Guild Renown Changes

[Blue100000005]

Want to see mine? People whining so much, wont hurt my feelings.

Argonessen, 28 active accounts, Eye of the dragon.


2,034,852 as of 1am local time.

I am by far the most active member of the guild.

If you want i can post past gains also. just will take time cause i am away from my home PC atm.

[slarden]

Real issue is as the guild matures, players focusing on TR'ing and end game content do not want to waste time on players brand new to the content. Have conversations with players you group with, just because they're guilded does not mean they didn't just randomly hit accept to a blind guild invite and found themselves unhappy there.

Players of low activity with a solid history of being a competent player find themselves having problems getting into smaller guilds of higher than the average activity. This is why we are even talking about how the small guild bonus is counter intuitive to inclusiveness.

My approach is that I will never try and recruit from another guild. It costs them renown and I believe guilds are one of many social mechanisms in the game and there is no real reason to ask people to join my guild unless they are unguilded or request it.

As for having conversations, we do. But keep in mind as a small guild with high decay that we are forced to run content faster to cover our decay tax. If we don't run content fast enough our guild will move backwards. Our guild started moving forward again after I stopped posting LFMs for quests a few months ago.

As a result of the decay, I find myself soloing or zerging more so I can help the guild cover our large decay tax.

Small guild bonus has nothing to do with inclusiveness as I've already demonstrated. However, decay does have a negative impact by forcing us to run content faster to keep up with decay.

The truth is the % of unguilded people at higher levels is low and many of those are unguilded by choice. It seems like a problem is being invented here that doesn't really exist.

[Hendrik]

Want to see mine? People whining so much, wont hurt my feelings.

Argonessen, 28 active accounts, Eye of the dragon.


2,034,852 as of 1am local time.

I am by far the most active member of the guild.

If you want i can post past gains also. just will take time cause i am away from my home PC atm.

Thank you Blue.

DEVs listen and pay attention to numbers, not long posts repeating the same thing over and over across multiple threads.

PLEASE keep updating from this point on if you can.

[Hendrik]

Doesn't that really apply to you and not me? I offered twice and now this is my third time offering to gladly provide my guild information so we can track both our guilds for 2 weeks.

So please provide your server, guild name and # of active accounts (as showing when scrolling over guild level) and I will do the same. The only reason you are not doing so it that you realize it will only prove conclusively what everyone from small gulds is saying about decay being a problem for us just as it used to be a problem for large guilds when they had roughly the same proportional decay that we have today.

Ever hear of MyDDO?

I don't hide behind it.

Sarlona
EW
79 Shown; 12-15 online on weekedays/20-24 online weekends on avg during prime time.
30,287,178
NO size Bonus
Decay @ 28k

Be sure to include how many accounts are actually playing a day.


And you statement of 'everyone from small guilds' has already been proven false.


I await your info.

[Dandonk]

The mechanics speak for themselves. We don't want anything handed to us - we just want equal workload for same level guilds.

So Turbine, it's been nearly three months now since you admitted the system was unfair to small guilds (which some are still trying to deny, for some odd reason)... so can we at least get some sort of timeframe for this issue?

[Hendrik]

The mechanics speak for themselves. We don't want anything handed to us - we just want equal workload for same level guilds.

So Turbine, it's been nearly three months now since you admitted the system was unfair to small guilds (which some are still trying to deny, for some odd reason)... so can we at least get some sort of timeframe for this issue?

A guild of the same size as yours, with the same account numbers, same size bonus, has the same workload.

Even a Guild with more members has the same decay workload.

Only difference is the activity level of the members. The Guild that has more active members will overcome the workload far easier.

Get your guild to come back and play and start to run content/stuff.


Go look at the Guild Leaderboards. They speak for themselves as well. All servers, top 10 over half are all small and very small. What is the difference between them and your Guild? How can they reach that level and you cannot? What are they doing that you are not?

[Dandonk]

A guild of the same size as yours, with the same account numbers, same size bonus, has the same workload.

Even a Guild with more members has the same decay workload.

Only difference is the activity level of the members. The Guild that has more active members will overcome the workload far easier.

Get your guild to come back and play and start to run content/stuff.

Decay per player.

Turbine has already said it is unfair. Please stop going on about your incorrect version of the truth.

[Hendrik]

Decay per player.

Turbine has already said it is unfair. Please stop going on about your incorrect version of the truth.

Then be more clear.

Also, no comment about the leaderboards being over half full of small guilds on the first page of all servers?

What are they doing different that you are not? Why are they able to get over this decay and you are not? How can they populate the leaderboard as they are and you cannot?

That is truth. If this system was so unfair to smalls, then they should not be there, yet, they are.

Explain?

I'll wait.

[Dandonk]

Then be more clear.

Also, no comment about the leaderboards being over half full of small guilds on the first page of all servers?

What are they doing different that you are not? Why are they able to get over this decay and you are not? How can they populate the leaderboard as they are and you cannot?

That is truth. If this system was so unfair to smalls, then they should not be there, yet, they are.

Explain?

I'll wait.

Look up Vanshilar's posts on the subject. They explain pretty well.

But don't try to make this about me. It's about an already-admitted-unfair system. Admitted by Turbine. No comment about that?

[Hendrik]

Look up Vanshilar's posts on the subject. They explain pretty well.

But don't try to make this about me. It's about an already-admitted-unfair system. Admitted by Turbine. No comment about that?

Unfair claimed by only a few in this thread, yet, the fact that smalls are on top of the lederboards on all servers speaks to the fact it is not as unfair as it has been claimed. Can't be all that unfair since the leaderboard show otherwise.

Sure, there might need a small tweak here and there. Admitted that and even proposed changes and debated those changes with those willing to listen and compormise.

Also unfair to the guilds, like yours, that are not active, not running content. Change to the sytems will not fix that now will it?

They are doing something that the vocal minority here is not doing. Find out what that is and there, you have your fix.


And Van's charts shows that ACTIVE Small/Medium Guilds dominate in all level ranges. It also shows that ACTIVE guilds by character count, again, small and medium dominate. Finally it shows that the top 30 Guild by renown totals, all but FOUR are gaining and two fo those are recent.

Common theme here is that ACTIVE Guilds of Small and Medium Size are gaining in all case except for a very small minority.

Good day and good luck.

[Dandonk]

Unfair claimed by only a few in this thread, yet, the fact that smalls are on top of the lederboards on all servers speaks to the fact it is not as unfair as it has been claimed. Can't be all that unfair since the leaderboard show otherwise.

Sure, there might need a small tweak here and there. Admitted that and even proposed changes and debated those changes with those willing to listen and compormise.

Also unfair to the guilds, like yours, that are not active, not running content. Change to the sytems will not fix that now will it?

They are doing something that the vocal minority here is not doing. Find out what that is and there, you have your fix.

By all means, keep on your crusade to remove decay because it is not fair for inactive guilds. But to remove that and you will have to give up something else to get that, like size bonus.

Good day and good luck.

Turbine has said it is unfair. So stop trying to make it anything else.

[Chaos000]

Again, there is no problem with people not being able to get into guilds on Sarlona. There wasn't before this guild change and there wasn't after this guild change.

I don't think you're understanding that the issue being brought up is not that people were not being able to get into guilds... it was that people were being booted from guilds if their activity was considered insufficient.

There IS a correlation between player removal and reduced decay + increase in small guild bonus.

I think it's fine to have a reasonable debate, but your small guild bonus argument is far from reasonable.

By your own admission adding a person that does not make up for the .15 loss of 6 people will not be beneficial.

Math shows that, in a decay/guild-level system when the total is divided equally among all players, each added player reduces the decay/player. Math also shows that for guilds without a size bonus, adding a person is always beneficial. Only in guilds with a size bonus, an added person has to "work" to be beneficial. Only in guilds with a size bonus, an added person could in fact increase the decay/player.

Math will ALSO show that increasing the guild size bonus will either require the added person to have to "work harder" to be beneficial or the guild be penalized due to association.

Therefore, because I see size bonus more helpful than hurtful, I support increasing the size bonus so long as the size bonus remains unaffected when any player is removed from guild.

By the way, you understand that increasing the size bonus for small guilds to a point their earning potential matches that of a guild of (any size higher than the smallest large guild), any large guild smaller than (any size higher than the smallest large guild) would be worse off than smaller guilds with a size bonus.

[Hendrik]

I don't think you're understanding that the issue being brought up is not that people were not being able to get into guilds... it was that people were being booted from guilds if their activity was considered insufficient.

There IS a correlation between player removal and reduced decay + increase in small guild bonus.



By your own admission adding a person that does not make up for the .15 loss of 6 people will not be beneficial.

Math shows that, in a decay/guild-level system when the total is divided equally among all players, each added player reduces the decay/player. Math also shows that for guilds without a size bonus, adding a person is always beneficial. Only in guilds with a size bonus, an added person has to "work" to be beneficial. Only in guilds with a size bonus, an added person could in fact increase the decay/player.

Math will ALSO show that increasing the guild size bonus will either require the added person to have to "work harder" to be beneficial or the guild be penalized due to association.

Therefore, because I see size bonus more helpful than hurtful, I support increasing the size bonus so long as the size bonus remains unaffected when any player is removed from guild.

By the way, you understand that increasing the size bonus for small guilds to a point their earning potential matches that of a guild of (any size higher than the smallest large guild), any large guild smaller than (any size higher than the smallest large guild) would be worse off than smaller guilds with a size bonus.

Good post Chaos.

Think it is clear, any reasonable debate cannot happen unless it starts with 'remove decay'. Anything that does not have that will be deemed unreasonable and unfair.

[DocBenway]

Common theme here is that ACTIVE Guilds of Small and Medium Size are gaining in all case except for a very small minority.

But ACTIVE when speaking in renown, only counts questing, not hours logged in, and especially not helpfullness in general chats and friendlyness to new player puggers with helpful hints in a constructive manner. Being an asset to the social aspect of the game.

You know, the stuff that traditionally was what got a guild its "good name."

In the last 24 hours I've been logged in at least 12. I have done some explorer finishing in Underdark and Sschin.. Sscyndr... Chicago, and got my arti his Bastion and Genesis flags. I'm posting this from the Demonweb on my ranger, just wandering around but entered from spinners prison so still attached to Harbor General Chat. Going between auction, mail and bank and answering questions / correcting misinformation given to new players in general, joking with friends and being punny (or pun-ishing) in a userchat, was how I spent most of those 12 hours.

That means I'm not ACTIVE.

ETA - 28.5 hours after last total posted, with 3 of the 4 active accounts having been on in that time and a +15% base boost for 5.5 hours of that. Total now:7,191,342

[Hendrik]

But ACTIVE when speaking in renown, only counts questing, not hours logged in, and especially not helpfullness in general chats and friendlyness to new player puggers with helpful hints in a constructive manner. Being an asset to the social aspect of the game.

You know, the stuff that traditionally was what got a guild its "good name."

In the last 24 hours I've been logged in at least 12. I have done some explorer finishing in Underdark and Sschin.. Sscyndr... Chicago, and got my arti his Bastion and Genesis flags. I'm posting this from the Demonweb on my ranger, just wandering around but entered from spinners prison so still attached to Harbor General Chat. Going between auction, mail and bank and answering questions / correcting misinformation given to new players in general, joking with friends and being punny (or pun-ishing) in a userchat, was how I spent most of those 12 hours.

That means I'm not ACTIVE.

ETA - 28.5 hours after last total posted, with 3 of the 4 active accounts having been on in that time and a +15% base boost for 5.5 hours of that. Total now:7,191,342

Yep.

You do not get renown by simply being logged in. You get it from Quests and really small amounts from Explorers.

Some want it just by being logged in and not doing anything - kinda like how we used to get XP from not playing the game. Decay is here for that very reason and will stay. You get fame/renown by completing Quests and not by talking to other players, posting on the AH, or sitting around and chatting in various channels.

People are not entitled to renown gains by just selecting your character and server.

Hells, if we got renown by just hours logged in, everyone would just log in and go AFK. Until the auto timeout kicked in and non-VIP started yelling how unfair that is.

Bet you could have gain a TON of renown if you were Questing for those 12 of 24 hours vs chatting, emailing, watching the AH. No offence, that is not a failure of renown/decay - you chose to do those things vs Questing - with respect.

And when I say active, I mean Questing/Raiding and not just being logged in.

[Dandonk]

Some want it just by being logged in and not doing anything - kinda like how we used to get XP from not playing the game. Decay is here for that very reason and will stay. You get fame/renown by completing Quests and not by talking to other players, posting on the AH, or sitting around and chatting in various channels.

I was not aware I lost XP when I was logged in without doing questing. Interesting.

[DocBenway]

And there is the crux. The renown we do get is taken away. The progress we make is slowed/halted because we play the way we like to play. Getting rid of decay gets rid of the whole issue. The treadmill is turned into a hill that gets steeper toward the peak, but your footing is firm and their is no backsliding. Your work is not taken away and everything you do that the game "counts" is kept rather than taxed for no purpose.

I am in no way asking for a free ride, I am saying that attempting to define guilds beyond what their membership has decided and dictate playstyle changes in order to be "competitive" in an area which should be of no contest in a non personal level, is detrimental to the gaming community as a whole.

I'll go grind 12 hours and let 15 newbies quit because without a pointer in the right direction they find the game too daunting or the only answer they get to questions is pvp trashtalk. I'm not claiming that all questing all the time is bad, but it is not my playstyle, and I know I was 1 more pug attempt from quitting the game in Oct. 09 had I not met the 5 others that were founding members of this guild. I met them through general chat shenanigans.

The fact that we were unfairly taxed above size when size was "fair", and now the "new fair" taxes us the exact same amount is just manure icing on the crapcake that is the renown system imposed on this guild 3/4 of a year after its creation.

The rewards are there, let us get them eventually without having to decide between playing the way we don't want to to get them or not playing at all. I don't give a cranium rat's behind what anybody else has/doesn't have or what the artificially imposed number by their tag is. Their guild is not my guild and affects the success/failure of mine in no way. I only care that Turbine is deciding only 75% of the way we have played for the last year should count. That percentage just gets smaller the longer we play the way we want to play, real incentive there.

[slarden]

Math will ALSO show that increasing the guild size bonus will either require the added person to have to "work harder" to be beneficial or the guild be penalized due to association.

Therefore, because I see size bonus more helpful than hurtful, I support increasing the size bonus so long as the size bonus remains unaffected when any player is removed from guild.

By the way, you understand that increasing the size bonus for small guilds to a point their earning potential matches that of a guild of (any size higher than the smallest large guild), any large guild smaller than (any size higher than the smallest large guild) would be worse off than smaller guilds with a size bonus.

Increasing a guild from 6 to 7 people increases the renown earning potential from 24 to 26.95. Even if the new person is only 1/4 as active as the rest of the guild the guild is still benefiting.

If we recruit an activce player we quested with, it is very little risk to add a person when the math shows that doing so is beneficial even if they are only 1/4 as active as the rest of the group. My experience has always been the opposite, players we recruit are very active at the time we recruit them and will give us a boost. This is why it seems so funny to me that anyone is correlating goild bonus with either booting or not taking on new players.

The problem with not adjusting size bonus when someone leaves the guild is that large guilds are recruiting our players away since the new system encourages guilds to grow as much as possible. I am fine if we are penalized for booting a player, but we shouldn't be penalized because the system highly favors large guilds and we lose a player because of it. If we are concerned about booting players, the only solution is a 100% penalty for booting players. Changing guild bonus to stop the booting makes no sense when it appears booting players primarily occurs in large guilds and not small guilds.

Adding one person is the equivalent of adding 3 people for a guild of 6 with minimal risk of a downside. The problem small mature guilds is finding people that are unguilded period - not rejecting people or turning them away. Our guild only removes players for the same reason other guilds do - long periods of inactivity unless they told us they were taking a break.

I will add this. Decay forces guilds to earn renown very quickly. If a person is unable to earn enough renown quickly enough to cover their decay tax then it is beneficial to boot the person regardless of guild bonus. They are casualties of a high decay system. This has nothing to do with the guild bonus really but how fast the person earns renown relative to the guild's decay tax. For a small high level guild the decay tax/person is very high and requires people to play content fast to cover decay. Only players can cover this tax since guilds have no way to generate renown otherwise.

Our guild would never boot a person over renown/decay period.

[slarden]

Ever hear of MyDDO?

I don't hide behind it.

Sarlona
EW
79 Shown; 12-15 online on weekedays/20-24 online weekends on avg during prime time.
30,287,178
NO size Bonus
Decay @ 28k

Be sure to include how many accounts are actually playing a day.


And you statement of 'everyone from small guilds' has already been proven false.


I await your info.

Yes "Everyone" was a poor choice of word for sure, but out of the 100 or so small guilds that commented only a few didn't seem to think it was a problem. The others all seemed to be in agreement that the system is unfair to small guilds and most felt decay was a large problem for small guilds.

I am unable to search for a gulid EW because it is less than 3 characters. I want to find a guild that dispalys it's renown total on their guild page as net renown change over the 2 week period is certainly enough to show some useful metrics. We still need a 150+ large guild in the mid 70s and we are ready to start. I will post my information once we have a 150+ guild. I have friends in one of the biggest guild on Sarlona and they may be willing to pass me their info - I will check.

[Hendrik]

And there is the crux. The renown we do get is taken away. The progress we make is slowed/halted because we play the way we like to play. Getting rid of decay gets rid of the whole issue. The treadmill is turned into a hill that gets steeper toward the peak, but your footing is firm and their is no backsliding. Your work is not taken away and everything you do that the game "counts" is kept rather than taxed for no purpose.

I am in no way asking for a free ride, I am saying that attempting to define guilds beyond what their membership has decided and dictate playstyle changes in order to be "competitive" in an area which should be of no contest in a non personal level, is detrimental to the gaming community as a whole.

I'll go grind 12 hours and let 15 newbies quit because without a pointer in the right direction they find the game too daunting or the only answer they get to questions is pvp trashtalk. I'm not claiming that all questing all the time is bad, but it is not my playstyle, and I know I was 1 more pug attempt from quitting the game in Oct. 09 had I not met the 5 others that were founding members of this guild. I met them through general chat shenanigans.

The fact that we were unfairly taxed above size when size was "fair", and now the "new fair" taxes us the exact same amount is just manure icing on the crapcake that is the renown system imposed on this guild 3/4 of a year after its creation.

The rewards are there, let us get them eventually without having to decide between playing the way we don't want to to get them or not playing at all. I don't give a cranium rat's behind what anybody else has/doesn't have or what the artificially imposed number by their tag is. Their guild is not my guild and affects the success/failure of mine in no way. I only care that Turbine is deciding only 75% of the way we have played for the last year should count. That percentage just gets smaller the longer we play the way we want to play, real incentive there.

Doc, I do NOT mean to be rude, but with 20 accounts (4/5 active players), Small Guild Bonus of 105.88% and Decay @ : 2,531, how are NOT advancing? Are you even Questing?


I know you said you spent 12 of the last 24 hours chatting, on the AH, emailing, some explorers and all, but man, are you and those 4/5 active players even stepping into quests/raids??

How can you not overcome 2500 decay with a 108% size bonus? That is one Legendary and some change on one person.