Time to Remove Guild Renown Decay

[herzkos]

I agree with Van on this one. Your idea doesn't change anything, it simply relocates and renames the way they system works. The more causal guilds would still not be earning enough renown to get "the best" stuff, and so they would still be whining about it and claiming that the system alienates them. Nothing would change.
As a matter of fact, I expect the more casual guilds would be worse off than they are now, because they'd spend all of their earned renown on top quality hookpoints, just like everyone else would, and they probably wouldn't earn enough renown during their duration to even be able to replenish them after they expired. So they'd have a newly empty ship, no renown to replace expired points, and not enough incoming renown to even attempt it. Eventually they'd save up enough renown to start spending again, only to find out that.... guess what.... they can afford to purchase almost exactly what they have right now.
So the whining would start all over again.

The plateau affect would still appear within guilds under your system, so nothing changes. And I don't think it should change.
Many people are throwing the word "elite" around in this thread. Well guess what? If you want the same amenities that elite players have, you should have to put forth the same amount of effort. This isn't an elitist ideal, it's common sense.
I don't consider myself elitist, nor elite, at all. The difference is that I recognize this fact, and because of that I don't think I deserve the same amenities that the "elite players" receive.

I nonconcur with your assessment. many high level guilds have every buff/shrine they can hold on their ships.
a less active guild would necessarily need to be more choosy with which buffs/shrines they buy.
while having greater resist shrines of all elements are nice to have, a less active guild would not try
to maintain them all. Nor would they likely spring for the 5% xp shrine or in many cases any xp shrine at all.
currently there is no real expense for these shrines. PLAT? pshaw. it's not even an effective sink since you
can earn that much plat in one hour of playtime in some cases.

to me, this is not an argument about "elite" vs non-"elite" players. Nor is it an argument about entitlement.
both are red herrings. This argument is about fun and being able to play/guild with those you want to without
being penalized by a mechanic designed to enforce grind. The system was purposefully set up by turbine to
reward those who spend massively more time in the game. The player's ability is irrelevant, the only thing that
matters is running quest after quest after quest to get those renown rewards. That is fine and their choice, however that choice is more harmful than helpful to the game.

[Aaxeyu]

I would like to see a better system in place that addresses all of the issues associated with guild renown, but I have yet to see it suggested. Forumites do protest the current system, but Im not seeing a master plan outlined for the new better system.

A simple solution to the what you worry about have been suggested already: If you kick someone, you will lose the renown that person had gained.

[Chai]

A simple solution to the what you worry about have been suggested already: If you kick someone, you will lose the renown that person had gained.

This is the current system, and not some new suggestion. So you suggest leaving the direct decay in but taking the indirect decay out.

All this does is makes it so guilds with more active members earn more renown and level faster. Its completely against small intimate guilds. We would still be inviting 1k noobs to farm renown, and booting those that dont contribute. If they didnt earn much renown, theres hardly a penalty for micromanaging them and booting those who dont contribute in order to make room for more headcount, because the single biggest reason not to boot them is that they count against the headcount total for decay reasons. Remove decay and you have the same result I already outlined, with slightly different semantics.

The single big difference is instead of booting most of them once the goal is attained, you let them slide away due to attrition.

The choice is still to tolerate friends who dont contribute or boot friends. The whole idea of changing the system is to avoid those kinds of dilemas. I have yet to see a suggestion that actually does so, other than removing renown completely.

[Chai]

So that could happen now ...

Also, if mass boots are occurring, reps will spread and players can band together. I fail to see this any greater a concern with no decay present.

It cant happen, as booting them all afterward would deleven the guild right back to nada. You could let the noobs slide off due to attrition, but you wouldnt be able to boot them all and keep the guild level with the current system.

[Aaxeyu]

This is the current system, and not some new suggestion. So you suggest leaving the direct decay in but taking the indirect decay out.

All this does is makes it so guilds with more active members earn more renown and level faster. Its completely against small intimate guilds. We would still be inviting 1k noobs to farm renown, and booting those that dont contribute. If they didnt earn much renown, theres hardly a penalty for micromanaging them and booting those who dont contribute in order to make room for more headcount, because the single biggest reason not to boot them is that they count against the headcount total for decay reasons. Remove decay and you have the same result I already outlined, with slightly different semantics.

The single big difference is instead of booting most of them once the goal is attained, you let them slide away due to attrition.

The choice is still to tolerate friends who dont contribute or boot friends. The whole idea of changing the system is to avoid those kinds of dilemas. I have yet to see a suggestion that actually does so, other than removing renown completely.

I don't quite understand the problem here.
You are saying that for the 1k korthos noob guild it would not make a difference. Fine, those are not the ones it's supposed to help anyways.

[Hafeal]

It cant happen, as booting them all afterward would deleven the guild right back to nada. You could let the noobs slide off due to attrition, but you wouldnt be able to boot them all and keep the guild level with the current system.

If they are noobs, how much guild renown are they generating? And is any guild going to boot EVERY member? Not very realistic. Especially for any guild that manages to get to high levels even without decay. I do not find it compelling that the basis to retain the current system is because it deters leaders from booting people becuase it hurts the guild renown already built. Leaders still remove players - for many reasons. In fact, what happens now is that leaders boot players sooner - when they are or appear to become inactive. Not very sociable.

To me the drama of booting players as the system currently stands is worse than the drama of a guild leader booting every memeber of a guild when they get to 100 - simply because the time and effort to get a guild to 100, even without decay, based on current standards, would require a strong guild, with good leadership.

All that being said, it strays from the point of decay. Decay hurts everyone whereas removing decay hurts absolutely no one. The removal of decay simply is an issue to small, elite groups of players who want to strut. Does anyone who plays long enough not really know the elite players and guilds on their respective server by end game that you need decay to emphasize the point?

[Vanquishedfo]

Some people may mistake what kind of player I am from the opinion I have on this topic. In DDO I am a very casual player I also am in my own small guild I founded a long time ago that is just me and an RL friend who is equally casual. We have our lvl 20 guild ship and are very happy with it and never even consider any need to upgrade it, nor want to worry over our lvl. In our opinion guild level was a bad idea much like forum rep. Id be happy to see renown and ship buffs all go away personally and return to the more personal time of house buffs. The ship itself and some non buffing functions like its fast travel, as well as possibly being a binding point and having an inn are all great functions that dont make it something that needs a decay system.

In City of Heroes I have for 7 years run a very active RPSG known as crey global part of the crey coalition and I build my sg base largely with my own work and that of a few other especially hard working individuals. Our base lacks nothing the biggest SGs have to offer and in fact is more efficient being smaller and streamlined for function rather then form.

THe systen the OP wants exists in another game that functions very differently in many ways and is also now FTP, Saying you found another game exists taht gives you waht your looking for is somehow giving up is very childish. Games often need to be quit when something about them grows to frustrate you, if the system here is even effecting your RL friendships then perhaps you and your friends should all try a different game. the system here in DDO like alot of its aspects is designed around a system as hard set as TRs with GS items being able to run with common first timers with junk weapons. Its not at all about all being equal its about those who put in the time being the best. Do I agree with it, not once upon a time, but its to late now because you cant change even one aspect like what the OP wants without needing to rip the entire game apart to rebalance it with the hard core completely forsaken.

Those who do currently run in high lvl guilds as several I know would I imagine be insanely angry if it suddenly meant potentiallly millions of thier hard earned renown that had gone to upkeep was suddenly meaningless. Once something like this has begun stopping it can do alot more harm then good

[Chai]

I don't quite understand the problem here.
You are saying that for the 1k korthos noob guild it would not make a difference. Fine, those are not the ones it's supposed to help anyways.

They already have the run of the mill. Having it your way would ensure the best way to farm renown in ANY guild situation would be to recruit a buncha lowbies who have alt-itis.

If they are noobs, how much guild renown are they generating? And is any guild going to boot EVERY member? Not very realistic. Especially for any guild that manages to get to high levels even without decay. I do not find it compelling that the basis to retain the current system is because it deters leaders from booting people becuase it hurts the guild renown already built. Leaders still remove players - for many reasons. In fact, what happens now is that leaders boot players sooner - when they are or appear to become inactive. Not very sociable.

Inactive players do NOT hurt guilds. Its currently a bad decision to boot inactives. The only people who hurt the decay rate are those who log in once in a great while and dont play.

To me the drama of booting players as the system currently stands is worse than the drama of a guild leader booting every memeber of a guild when they get to 100 - simply because the time and effort to get a guild to 100, even without decay, based on current standards, would require a strong guild, with good leadership.

It doesnt take alot of time to level a guild with a buncha newbies with alt-itis who roll through the harbor quests which take 3 minutes to play through but have just as many, if not more chests as higher level quests that take much longer.

All that being said, it strays from the point of decay. Decay hurts everyone whereas removing decay hurts absolutely no one. The removal of decay simply is an issue to small, elite groups of players who want to strut. Does anyone who plays long enough not really know the elite players and guilds on their respective server by end game that you need decay to emphasize the point?

Removing decay will make the best option for leveling a guild exactly what I outlined. The attitude would be "the more heads the merrier" which has all emphasis on quantity and none on quality. Ill just get all my friends up in there, then load'er up with 950 alt-itis noobs who dont have a toon past level 4, but hey, they all run irestone twice a day. Weve seen how long it takes to get to 100 that way, and most of the perks Id want would be had well below that level. When we hit max level, I shave em off 3 at a time, waiting to hit 100 again before shaving more off. Think this doesnt happen? It cetainly did before this current incarnation of guild renown decay was put in. Weve already seen the result of this little social experiment, heh. Im not predicting what WILL happen, I am referring to what HAS happened already, in that situation.

[Hafeal]

They already have the run of the mill. Having it your way would ensure the best way to farm renown in ANY guild situation would be to recruit a buncha lowbies who have alt-itis...It doesnt take alot of time to level a guild with a buncha newbies with alt-itis who roll through the harbor quests which take 3 minutes to play through but have just as many, if not more chests as higher level quests that take much longer.

No one is saying to change the amount of renown needed to advance. Your implication is that it is 'easy' to get to higher guild levels. It is not. It still takes many months, and in many cases, years, even without decay. You can recruit, and without decay, try to push to 25 now and people don't do it. You are also assuming the sheer number of noobs is available and they stick with a guild in such a situation for months on end. Your example does not bear out all the way through high levels.

Inactive players do NOT hurt guilds. Its currently a bad decision to boot inactives. The only people who hurt the decay rate are those who log in once in a great while and dont play.

Uh, the very definition of inactive in my book.

Removing decay will make the best option for leveling a guild exactly what I outlined. The attitude would be "the more heads the merrier" which has all emphasis on quantity and none on quality. Ill just get all my friends up in there, then load'er up with 950 alt-itis noobs who dont have a toon past level 4, but hey, they all run irestone twice a day. Weve seen how long it takes to get to 100 that way, and most of the perks Id want would be had well below that level. When we hit max level, I shave em off 3 at a time, waiting to hit 100 again before shaving more off. Think this doesnt happen? It cetainly did before this current incarnation of guild renown decay was put in. Weve already seen the result of this little social experiment, heh. Im not predicting what WILL happen, I am referring to what HAS happened already, in that situation.

This scenario is so far removed from reality I cannot believe you are putting this forth with any sense of seriousness.

[crazycaren]

The full article can be found here on DDM's Realm: It's Time to remove guild renown decay from DDO



The problems that have arisen with this system have strained friendships, guild participation, and has even led members of my guild to leave the guild and Dungeons and Dragons Online completely.

...

Please remove Renown loss and decay from Dungeons and Dragons Online.

I totally agree.

I'm no longer sure what the point of guild renown is or was supposed to be. From some of the highest ranking guilds, noobs get blind invites on Korthos or the Harbour and then given no support/advice and dumped when they take 2 weeks off. Older guilds with a mixed group of players, priorities and gaming styles get ripped apart.

It's the only part of the game, well, other than lag, that is internally destructive. Like a cancer or something.

thanks for starting the discussion.

End decay. Or better yet, renown.

[Shakanos]

In short, the idea that guild renown shouldn't decay -- that a level 80 guild two years ago (if the renown system had been in place back then) should still be level 80 now and enjoy the same benefits, even with no one putting effort and pulling renown the past few years -- is functionally equivalent to the idea that a decked-out level 20 that hasn't logged in for the past 2 years should automatically be given the current top-of-the-line gear like ESoS, +5 holy burst of greater bane, epic gear, etc. upon logging in.

Actually, it's more like saying a level 80 guild from two years ago should have access to the level 80 benefits that were around back then. Just like if a 20 logged in after 2 years they'd still have that MinII weapon. If any new guild benefits were added with some type of prerequisite to obtain (run Artificer raid X times a week to have Y buff available on your guild ship - as opposed to what is currently 'hit level X and then buy from a vendor'), they would have to go earn those. They may be a high enough level (80) to use the benefits, but they still have to actually get them and pay the cost to add them to their ship. Just like a level 20 character from 2 years ago meets the requirements to wield an Epic SoS (be level 20), but would still have to actually put forth the work to obtain one.


Renown decay seems to be doing the one thing that a video game should never do - turns playing it into a job. It was an interesting idea, but the current implementation has too many drawbacks. It doesn't matter if there's decay or not. The hardcore power gamers will obtain things faster than more casual players. Currently it's not a matter of putting in the same effort as hardcore players, but over a longer period of time. Now it's either match the time per day, min max approach of the best players or never get to the higher levels. Pretty much fits my mind's definition of "Elitism."

If it requires a hardcore player to invest 20 hours a week to achieve something, a casual player should be able to more or less acquire the same at 2 hours a week, but it would just take them 10 times longer (likely even longer, as they'd almost certainly be less efficient as well).

As many have said, the actual effects of guild renown decay are detrimental to many people's experience. I believe Turbine's intent was to allow small guilds to actually have progress (thus the bonuses for smaller guilds), not to promote people actively trying to stay small.

[grgurius]

First thing, are you really considering booting a friend just because he doesn't bring in enough renown. Not sure if i would consider you a friend in that case.

Removing decay ,as chai already pointed out, would only bring a new set of problems. Only good solution would be to tweak decay values a bit, and as someone already suggested implement "safe levels".

But if you are only interested in reaching lvl 100, think there is a guild on Sarlona that could give you a few pointers on how to exploit your way to 100.

[Ungood]

First thing, are you really considering booting a friend just because he doesn't bring in enough renown. Not sure if i would consider you a friend in that case.

The Point that responses like this miss is not that Turbine/DDO Put In a system where I had to make a choice of either "Do without or Leave my Friends"

That is a Horrible idea to place in a game. Regardless of what choice a player makes, it is the fact that they had to make such a choice that deducts from the joy of the game for them. Remember, this is a game after all.

No one enjoys "Doing without" no matter what anyone says, a signature part of gamers is that we want to win. We want the good gear, and high levels, that is why we keep playing.

If we hit a stone wall, especially one like Renown Decay inflicts, that is nothing but discouragement, quite literally, it is grind purely for the sake of grind.

The trust is, There is NO other aspect of DDO, (Nor most MMO's for that matter) that has such a mechanism in place whereupon a Plataea is enacted based purely on how much I play.

If I run one quest a day or one quest a week, I'll eventually get to 20th. That is the way a game should work, that is something we all agree upon.

If I run eVoN once every 2 days 18 hours or once every few weeks, eventually I'll get those 20 FRDS. It might take one player far longer then the other, but casual or hard core they both can obtain the same objectives, not matter what they are.

Renown Decay specifically targets the Casual player and denies them advancement.

It is a unique in DDO to just Guild Levels, and very bad system at that.

Solution is to remove it. If eventually everyone is level 100, there is nothing wrong with that. Just like the Game and World has not ended because everyone can make level 20th, or even work towards getting their completionist feat.

The game has been great because Hard Core and Casual players can progress towards goals at their own pace and both can get the same things.

Guild Renown Decay, is different then any other part of DDO, unique to the Guild Leveling System, and it is a total fail of a system.

[Hendrik]

No, loot does not decay.
I would be perfectly fine with them adding new guild rewards.

How does character exp decay? Or favour? Or past lives? etc etc.

It does decay, it is called diminishing returns and ransack.

[Hendrik]

The Point that responses like this miss is not that Turbine/DDO Put In a system where I had to make a choice of either "Do without or Leave my Friends"

Or;

1. Recruit more to over come decay.
2. Play higher level content for more chances at higher renown.
3. Game the Renown System.
4. Change Guilds.
5. Not care about what other Guilds have for amenities.
6. Realize you WILL plateau unless you change playstyle.
7. Not care at all and just play the **** game.

I see far more options then just "Do without or Leave my Friends."

But what do I know as I just subscribe to #2, #5, and #7. More #7 then anything else....

[grgurius]

The Point that responses like this miss is not that Turbine/DDO Put In a system where I had to make a choice of either "Do without or Leave my Friends"

That is a Horrible idea to place in a game. Regardless of what choice a player makes, it is the fact that they had to make such a choice that deducts from the joy of the game for them. Remember, this is a game after all.

No one enjoys "Doing without" no matter what anyone says, a signature part of gamers is that we want to win. We want the good gear, and high levels, that is why we keep playing.

If we hit a stone wall, especially one like Renown Decay inflicts, that is nothing but discouragement, quite literally, it is grind purely for the sake of grind.

The trust is, There is NO other aspect of DDO, (Nor most MMO's for that matter) that has such a mechanism in place whereupon a Plataea is enacted based purely on how much I play.

If I run one quest a day or one quest a week, I'll eventually get to 20th. That is the way a game should work, that is something we all agree upon.

If I run eVoN once every 2 days 18 hours or once every few weeks, eventually I'll get those 20 FRDS. It might take one player far longer then the other, but casual or hard core they both can obtain the same objectives, not matter what they are.

Renown Decay specifically targets the Casual player and denies them advancement.

It is a unique in DDO to just Guild Levels, and very bad system at that.

Solution is to remove it. If eventually everyone is level 100, there is nothing wrong with that. Just like the Game and World has not ended because everyone can make level 20th, or even work towards getting their completionist feat.

The game has been great because Hard Core and Casual players can progress towards goals at their own pace and both can get the same things.

Guild Renown Decay, is different then any other part of DDO, unique to the Guild Leveling System, and it is a total fail of a system.

But its not Turbine making that choice, or even considering that choice. Its you, just because you want bigger numbers over your head.

When it comes to renown, i doubt that it was ever intended as a same opportunity far all system. Even the word renown says it. Simply, its a epeen measuring stick, nothing more, nothing less.

[Ungood]

I dont think the current system is a good idea, but whats the alternative which addresses ALL issues (not just the issues that affect specific forumites)?

An ideal solution is to Bind Renown, and Renown Decay to the Player not the guild.

This solves several issues:

First: If a Guild shoots up around a player (either because they could only play on the week ends or had to take a break and came back) they are not then stuck with a Renown Debt that they have to play.

This fixes the issue with anyone carrying anyone else as well. Each player only carries themselves. Their decay is only based on how much they have earned. so if they are a low earner, because they do not have as much renown to their name, they do not loose as much as the higher earners.

This also allows players to take breaks and not worry if the guild will suffer for them. If they earned a high amount, they are worth keeping for that month before inactive kicks in. If they are a low earner, their loss is nominal. As opposed to one player who has earned 500,000 renown and another who has earned 50,000 renown both paying the same amount in debt.

Secondly: It equalizes Earning of Exp. No more of this "Ideal guild size" or two weeks of kicking counting against you, or anything else. No stupid systems. Everyone gets the same renown for each Reward.

This also fixes any issues with inviting players into your guild and worrying if they will carry their weight. If the size of the guild no longer counts for or against you, it allows guilds to grow or shrink as they see fit to serve their ideal social aspect of the game.

Third: It's Freedom. None of this "Oh 25% if I got kicked, and then we need to boot the slow members, and I put in all that work" yuck. Each player would ideally be a guild of one. With Renown being little more then an alt-exp bar. Players can move about freely, with top tier guilds wanting the high end earners, but equally so, the high earner of a previous guild do not feel like they have to give something up to move to a guild more their licking. It allows people to join guild a guild for social motives, like, they just like the people in it, and it allows guilds to accept people and look at them like fellow players because they do not contribute to guild decay and can on their worst day, only move the guild up their ladder. Thus everyone is providing to the better of the guild overall.

Now. What about when People Leave the Guild. Well the better question is, why are they leaving? If you are kicking them. what does it matter how much renown they take with them, 25% or 100%. same difference, if that is not the player you want in your guild. Are you suddenly going to be like "Oh for 75% of his renown, I guess we can overlook this guy is a total scum bag" Really? Then as others have said about kicking your friend -The issue is on your end. If they leave the guild on good terms, then with them the best, hope they enjoy the guild they move to, and if they feel the urge to come back, leave the door open to them. It's a game, that is called friendship and it's worth more then renown.

The point is, I should not need to chose between the two. Ever.

[Aaxeyu]

It does decay, it is called diminishing returns and ransack.

no, it doesn't. Ransack is not loot decay.

[grgurius]

@Ungood

Its not should you chose between a player or renown, i'm interested why are you considering that choice in the first place.

For me its a no brainer, people first, renown is just a side effect of playing the game.

[Ungood]

Or;

1. Recruit more to over come decay. (Spam Invite? Really?)
2. Play higher level content for more chances at higher renown. (leave my friends behind, got it)
3. Game the Renown System. (What?)
4. Change Guilds. (Leave my Friends)
5. Not care about what other Guilds have for amenities. (Do without)
6. Realize you WILL plateau unless you change playstyle. (Accept my choices are: Do without or Leave My Friends)
7. Not care at all and just play the **** game. (Do without)

I see far more options then just "Do without or Leave my Friends."

But what do I know as I just subscribe to #2, #5, and #7. More #7 then anything else....

Nope. No mater how you slice., It really boils down to "Leave my Friends or Do Without"

You have opted to be cool with doing without, I will too in the end of things. That is your choice. I think it wrong that a game Thrusts this Choice upon it's player base.