My depressing DDO Day (Renown)

[Glenalth]

But if you have a player who is not fully inactive, who plays one day a month, THAT is when you have to kick them.

Or you get 1 day of play, and 30 days of decay, repeated forever.

I wasn't responding to your issue.

Though on this response, no you don't have to kick them. You only kick them if your guild is only about achieving max level.

[Llewndyn]

in reference to a lame movie from decades ago

...until you insulted Princess Bride. That is one of the finest movies ever made, and I'm not even joking. 2 of your friends died just from your unkind words.

From another "reference to a lame movie from decades ago", Lighten up, Francis.

PS - Get to da choppah!

[Glenalth]

People have been clamoring for guild changes for years.

My suggestion, that I make in all of these threads I can be bothered to in case Turbine are scouting the forums looking for people with good ideas to employ. Are as follows.

1) Abolish renown decay. Make max guild size 100, keep in bonuses for tiny, small, medium and large guilds with numbers revised. (Ahh, let me finish)

2) Purchase all guild ships, ship amenities, guild houses*, guildhouse amenities*, guild storage* and guild titles* "SLAYERS OF TEH EVERYTHINGZ" for example by using renown points.

New airship: 10,000,000 Renown Points. (Or reps as I see them becoming known as)
Rental of a +2 Dex Shrine: 10,000 reps.
Coat Rack and Jaunty Hat Stand: 500 reps. (600 with Jaunty Cosmetic Hat)

(Numbers pulled out of thin air)

Lend me a vowel because Oh, Emm Gee. Problem solved. Overnight.

*Would require implementation of awesome new guild HQ's. With DDO store options. Think cosmetic pets for guilds. Think of the dollars. Am available for freelance consultancy work if needed.

It is a good concept.

It does favor max size guilds since there is no decay, but just having the shrines themselves be X uses instead of 1 week of uses could balance that.

[eris2323]

I wasn't responding to your issue.

Though on this response, no you don't have to kick them. You only kick them if your guild is only about achieving max level.

It is funny how so many people just jump in at the end of threads without reading the whole thing

If you think I only care about achieving max level, you missed a post. Highly suggest flipping back....

[AZgreentea]

I dont think I understand the issue. If you are in a guild to hang out with your friends, then leave them in the guild. If you are in a guild to reach lvl 100 and have the best amenities, then kick them.

You cant have it both ways, so pick one and let it go. You are playing DDO to have fun, not work and stress.

I personally joined a guild of people I like. I dont care what the guild level is. If I really want those amenities, I will ask for a ship invite when I hit a group (I've never asked). Its not like content cant be completed without guild buffs.

[sebastianosmith]

From another "reference to a lame movie from decades ago", Lighten up, Francis.

I encouraged my 20-year-old step son to enjoy that movie just this past weekend by forcing him to watch it. He thought it was hilarious. Call it fate. Call it luck. Call it karma. I believe everything happens for a reason. I believe that we were destined to quote lines from lame movies made decades ago just so I could mention this bit of personal information for no reason whatsoever.

ps-
If it bleeds, we can kill it.

[eris2323]

I dont think I understand the issue. If you are in a guild to hang out with your friends, then leave them in the guild. If you are in a guild to reach lvl 100 and have the best amenities, then kick them.

You cant have it both ways, so pick one and let it go. You are playing DDO to have fun, not work and stress.

I personally joined a guild of people I like. I dont care what the guild level is. If I really want those amenities, I will ask for a ship invite when I hit a group (I've never asked). Its not like content cant be completed without guild buffs.

Okay, here's the thing. You have friends, you build a guild. Some of them aren't as active any more, and yet you have more friends that are.

Some of them play for a year, and never gain a level. This starts to bother them... they wonder 'hey, why we can't gain levels'. We explain it to them. They realize that they have to be in a 6-12 person 'power' guild if they want to get to 100.

They leave the guild. They take 14 days renown debt with them. They take a percentage of everything when they leave.

They WILL leave. They want to gain levels.

A large guild with any casual members WILL hit a wall where they can advance no more.

Put those two together, and you've got a very bad environment for any large, social guild.

I'd still like to know. What makes Guild A) with 12 powergamers who play daily better than Guild B) With 12 active members that play daily, the same amount as the powergamers, and 60 casual players that play weekly.

Why should the 12 person guild be able to hit 100, and the casual guild with a few daily players forever be stuck at a low level?

I don't see the justification. Why is PowerGamer Guild any better? They don't have any MORE players than guild B) - they're just elitist, and run a closed guild, and won't accept any more players because of the math.

So that entitles them to be able to advance forever?

I think the whole idea is backwards.

I think if I have active players in the guild - I should be allowed to have some casual players as well. The active players should 'cover the costs' of some of our casual players. Perhaps 1 active player would mean I could have 3 casual players being taken out of the guild renown decay formula.

Right now - the daily active players have been playing for years - and stuck at the same level forever. Should they not be rewarded for their dedication?

[LordPiglet]

Guild level is NOT casual friendly. I'm not the only poster who believes so.

We have a problem with being told to 'just settle' - to accept we'll never get anywhere higher. We just want a fair chance to keep growing.

It sure is. We have a semi casual guild, a few play almost daily, some play less then that, maybe once a week, maybe not show up for a couple months or well over a year in a couple cases.

We have steadily grown in level, we rarely recruit.

Casual/semi casual + small guild = no issue.

Your problem is that you have a guild that grew huge to get up in level as fast as possible. Large guild + cause = issue. However, who really cares about guild level, just play to have fun.

[eris2323]

Your problem is that you have a guild that grew huge to get up in level as fast as possible. Large guild + cause = issue. However, who really cares about guild level, just play to have fun.

Actually, no.

Our guild is a large, established guild, that used to be newbie friendly, and did things like set up LFM's designed solely to teach new people adventures, areas, and DDO in general. We'd hang out in chat channels, and we'd answer questions. We have always been newbie friendly.

You are incorrect.

[CountHenri]

It means something to me, because it means something to a percentage of the currently active people I currently play with. I'm not just one person here thrudh - this is a large(ish) guild. This concerns 187 real people.

A guild that is forever cut off from ever getting another accomplishment is a dead end, and that is how you lose your active players to the little 6 and 12 person guilds.

Which we then pay decay for 14 days for again - on top of our casuals, because the people who DO want to gain levels will leave to do so, rather than fight for years to stay the same level they are.

Sure, some are fine with never gaining a level. Some are not. Those who are not, will leave. This causes more 'bad math' that hurts us more.

It's really pretty simple, when you think about it.

Just because YOU don't care about gaining levels, doesn't mean other people don't, or shouldn't.

Wow it amazes me that people keep complaining about this...

It really is simple : the Guild renown system works to reward consistant playing which is, of course, what Turbine want you to be doing (since consistant players are more likely to be either Subs or TP point buyers).

Even for consistant, organised and driven Guilds getting to the high levels is no easy task ~ we are a L100 Guild and it took us a while to slog through the 90's (even getting stuck in a 94/95 loop for a while when some players left to sample SWTOR for a few months).

There's also a prestige thing as well as some bragging rights for top end Guilds.

I've said this before & I will say it again : It comes down to a choice either be a big, casual guild OR be a high number guild. Choose your option and work with it accordingly.

To those saying "I hope the Devs are reading this so they see how we feel" ~ I'm totally with you on this ~ cause if they do remove the last semblance of Powergamer Prestige from the game by putting in an easy button for casual guilds it will alienate the ones that really worked to get to the top, you know the ones that consistantly spend money on the game...

Remember when the Guild Levels started? The way to the top then was blind Korthos recruiting when guilds were pushing the 1000 account limit and guys fresh off the beach were telling Vets how uber they were because they had the highest ranked guild. Going back to anything like that would be a huge mistake in my opinion...

[eris2323]

Wow it amazes me that people keep complaining about this...

It really is simple : the Guild renown system works to reward consistant playing which is, of course, what Turbine want you to be doing (since consistant players are more likely to be either Subs or TP point buyers).

Even for consistant, organised and driven Guilds getting to the high levels is no easy task ~ we are a L100 Guild and it took us a while to slog through the 90's (even getting stuck in a 94/95 loop for a while when some players left to sample SWTOR for a few months).

There's also a prestige thing as well as some bragging rights for top end Guilds.

I've said this before & I will say it again : It comes down to a choice either be a big, casual guild OR be a high number guild. Choose your option and work with it accordingly.

To those saying "I hope the Devs are reading this so they see how we feel" ~ I'm totally with you on this ~ cause if they do remove the last semblance of Powergamer Prestige from the game by putting in an easy button for casual guilds it will alienate the ones that really worked to get to the top, you know the ones that consistantly spend money on the game...

Remember when the Guild Levels started? The way to the top then was blind Korthos recruiting when guilds were pushing the 1000 account limit and guys fresh off the beach were telling Vets how uber they were because they had the highest ranked guild. Going back to anything like that would be a huge mistake in my opinion...

Who said easy button? Why does every powergamer say we want an easy button?

Would just like a fair chance, that's all. Just want a chance to have a feeling that we could actually gain something in the future, and not be limited by math.

If you think I want an easy button, you missed a post.

[danotmano1998]

I'd still like to know. What makes Guild A) with 12 powergamers who play daily better than Guild B) With 12 active members that play daily, the same amount as the powergamers, and 60 casual players that play weekly.

Why should the 12 person guild be able to hit 100, and the casual guild with a few daily players forever be stuck at a low level?

I don't see the justification. Why is PowerGamer Guild any better? They don't have any MORE players than guild B) - they're just elitist, and run a closed guild, and won't accept any more players because of the math.

So that entitles them to be able to advance forever?

I think the whole idea is backwards.

I think this is the best post I've read yet on this point. Hits right at the root of the problem.
+1!

[LordPiglet]

Okay, here's the thing. You have friends, you build a guild. Some of them aren't as active any more, and yet you have more friends that are.

Some of them play for a year, and never gain a level. This starts to bother them... they wonder 'hey, why we can't gain levels'. We explain it to them. They realize that they have to be in a 6-12 person 'power' guild if they want to get to 100.

They leave the guild. They take 14 days renown debt with them. They take a percentage of everything when they leave.

They WILL leave. They want to gain levels.

A large guild with any casual members WILL hit a wall where they can advance no more.

Put those two together, and you've got a very bad environment for any large, social guild.

I'd still like to know. What makes Guild A) with 12 powergamers who play daily better than Guild B) With 12 active members that play daily, the same amount as the powergamers, and 60 casual players that play weekly.

Why should the 12 person guild be able to hit 100, and the casual guild with a few daily players forever be stuck at a low level?

I don't see the justification. Why is PowerGamer Guild any better? They don't have any MORE players than guild B) - they're just elitist, and run a closed guild, and won't accept any more players because of the math.

So that entitles them to be able to advance forever?

I think the whole idea is backwards.

I think if I have active players in the guild - I should be allowed to have some casual players as well. The active players should 'cover the costs' of some of our casual players. Perhaps 1 active player would mean I could have 3 casual players being taken out of the guild renown decay formula.

Right now - the daily active players have been playing for years - and stuck at the same level forever. Should they not be rewarded for their dedication?

Why should the guild who can send the most blind invites get to 100 first?

[mystafyi]

putting in an easy button for casual guilds it will alienate the ones that really worked to get to the top, you know the ones that consistantly spend money on the game...

Since we all lack the details to this information, we can only observe turbines trends and make assumptions. The recent trend is to make everything simple and easy for casual players.

[Kinerd]

@OP - It sounds to me like you have already made the decision to switch focus from a "Social Focus" Guild to a "Level Focus" Guild - You have your reasons, it yours and I don't fault you for making the decision. You are at this moment at the same place where many Small Business stand just before they make the Leap to something bigger - The change in focus does not always meet all current members needs.

Based on the current system

Break Even Points
-----------------
Guild Level 100
12 Account Guild = 5,500 Per Account Per Day
187 Account Guild = 3,160 Per Account Per Day

Guild Level 70
12 Account Guild = 990 Per Account Per Day
187 Account Guild = 570 Per Account Per Day

Ok why the numbers? It looks to me like it is fairish...

The problem I'm pointing at is that decay is only 1/2 of the problem, it is the guild renown earning potential. The current system favors Smaller Guilds on both ends, earning and decay. If changes need to occur it needs to occur for both not just decay. One option could be to base it on a "Daily Account Activity" during the Decay calculation maintaining the current minimum of 10 Accounts. A large inactive Guild would still "bleed out", but a large "casual" guild would only loose based on its Activity for that day.

If we look at the above totals and go with a conservative 300 Base Renown earned per quest, a 12 member Guild will need to run 2 Quests per account and a 187 member Guild will also need to run 2 Quests Per Account.

At Level 100 that's 7 Quests Per Account on the 12 member and 11 Quests Per Account for the 187.

For every 1K pulled a 12 member guild pulls in 2,400 Renown. For Level 70 that's nearly 20% of the Total Guild's Renown needed to stay even. While for a 187 Member guild that comes out to about .1%.

I believe the problem is with the assumption that regardless of account size each member is just as active, many large guilds originally built themselves up by catering to the "Social Player" by giving them a large pool of people they could play the game with that are tied together with some common bond. Smaller guilds were generally close friends or people that just found a common interest be it constantly leveling or End Game.

It is my belief that the decay is not the entire problem. The problem is that guild renown earning has has tipped the scale making it easier for very small guilds to earn more renown per account.

I encourage you to model out exactly how long it takes the 187 account guild to reach level 63 (let's say) at the 570 /a/d and the 12 account guild at the 990 /a/d.

If you like, then extend it to level 70.

Some of them play for a year, and never gain a level. This starts to bother them... they wonder 'hey, why we can't gain levels'. We explain it to them. They realize that they have to be in a 6-12 person 'power' guild if they want to get to 100.

They leave the guild. They take 14 days renown debt with them. They take a percentage of everything when they leave.

They WILL leave. They want to gain levels.

My small guild will never reach level 100. We haven't had anyone ditch the guild. Why is my situation different than yours?

Just want a chance to have a feeling that we could actually gain something in the future, and not be limited by math.

I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but the 85 ship isn't really any better than the 55 ship. I have even seen some people argue that it is worse.

[eris2323]

My small guild will never reach level 100. We haven't had anyone ditch the guild. Why is my situation different than yours?I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings, but the 85 ship isn't really any better than the 55 ship. I have even seen some people argue that it is worse.

If you are in a small guild, I hope you enjoy it. That is not enjoyable to me.

Just like having a guild stuck at a certain level, which ALL large guilds with casual players eventually face is not enjoyable to me, even though so many forum posters think we should just shut up and accept being a lower level.

A feeling of accomplishment, of getting somewhere, of feeling good about your guild, your organization, your team? That is enjoyable to me.

I'm forever barred from what is enjoyable to me based solely on the amount of casual players.

*THAT* is the point.

[cdbd3rd]

There are some valid points thru this thread -- amongst the thorns, in most cases.

The "Associate Member" mentioned back there somewhere has some merit. Some random thoughts on that:

* Demoting a character/account to Associate status should effectively remove them from the guild in all aspects short of carrying the name and access to guild chat.
* There must be an anti-abuse mechanic. Either a timer or set condition that must be met before those characters can be re-promoted to Active status.
* Ponders: On days where that Casual/Associate character is logged in and running quests, should guild tokens be active for that character? Should that be one of the set conditions for promotion - to achieve X-amount of renown before promotion allowed?


Just beginning thoughts on the idea. There should be at least one ponderable thing to come out of this thread.


Decay can't go away entirely. If all renown became a 1-way street, everyone would eventually be floating in the level-100 renown cream, with the only difference in guilds being that us Casuals take longer to get there.




My thought pennies, anyhow.


edit: Actually I did have one more penny to throw into the mix. Purely opinion, of course, but no game mechanic should ever out-rank friendships. Need-Before-Greed. Friendship-Over-Renown.

[mystafyi]

A feeling of accomplishment, of getting somewhere, of feeling good about your guild, your organization, your team? That is enjoyable to me.

I'm forever barred from what is enjoyable to me based solely on the amount of casual players.

Perhaps you should just realize guilds are horribly implemented in ddo. Stop stressing out on this issue and forget about kicking out anyone. It will take months or even years of decay to drop you under level 63. Play the game, hang out with your friends and stress no longer about the abomination called guilds in ddo.

[eris2323]

There should be at least one ponderable thing to come out of this thread.

I guess, at some point.. I'll have to post some useful suggestions to the problem. Quite a few people recently have complained about the decay situation, and the effect it has on casual guilds; but I haven't yet seen a combined solution that would satisfy all parties.

So I present to you my proposed changes.

I started with some basic thoughts, based on what we have:

• The system should be designed that few guilds reach top guild levels. Most guilds should fall in the lower-mid range of the renown leveling system without extraordinary effort. (we have this, basically)
• The system should reward guilds whose members log in frequently.
• The system needs to encourage the practice of guildies collecting renown tokens.
• Minor changes only - no huge changes, some small mechanics added only

I then took it to the next level - here's where I would modify mechanics to the game, or add any new mechanics to the game, to try and enable both powergamer guilds their place, and large, casual, social games to still have a chance.

Please though, read the whole thing through, and think it through.. don't harp on just one suggestion as bad without taking them into consideration with all the rest. If after that you still think it's bad, well, we can't all agree on everything.

So here goes. My Proposed Changes would be:


Modify Existing Mechanic
There’s a limit to how far you can fall. If you can earn enough renown to be eligible for a bigger ship, your deeds are remembered longer, even if you go idle.

Each level you can get a ship at is a new ‘breakpoint’ that you can’t fall below again, IF you buy the ship. (Levels 25, 50, 55, 80, 86)

This may sound MUCH higher, but if the customer pays for a ship, they should retain the level. For a little perspective, our large guild has NEVER been above level 80, in over two years. We always have active players, but we have a lot of casual players. We’d still have something to work for, and so would other large guilds. If you tie the mechanic to not work unless you BUY the ship, you will probably sell more of the real-cash astral diamond ships, as people try to guarantee not dropping below that level.

New Prestige Levels
Add 100 levels to the guild system. Do not add ANY buffs, anything that makes them special. Give “Global announcements every 20 levels” perhaps, but these are so the power-gamers still have something to work towards, Many people seem to think there’s a certain point where ‘oh, who cares, the higher buffs don’t matter’. They do matter, and people want them. However, the power-gamers are more likely to ‘play just for the prestige of the number’ anyways, and you might as well give them something even more to strive for, especially since it will just be for bragging rights. If in the future you raised the level cap again, you could reconsider when and if new ship buffs would appear during those levels.


Modify Existing Mechanic
I propose a slight change to the guild renown formula: We track a new variable, A count of how many active accounts (not characters) we had today; and we call it “TodaysActives”
For each account who logs in today, the ‘modified account number’ is reduced by 1 for tomorrows renown debt. The new modified guild size math would be
((Active – Inactive – TodaysActives) + 10) = Modified Guild Size
Example using our guild: With 190 accounts. 90 inactives. and 20 people playing that day our modified guild size that day would be only 90 renown debt would be: effectively 90 * 650 renown per day (58,500) instead of (65,000). This isn’t a huge reward, but is noticeable at our level.
Caveat: To be considered active, the account must log in for at least an hour, and collect at least 5 renown.

Modify Existing Mechanic
Currently if someone logs in for a day, it can cost us up to 30 days renown debt before they are considered inactive. This mechanic is hurting the casual player the most, as most guilds will start to remove casual players at a high level, because 30 days of renown debt for a casual player can REALLY add up. Reduce this to 7.
Example from our guild: Someone plays once a month, their debt is 19500. With this modified mechanic, that idler would only cost us 4550 renown before switching to an inactive state. The result would be a much friendlier attitude towards casual and new players.

New Mechanic added “Mentor Bonus”
Any guildie who starts up public LFM as leader, and accepts people who are NOT in the guild, will receive 100 renown per non-guildie accepted, on successful completion of the quest.

This will encourage more mixed groups of public LFM’s and reward people who are willing to teach new players the game.


New Mechanic added “Activity Bonus”
For each active account you have in a 24 hours period, all guild members will receive a 1% bonus to guild renown, for the next 24 period only.
If we had 30 Active Players yesterday, today we would all be receiving a 30% bonus to renown – For one day only – the next day would be dependent on how many active players the guild had today.
If you know you’re getting a 30% bonus to renown that day, you’re tempted to choose renown more, just to increase it. If you know you’re on a 50% bonus day, you might even be tempted to spend some time farming for renown.
This would also encourage guild growth – The more active players you have today, the more of a renown bonus you’ll have tomorrow.
IE: Yesterday we had 20 unique accounts log in. Therefore, tomorrow, everyone who logs in gets a 20% bonus to renown that day.
There MIGHT need to be a cap on this – 100%? It’d be fairly hard for any guild to get 100 different accounts online and playing each day, I think that’s a fair number to work towards.

Some guilds might try to enforce a ‘You must log in or be kicked rule’, but that’s their choice. That would be a power-gamer guild, and if they want to impose such a harsh rule, they should be allowed to. However, there should also be a place for the casual player – larger guilds, with more of a social aspect. We will obviously not have such a rule, and we exist to help new players learn the game anyways, so we provide a vital service.

Modify Existing Mechanic
Guild Kicks: Currently kicking anyone – or anyone who leaves willingly, costs 2 weeks of debt. Proposed: change that to 7 days of debt if kicked, ZERO days of debt it the guildie leaves of their own accord. If a casual guild doesn’t gain levels fast enough, power gamers WILL leave their casual guilds for powergaming guilds. No call to be punishing the casual guild for 2 weeks for that.

Anyone idle for 6 months may be kicked with no penalty to the guild to make room for new characters. No Penalty. I only suggest this because of the hard cap on number of people in guilds.

[jonqrandom]

OP: i know you'd like turbine to change the guild renown system. so would a lot of people. however, turbine appears to disagree and this thread is not likely to change that. so - would you like a solution? something that fixes your problem now instead of never?

make another guild (or get someone who's vip to make one for you, if you're not). you might wanna call it something like "myguild"-casual, it doesn't really matter. make a channel named after your initial guild. put the command to join the channel in the guild message for both guilds, and ask all your members to use the channel instead of guild chat. move your casual players to your casual guild. your dedicated players can invite them to your dedicated guild ship for buffs, and a sparrow will get them anywhere a larger ship can if they're just needing transport.

is this an ugly workaround? yes. does it solve your problem? yes. will turbine solve your problem? not likely. i'm aware that you won't like this and that it isn't "fair" or very simple but it will fix your issue as far as it is likely be fixed.