Suggestion: guild names in the LFM list

[Gkar]

This idea can only help the grouping process.

[gfunk]

I think this causes more drama...but if it is deemed necessary, please do NOT make it like that picture in the OP. Maybe just have it like the Who tab but instead of having their location underneath their names in a smaller font, it would have their guild name.

Personally, I have lots of issues with this though but if it HAD to be done...:P

It just hands itself to more elitism...

Do you really want an impatient power gamer mixing with some green players simply because he couldn't tell the difference in the LFM? This change would further enable players to find link-minded individuals with whom to quest/raid. it makes a lot of sense... and I would make it exactly like the picture in the OP. Nice work Garth!

I am strongly in favor of the idea.. it would save me checking through the who list (which I always do before joining)

[Jendrak]

After thinking about it more I gotta say I think you wrong on this one. There is already a huge rift between certain groups of players (take your pic of any of the numerous LFM complaint threads) and adding this is only going to fan the flames. The only "good" thing (if you can call it that) is reverse exclusion aka "I'm not joining those noobs" And in any case it's still gonna cause more problems than it solves.

[morticianjohn]

I think this causes more drama...but if it is deemed necessary, please do NOT make it like that picture in the OP. Maybe just have it like the Who tab but instead of having their location underneath their names in a smaller font, it would have their guild name.

Personally, I have lots of issues with this though but if it HAD to be done...:P

It just hands itself to more elitism...

It's not like you don't know what guild they're coming from anyway. I can see this saving people on griefing. Especially if they included the guild names on the application to an LFM also. I sometimes see player joins group, party leader finds out which guild they're in, player gets booted. Or another example, I joined a guild run as one of three puggers. We get to the quest entrance the other two puggers immediately drop group and send me a warning about the guilds reputation. This type of thing could be avoided with the op's suggestion so.....

/signed on this suggestion

Include it for applicants as well.

[Seamonkeysix]

I like it. I don't see it as a form of elitism at all. In building or joining a group, sometimes you have no idea who somebody is or who their alts are. There are plenty of guilds, however, that you know raid a lot and have overall competent players or people that you like to group with.

I don't see a down side.

/signed

[Jendrak]

It's not like you don't know what guild they're coming from anyway. I can see this saving people on griefing. Especially if they included the guild names on the application to an LFM also. I sometimes see player joins group, party leader finds out which guild they're in, player gets booted. Or another example, I joined a guild run as one of three puggers. We get to the quest entrance the other two puggers immediately drop group and send me a warning about the guilds reputation. This type of thing could be avoided with the op's suggestion so.....

/signed on this suggestion

Include it for applicants as well.

You do know that all join request already show the guild name so any group leader who has certain guilds he doesn't like should probably use the actual grouping window and not just the text he gets in party chat.

[Dawnsfire]

I personally don't have a problem with it (I suspect alot of people already do it without Turbines help anyways) but I doubt Turbine wants to make it easier to self segregate. Since they are actively trying to bring new people into DDO I would be surprised if they made a change that could make it notably easier to exclude them.

[Chaos000]

This idea has some merit.

Think about it this way, if a person is unguilded chances are a the person forming the party is likely to type in chat "anyone know so-and-so?"

The more information we have the better. As a healer I would like to know when I can expect to drink mana pots for completion or not. At least I'd rather not go into it blind.

[SilkofDrasnia]

/signed

[Symerith]

/signed great idea.




/rant on
man... smfh. you guys with the elitism whining all the time drive me nuts. any successful/accomplished group, guild or player who simply prefers to run with others of like mind/ability and have the capability/reputation of getting the job done are always considered elitists by those whose fail rate is higher than they'd like it to be. usually this undeserved moniker is proliferated by people who have received tells from such groups like :sry. you need more hp for eadq. 230hp is a guaranteed death here" or sry, a 35 dc is simply not enough to do anything in echrono" and "sry, this is an elite tod run. you absolutely need a bossbeater or we can't accept you'
if many of these self proclaimed elitists haters stopped looking for the easy button or released that idea of automatic entitlement ddo would be a much better place. stop demanding and start earning your respect through thoughtfulness, hard work, perseverance and determination.
/rant off

an idea like this is great for the multitude of reasons already mentioned. grats on conceiving it. I for one hope it gets applied asap.

Totally agreed.

/Signed.

[Rumbaar]

Not sure what to think about this idea??? Seems like everyone wants it to either avoid certain guilds or (for lack of a better term) stalk the popular ones. Just seems like socially acceptable griefing mechanic to me and thats scary.

Yeah just like Turbine putting HP/SP in clear view of every party member now. Didn't you know Turbine condones and supports player griefing and ostracism now.

But seriously I support more info in the LFM.

[altrocks]

/signed

All of the reasons for it have been given and they're all excellent.

To anyone saying that it would be a griefing tool, you can always click the "Anonymous" checkbox on the Who tab. Problem solved.

[Jendrak]

Yeah just like Turbine putting HP/SP in clear view of every party member now. Didn't you know Turbine condones and supports player griefing and ostracism now.

But seriously I support more info in the LFM.

And I said the same thing about that and look what happened there

[Book_O_Dragons]

I hate this idea the HP/SP numbers are an actual gameplay factor while guilds are mainly a social entity as to grouping purposes. Guilds are many different individuals while HP/SP are possibly the same between players at different skill levels.

[redspecter23]

I like this idea. Really it just speeds up a process you could be doing manually anyway. Either I can use the who tab to check guilds or I could just find their location and walk up to them and check. This just saves me time in situations where I would want to know a guild beforehand. There are some guilds that I prefer not to group with. I don't want to be that guy that joins and then has to say "sorry, I don't group with you." and then leave.

[AmatsukaIncarnate]

I don't think it encourages elitism. Another option would be to put 'Guild 1' and 'Guild 2' and 'Guild 3' so it's not about the guilds but about the same guild... but I really think that's just making it overly complex.

I find the location really useful - especially when a raid is forming, nice to know if people are ready or on their way or on their airship still (i.e. do I have time to buff myself).

How about this:



Garth

Yeah I like the layout of that better. Its not that I want this to REPLACE the location (cause yes, I find it extremely useful as well). I just don't want the menu to become overly large laterally because my screen isn't that big

I'm not sure why I got neg rep'd on my previous post but okay...

[Matuse]

Just seems like socially acceptable griefing mechanic to me and thats scary.

This is nothing that doesn't already take place. Putting the guild name in the LFM just means people waste less time doing /who searches on members.

Nothing will actually change about who groups with who.

[GermanicusMaximus]

The only "good" thing (if you can call it that) is reverse exclusion aka "I'm not joining those noobs".

I have to admit, I prescreen every LFM I join now.

I used to be willing to group with everyone. At this point, I save time by simply black listing entire guilds. But its hardly the case mentioned by Jendrak. In fact, its the exact opposite. I blacklist the self appointed uber elitists who actively work to undermine our sense of community.

The last thing I want to do is jump into a quest and see I'd be healing a bunch of people who I'd prefer would just crash and burn, and just perhaps, reacquire some small sense of humility they desperately need.

[Robai]

Showing information is almost always a good thing.
Yes, that includes showing guild names.

But I'm against blacklisting the whole guilds. You can blacklist a person, but why the whole guild? In a guild there are so many different players. Blacklisting the whole guild makes no sense.

One person removed me from group just before EVoN6 (while we all went to take buffs) and he said that I should understand it, because he had to accept his guildmate instead.
Well, that was really annoying. Did I blacklisted him? Well, I added him to friend list and kept an eye on him. Despite that I accepted him to my group for several Epic runs and never regret it (he was really good dps). So, why would I decline him? Moreover, why would I decline his guild? Some of his guildmates are really nice people.


Yes, please, the following would be really useful:

I find the location really useful - especially when a raid is forming, nice to know if people are ready or on their way or on their airship still (i.e. do I have time to buff myself).

How about this:

[Ungood]

While I totally disagree with the OP about the Guild Make up, and the more of the same guild members equals better run.

However, if I, a member of a very small guild, slap together a rag tag band for a raid run, this little list of who's guild will exclude people who feel the way the OP does, or others on this topic. It is like reverse elitism. I get rid of them before they ever hit the LFM. That is not a bad thing in my mind.

Since I have no intention of "working" on something that by it's inception, design and existence is nothing but a paltry distraction from life, if I wanted to "work" more, I'd just stay at work and not play games. So, maybe overall, this is a good thing.

To anyone saying that it would be a griefing tool, you can always click the "Anonymous" checkbox on the Who tab. Problem solved.

To be honest going Anon typically means auto-decline, just saying.