro-manage peoples behavior. From a business standpoint its practical however, as it keeps the majority happy if not applied to liberally. IMO it beats the situation where if the act right mechanism in someones brain stops functioning correctly for an hour or two one morning, everything people worked toward for a long period of time can just disappear.

In either case, its like a 14 day thing, so its not the end of the world as far as the guild hopping is concerned.

[Kinerd]

Can't comment on the whole leaving guild/not getting renown, but I have noticed that I get a lot less renown on my high-level (17+) toons running level-appropriate stuff (Vale, Reaver's Refuge) than I do on my low-level toons for the number of chests I get.

I'm more likely to get Impressive and Legendary on the higher-level toons, but when a single run of Irestone Inlet nets me more renown (via Heroics only) than I got in an entire day with my high-level toons ...

A single run of Irestone Inlet can get you at most 13 Heroic Deeds, including end reward. It only takes one Impressive Trophy to equal 10 Heroic Deeds. It is simply a fact that higher level content generates more renown if you are getting chests and completions at anywhere near the same rate.

[le_goat]

i remember the devs saying that you can get a certain amount of renown per day? after that it tapers down to nothing.

[achitophel]

I have concluded that there is a guild leveling "soft cap", it seems ot be about 8 levels per day. I remember something vaguely in the past about people selling guilds and i guess this is a turbine fix.

If you have any info or have experienced the "soft cap" for guild leveling, real info would be appreciated - is it level based or xp based or something else ?

Until the end of day 2 in Sabotage it will be hard to see if it is 8 levels per day. We started getting renown again this evening roughly 24 hours after creation.

[TimoteoDeLani]

A single run of Irestone Inlet can get you at most 13 Heroic Deeds, including end reward. It only takes one Impressive Trophy to equal 10 Heroic Deeds. It is simply a fact that higher level content generates more renown if you are getting chests and completions at anywhere near the same rate.

Loot boost weekend.

5-ish runs of the Vale (wilderness only) and I don't know how many runs of the Reaver's Refuge wilderness areas in a day. Total renown was something like 3 Heroics with a level 18 (with Greater Dragonmark of Finding) and a level 17. Plenty of rares, but no chest was ever ransacked. Chest level == 19 (base 16 +2 loot boost +1 finding) for Vale, 20 for Reavers.

1 run of Irestone Inlet elite got me about 15 Heroics with a level 5 and a level 7.

It's anecdotal, and you have no reason to believe me, but that's how it happened. Fortunately I was running for loot, not renown, but I was stunned at how little renown I actually got.

[Kinerd]

I certainly believe you, wildernesses are terrible at generating renown trophies. If you had run Tangleroot Gorge instead of Irestone Inlet, you would have been even more disgusted. On the other hand, if you had been running Inspired Quarter instead of RR wilderness, you would have been up to your ears in Impressives.