Guild Renown Changes

[eris2323]

If you take offense to people for politely telling you that my opinion (often supported by your own words) is wrong - then that is you opinion. So noted.

If you are insulted that is not the intention of my rhetoric. However, I will not apologize for debating for what many feel is fair and using your own words to prove you wrong.

Using an opponents own words against them (which you have also tried to do) is part of debate. We will not back down due to threats or bullying or mud slinging.

Have a lovely day! Wish you well! And gratz on the power leveling of your guild!

Calling me a sock puppet is a direct violation of forum rules. Personally, I'm going to wait for the mods to come in, and see what they have to say - luckily, as far as I am aware, a copy of your message is sent directly to them when I report it, so you won't have any more time to edit it away... You might want to anyways, to show that you are capable of following their rules.

[UurlockYgmeov]

It seems to me you are the one who does not understand the renown system, and calling my posts meaningless drivel is yet again, another insult to me.

Reported.

LOL!!! I needed that laugh! Calling something meaningless drivel is not an insult - just a statement of opinion that cannot be construed as a personal attack.

I will correct my statement, you do understand the system but choose to ignore or hide the fact you do.

Guilds do feel the pressure to boot less active players. They always have and always will. This kludge just shifted the pressure from the large guilds to the medium and smaller guilds.

You know this because you referenced to the guild size bonus multiple times.

[eris2323]

LOL!!! I needed that laugh!

I will correct my statement, you do understand the system but choose to ignore or hide the fact you do.

Guilds do feel the pressure to boot less active players. They always have and always will. This kludge just shifted the pressure from the large guilds to the medium and smaller guilds.

You know this because you referenced to the guild size bonus multiple times.

I understand exactly how the system works, and I understand how you are trying to twist the system to your own ends to get exactly what you want, without caring about the effect your proposal (which has been shot down multiple times as being totally opposite to what most people want) would have on the game.

You only care about browbeating people until they agree that you are correct.

Well, sorry... I don't believe you ARE correct.

In fact, I think you're totally wrong, and your whole post is a self-serving attempt to help out your own personal guild, or perhaps a guild of a friend.

[UurlockYgmeov]

I understand exactly how the system works, and I understand how you are trying to twist the system to your own ends to get exactly what you want, without caring about the effect your proposal (which has been shot down multiple times as being totally opposite to what most people want) would have on the game.

You only care about browbeating people until they agree that you are correct.

Well, sorry... I don't believe you ARE correct.

In fact, I think you're totally wrong, and your whole post is a self-serving attempt to help out your own personal guild, or perhaps a guild of a friend.

I

*unbridled laughing*

Now back to the real topic - guild renown.

I think it is time to reword the proposal and will repost it when I do.

Also need to consider the implications of the daily dice into it since Turbine has the stated goal of getting more accounts to log in daily.

[eris2323]

*unbridled laughing*

Now back to the real topic - guild renown.

I think it is time to reword the proposal and will repost it when I do.

Also need to consider the implications of the daily dice into it since Turbine has the stated goal of getting more accounts to log in daily.

And you will add yet more unrelated stuff to your 'proposal'?

I will be here to shoot it all down, no matter how many times you feel the need to post this proposal, which has been shot down multiple times by multiple people!

If you keep re-posting it, I'll keep reposting my feelings on the matter, too! Frankly, like you, I'll probably just go through my old posts, and copy/paste them into a new one. Just like you do.

See you then!

Unless the devs shut the thread, of course... then we can make a new one!

[UurlockYgmeov]

I have rewritten the proposal in a more easy to understand format – separating the proposal from additional ideas that have been generated in this forum that might deserve consideration.

Yes, this proposal does mean a tiny more decay for most guilds (all sizes, and levels) - and does affect even the level 1 through 25 guilds; yet the changes are fair and easily handled without any difficulty, especially since it eliminates the effect of casual players on decay unless they earn renown.

In pink as requested in another post.

SO here is the updated and revised proposal - prioritized easiest to implement first to the most difficult last.

Eliminate Decay Altogether

but if Turbine says no, then:

1. Modify temporary system by making simple and easy changes that take away 99% of the pressure away to boot. Is fair for all guilds of all sizes of all styles of play. Booting will still occur - but not because of the system. Easy to accomplish because mostly only modifying existing code by changing static variables.
   
   1. member is not counted toward modified guild size until generates renown. (for mail checkers and purely social log ins)
   2. instead of 30 days until considered inactive for guild purposes, change to one day (changed to account for daily dice);
   3. remove the +10 to the modified guild size in the formula, with a modified minimum guild size becoming one - no cap/limit.
   4. adjust decay to affect all guilds of all levels.
   5. Significantly lower decay for higher level guilds by up to 93% (the level multiplier drops from up to 4.5 down to 2.5).
      
      1. Modified formula would be something like: modified_guild_size[i](1 being the minimum) x (guild_level x 2.5 (two point five)). [i]This change alone reduces decay for high level guilds by up to 93%)
      2. Keep It Simple - keep it transparent and easy to explain, understand, and compute.
   6. Ransack set to start at 500K per day or at 2nd level - whichever is easier to implement. Ransack doesn't start to kick in until (500K) or (2nd level) is reached.
2. Implement (aka ADD a)simple Provisional (two-week) guild invite - invitee does not affect guild renown. So doesn't earn renown, and isn't counted toward modified guild size. Allows guild and prospect to try each other out and see if the fit is right. changed term to provisional - Thanks Fearmaker!

The following is a short compilation of additional suggestions that will benefit guilds and has been generated in this discussion thread. These are not needed to implement the proposal, but are highly recommended as they address issues that affect the current topic and enhance the guild experience.

1. VIP's should get +10% renown - this is now in line with what Fernando stated about new benefits starting with +10% xp for VIPs that begin next patch(s.i.c. below).
2. there needs to be a new form of Global Friends List - one that acts like facebook in most basic essence. You ask someone to be on your friends list (or offer) - and can select to be public, private; to show online status - last log, show all or just one characters in account; and an easier way to talk with them in game without having to be in a guild. Once a player is on your Global Friends List - you can see any of their characters from any of their characters (can still flag yourself as "invisible" or "do not disturb" to make a character not show up in global list). This lets us do global ignore as well, for those who would use it. Selecting (or hovering over with tool tip) a Global Friend in your list and it shows you the last (visible) character they logged in as, the server, and how long ago they logged off, if they aren't online. thanks to Artos_Fabril for the improvements!
3. Guild Information Kiosk: There needs to be a better way for guilds to communicate information in-game about their guilds to the general public - including membership rules, play times and styles, recruitment status - and a way to ask for an invitation. Current methods are all out of game (compendium) and private web-sites (guildportal.com for example) both require programming knowledge (wiki style and web layout). Just have a guild information kiosk in the upper harbor and or in Korthos where players could talk to the NPC to find out more about guilds (general), guilds (specific guilds), search for a guild, message guild leader (inquiry), and apply for membership to a guild. The alternative is to add another page to the social panel that does this as well.
4. Need a replacement to fill in the void caused by the demise of guild-slotted equipment. Not a total replacement, rather something that fills the greatest void. Two new ship amenities - each with different level for different level guilds. Same buff as available from guild augment crystals - so does not stack with itself.(Again thank you to Fearmaker and Alyonna for the suggestion)
   
   • Tiny: no ship available so not applicable
   • Small: Minimum Guild Level 25
     
     • Hit Point Shrine:+10 stacking maximum HP
     • Spell Point Shrine: +40 stacking maximum SP (+80 to Sorcerers and Favored Souls)
   • Medium: Minimum Guild Level 45
     
     • Hit Point Shrine: +15 stacking maximum HP
     • Spell Point Shrine: +60 stacking maximum SP (+80 to Sorcerers and Favored Souls)
   • Large: Minimum Guild Level 70
     
     • Hit Point Shrine: +30 stacking maximum HP
     • Spell Point Shrine: +80 stacking maximum SP (+160 to Sorcerers and Favored Souls)

add 10% boost to all earned XP for VIP accounts.

this goes live on Monday the 18th of March 2013.

Kindly Note: Large Guilds (which are the minority in both number and total membership vs total population) object to any changes from the temporary ad hoc kludged system and wish the existing temporary system made permanent.

Kobold puts on its 33% fire reduction cloak of superior flame resistance.

Have a nice day! and a lovely St. Patrick's day!

[Drakesan]

I would be greatly interested in seeing the number of guilds that reached milestone levels (ie, announcement type levels, 60, 70, etc.) in the 12 months prior to the change, and in the time since the change.

I am willing to bet that the latter far outnumbers the former. This change is beneficial over the old system.

I get that we all would like a better system, but even after reading through the posts (yes, I have read them all), the only ones that seem to me would be better, is to scrap the decay altogether.

Please, don't change the current system. It seems to be the best choice so far.

[eris2323]

I have rewritten the proposal in a more easy to understand format – separating the proposal from additional ideas that have been generated in this forum that might deserve consideration.

Yes, this proposal does mean a tiny more decay for most guilds (all sizes, and levels) - and does affect even the level 1 through 25 guilds; yet the changes are fair and easily handled without any difficulty, especially since it eliminates the effect of casual players on decay unless they earn renown.

In pink as requested in another post.

SO here is the updated and revised proposal - prioritized easiest to implement first to the most difficult last.

Eliminate Decay Altogether

but if Turbine says no, then:

1. Modify temporary system by making simple and easy changes that take away 99% of the pressure away to boot. Is fair for all guilds of all sizes of all styles of play. Booting will still occur - but not because of the system. Easy to accomplish because mostly only modifying existing code by changing static variables.
   
   1. member is not counted toward modified guild size until generates renown. (for mail checkers and purely social log ins)
   2. instead of 30 days until considered inactive for guild purposes, change to one day (changed to account for daily dice);
   3. remove the +10 to the modified guild size in the formula, with a modified minimum guild size becoming one - no cap/limit.
   4. adjust decay to affect all guilds of all levels.
   5. Significantly lower decay for higher level guilds by up to 93% (the level multiplier drops from up to 4.5 down to 2.5).
      
      1. Modified formula would be something like: modified_guild_size[i](1 being the minimum) x (guild_level x 2.5 (two point five)). [i]This change alone reduces decay for high level guilds by up to 93%)
      2. Keep It Simple - keep it transparent and easy to explain, understand, and compute.
   6. Ransack set to start at 500K per day or at 2nd level - whichever is easier to implement. Ransack doesn't start to kick in until (500K) or (2nd level) is reached.
2. Implement (aka ADD a)simple Provisional (two-week) guild invite - invitee does not affect guild renown. So doesn't earn renown, and isn't counted toward modified guild size. Allows guild and prospect to try each other out and see if the fit is right. changed term to provisional - Thanks Fearmaker!

The following is a short compilation of additional suggestions that will benefit guilds and has been generated in this discussion thread. These are not needed to implement the proposal, but are highly recommended as they enhance the guild experience.

1. VIP's should get +10% renown - this is now in line with what Fernando stated about new benefits starting with +10% xp for VIPs that begin next patch(s.i.c. below).
2. there needs to be a new form of Global Friends List - one that acts like facebook in most basic essence. You ask someone to be on your friends list (or offer) - and can select to be public, private; to show online status - last log, show all or just one characters in account; and an easier way to talk with them in game without having to be in a guild. Once a player is on your Global Friends List - you can see any of their characters from any of their characters (can still flag yourself as "invisible" or "do not disturb" to make a character not show up in global list). This lets us do global ignore as well, for those who would use it. Selecting (or hovering over with tool tip) a Global Friend in your list and it shows you the last (visible) character they logged in as, the server, and how long ago they logged off, if they aren't online. thanks to Artos_Fabril for the improvements!
3. Guild Information Kiosk: There needs to be a better way for guilds to communicate information in-game about their guilds to the general public - including membership rules, play times and styles, recruitment status - and a way to ask for an invitation. Current methods are all out of game (compendium) and private web-sites (guildportal.com for example) both require programming knowledge (wiki style and web layout). Just have a guild information kiosk in the upper harbor and or in Korthos where players could talk to the NPC to find out more about guilds (general), guilds (specific guilds), search for a guild, message guild leader (inquiry), and apply for membership to a guild. The alternative is to add another page to the social panel that does this as well.
4. Need a replacement to fill in the void caused by the demise of guild-slotted equipment. Not a total replacement, rather something that fills the greatest void. Two new ship amenities - each with different level for different level guilds. Same buff as available from guild augment crystals - so does not stack with itself.(Again thank you to Fearmaker and Alyonna for the suggestion)
   
   • Tiny: no ship available so not applicable
   • Small: Minimum Guild Level 25
     
     • Hit Point Shrine:+10 stacking maximum HP
     • Spell Point Shrine: +40 stacking maximum SP (+80 to Sorcerers and Favored Souls)
   • Medium: Minimum Guild Level 45
     
     • Hit Point Shrine: +15 stacking maximum HP
     • Spell Point Shrine: +60 stacking maximum SP (+80 to Sorcerers and Favored Souls)
   • Large: Minimum Guild Level 70
     
     • Hit Point Shrine: +30 stacking maximum HP
     • Spell Point Shrine: +80 stacking maximum SP (+160 to Sorcerers and Favored Souls)

this goes live on Monday the 18th of March 2013.

Kindly Note: Large Guilds (which are the minority in both number and total membership vs total population) object to any changes from the temporary ad hoc kludged system and wish the existing temporary system made permanent.

Kobold puts on its 33% fire reduction cloak of superior flame resistance.

Have a nice day! and a lovely St. Patrick's day!

Awwww... Now you're hiding the fact that you want all guilds to go back to a system where each member is counted towards renown decay.

1) I do not agree with this at all, none of this section

2) Don't see the need for this, think guild leaders should be more choosy when accepting new members, no need for turbine to program this.

Everything after your first section is basically extra fluff, that shouldn't be in an renown decay thread; they should each be in their own separate suggestion threads - There they could be debated to no end, instead of in this thread that is about the renown system. It's almost like ... it's a government.... adding in extra fluff hoping there will be a vote and the whole thing gets approved.... none of the extra suggestions have anything to do with this thread, and frankly - totally overpowered for your new guild buffs, and a lot of extra programming work.

I feel that a return to the old system that penalizes guilds based on their casual players is a bad idea, and I feel your ideas are not well thought out, and based on flawed data, because you don't have access to the data Turbine has access to.

I also feel that you are proposing these changes solely to help your own guild or a friends guild, and that you are not taking 'the big picture' into consideration.

[Charononus]

I have rewritten the proposal in a more easy to understand format – separating the proposal from additional ideas that have been generated in this forum that might deserve consideration.

Yes, this proposal does mean a tiny more decay for most guilds (all sizes, and levels) - and does affect even the level 1 through 25 guilds; yet the changes are fair and easily handled without any difficulty, especially since it eliminates the effect of casual players on decay unless they earn renown.

In pink as requested in another post.

SO here is the updated and revised proposal - prioritized easiest to implement first to the most difficult last.

[b][color=fuchsia]Eliminate Decay Altogether

but if Turbine says no, then:
[List=1][*]Modify temporary system by making simple and easy changes that take away 99% of the pressure away to boot. Is fair for all guilds of all sizes of all styles of play. Booting will still occur - but not because of the system. Easy to accomplish because mostly only modifying existing code by changing static variables.

1. member is not counted toward modified guild size until generates renown. (for mail checkers and purely social log ins)
2. instead of 30 days until considered inactive for guild purposes, change to one day (changed to account for daily dice);
3. remove the +10 to the modified guild size in the formula, with a modified minimum guild size becoming one - no cap/limit.
4. adjust decay to affect all guilds of all levels.
5. Significantly lower decay for higher level guilds by up to 93% (the level multiplier drops from up to 4.5 down to 2.5).
   
   1. Modified formula would be something like: modified_guild_size[i](1 being the minimum) x (guild_level x 2.5 (two point five)). [i]This change alone reduces decay for high level guilds by up to 93%)
   2. Keep It Simple - keep it transparent and easy to explain, understand, and compute.
6. Ransack set to start at 500K per day or at 2nd level - whichever is easier to implement. Ransack doesn't start to kick in until (500K) or (2nd level) is reached.

*snip*

Kindly Note: Large Guilds (which are the minority in both number and total membership vs total population) object to any changes from the temporary ad hoc kludged system and wish the existing temporary system made permanent.

Kobold puts on its 33% fire reduction cloak of superior flame resistance.

Have a nice day! and a lovely St. Patrick's day!

Since you want to nerf large guilds the only way to make your system fair is to nerf small guilds and get rid of all small and medium guild bonuses if you honestly want your system to be fair. Honestly from your complaints about small guilds wanting to boot maybe they should do that anyway, then recruiting more will always be better. You don't like that? Really that's shocking, maybe you understand why others hate your suggestion now.

As for your second part unless you are secretly a dev no data you have is accurate about #'s in what size guild, unless you think myddo is accurate in which case you have other problems.

[Hendrik]

Just add a +5%/10%/+15% Renown Shrine to the Amenities list available for placement at each corresponding level a new ship is available.

Can make Gold Seal for +10/+15/+20% for each corresponding upgrade ship level for money making.

Only highest take effect, stacks with pots and system bonus.

Done.

[Gremmlynn]

Kindly stop flinging mud

IMHO You are hiding your own dysfunctionality and lack of effort to disprove data with fact, by slinging bigoted and wildly inaccurate mud about guilds that aren't your guilds size and play style.

No, I use the word dysfunctional for guilds that don't function. I've been in these guilds with no active core or an active core that has moved on. I'll log in to nobody on and those who do log in will either log out almost immediately or maybe say hi and comment on how dead the guild is before logging back out. I don't need data to give opinions based on personal experience. I'm not hiding anything as I'm not even trying to play your game of "disprove the made up facts with data that doesn't exist".

This is proven definitely by your choosing to blatantly ignore 99.9999999^% of what is posted to refute your mud.

Opinions differ, they don't disprove each other. If I say I like vanilla ice cream, it doesn't matter how many "facts" or polls you post about how chocolate is better I'm still going to post that I like vanilla. If I think guilds dysfunctional, no matter how many people post that it isn't the case, or find it rude, I'm going to stick with it. At least until someone convinces me they have a function.

This is proven even more by your refusal to use multiquote or to combine multiple sequential postings into one.

All that is proven there is that I'm not so anal as to even check to see if my quotes are sequential before making the next, mostly because I don't care. I simply pick up the thread where I left off and comment as I go.

Start posting facts instead of just calling guilds dysfunctional because they don't fit your very walleyed tunnel-visioned view of the world.

No, I'm just basing my opinions on my personal experience and saying any guild I have been in that doesn't have a solid core of active players, the kind of players that don't log out if nobody else is on, tends to be considered useless by most casual players.

Guilds come in all flavors, sizes, styles, and membership commitment levels. They all have the right to do as they wish as long as they don't violate the EULA.

Here is where you and me differ in our opinions. IMO, most guild should have members of all those flavors. I'm not stuck on the idea that the player should be segregated into guilds along those lines. While the highly committed can get along fine that way, the rest don't do so well. Maybe you think a 7 man guild that has one player that plays each day of the week serves some purpose, I don't.

If a guild insists on all members playing at the same time so be it; will they boot if your play schedule is diametrically opposite to the bulk of the other players? Probably not because what time of the day you play doesn't affect earning renown or renown decay in any shape way or form.

Yes.

If a guild clearly states that it is only for Spanish speakers, they have that right and have the right to only invite those who speak Spanish. Common Sense? Common Purpose (Allowing for social interaction for those who speak a common language). Do you also find fault in this guild style?

Yes

If a guild insists on only uber-active members - then that is their right as long as they are up front about it and again don't violate the terms of the EULA. You might not like it (you don't as you have clearly and repeatedly stated time and time again).

Yes, but the games mechanics shouldn't support this view.

If a guild transitions to an active member only guild - that again is their right. Is it nice, and politically correct? Maybe, maybe not. The only thing Turbine should do about it is minimize the stimulus (something that rouses or incites to activity) that are unfair - player activity level.

Yes. If you hadn't noticed the game currently does minimize this stimulus for large guilds and could easily do so for small simply by removing the size bonuses.

If a guild chooses to only accept VIP's that is their choice, as also is a guild that prohibits VIP's and another that tells you that if your character dies, you must delete instantly.

Yes.

You don't get to decide for anyone other your you how to run their guild. Sorry Charlie the Kobold - you aren't the Union Boss.

No I don't. But I do get to express my opinion when someone promotes game mechanics that supports dividing the player base into those in guilds that work and those in guilds that are pointless.

All guilds CAN (as in having the POSSIBILITY) reach 100 through work and time, but NOT ALL GUILDS WILL (as having the PROBABILITY) due to many factors. A guild achieving level 100 is possible, but not always likely to happen. This probability can be changed by many factors.

Yes, that is what they gave us. Personally I think it's not a good way to support the game because by giving the overachievers something to strive for it gives, in my experience, the rest little but a source of drama and frustration. But they will do what they think is best, it's their livelihood on the line after all. All I do is give feedback based on my experiences with it.

As stated elsewhere - if a guild wants to earn renown faster, there are only three possible ways: more members, more activity, or more elixirs (or any and all combinations of the above).

So spoken in even simpler terms: all guilds possibly can achieve level 100 someday through hard work and time; most won't because they just don't have enough players, or aren't active enough to do it. Does that make them dysfunctional or lacking leadership? Absolutely Not.

No it doesn't. Having most of those capable of being leaders take most of those who are the most active players segregate themselves in their own exclusive guilds due to the mechanics favoring that does leave most of the rest of the player base stuck in pretty **** dysfunctional guilds though.

A small guild of weekend warriors can achieve level 100 someday - even if they don't ever talk to one another and play at different times. If you don't approve of that style guild, then don't join or leave it or fix it.

So can a one man "guild". That doesn't mean I actually have to consider it a guild. To me, both of those cases are just people playing the system. They are guilds in name, but much like a marriage for the purpose of immigration, not in spirit. If a guild loses any meaning without this guild leveling gimmick, to me it's not really a guild. Just a way to get more buffs.

You advocate little to no decay and that supports exactly what you claim to not want - see quote of your own words above.

You know, you have convinced me. The current system is much better than one with no decay. It gives those who are active and serious about achieving levels a reason to recruit those who simply want source of reliable people to play with. While at the same time it allows those who want to segregate themselves the "possibility" to achieve the same thing.

I don't like decay - and support Turbine removing it completely; but in the probably likelihood that Turbine insists on decay remaining - then decay must be assigned fairly and must be assigned based upon level and active member count in order to be fair. If you quote this line you must quote it all.

Fair to whom though? As it is it is fair to all guilds right now.

Actually - booting can and often does help small and medium guilds. Kindly review the guild renown system.

That can be easily fixed by simply removing the size bonuses.

Please kindly understand the renown system before telling others that they don't understand the renown system.

You see , this is the problem. You are trying to come up with a system that supports the renown system. While some of us are trying to come up with a renown system that supports guilds. Or at least doesn't interfere with them.

[Dandonk]

Fair to whom though? As it is it is fair to all guilds right now.

No.

[Gremmlynn]

Exactly.

Since one player guilds are doing fine, and there are multiple high-level small guilds; that DOES mean that any current guild who is not gaining levels to their satisfaction has bad leadership.

On the other hand, those that just don't care about guild levels and only care about having a small guild of friends - well, they don't care, they're not here complaining about it. As long as they accept that fact, their leadership is NOT dysfunctional.

I would go even deeper than that. Throw out the whole guild leveling system as it shouldn't be what defines guilds. It's just a gimmick the devs added on to give players something else to keep them occupied.

If a guilds leadership isn't around enough to keep there finger on the pulse of the guild, know what concerns the guild has and enforce an acceptable level of behavior within the guilds membership it is dysfunctional. A system that encourages every guild leader that does play enough to trim the guild down into a lean mean renown earning machine due to per member decay mechanics leaves most of those who don't fit into that mold getting by in guilds that have leadership that simply don't play enough to be effective at those things. Add to that, for every 6 hour/day generally 7 day/week player that no longer wants to guild with them, that guild would have to find 14 3hour/day, 1 day/week players and even that generally wouldn't fill the void as a more active player will generally log on to play while less involved players are as likely as not to log in to play with others and log back off if those others aren't present.

[Gremmlynn]

No.

Ah, that explains it.

[UurlockYgmeov]

No.

+1 rep.

[Dandonk]

Ah, that explains it.

Just as well as your post, I think.

But I'm not getting back into that. I'll just comment that devs have posted that this current temporary system is not intended to be final, and that it is not fair for small guilds to wait so long for a new system. This implies that there is an issue for small guilds with the current temporary system, and thus I still hope that the devs will come up with a new system soon, that will relieve the small guilds of their current renown burden.

Please do not think I want it to be harder on large guilds. I do not. I am happy that large guilds get it so easy now. I am even happier that their do not get pressured to change their preferred socializing style due to renown reasons.

EDIT: For an indepth treatment of the subject, with math, statistics and stuff see Vanshilar's posts. They are good reading, and give a lot of insight into the matter at hand.

I just wish that there would be some sort or balance between the guilds, regardless of socializing style - which Turbine has stated (both at the start and more recently) that they intend there to be. And that small guilds do not get pressured to change their preferred socializing style due to renown reasons. It was bad before, and it is bad now.

Thank you for reading. I will now go back to lurking in this thread until the 26th, when another month without any kind of word from Turbine will in all likelyhood have passed.

[Gremmlynn]

Guilds do feel the pressure to boot less active players. They always have and always will. This kludge just shifted the pressure from the large guilds to the medium and smaller guilds.

You make this sound like it's a simple fact of life we all must simply accept. Before they added the whole guild leveling gimmick to the game, where did this pressure come from? Identify that and maybe we can redesign this system to relieve it without adding other sources of pressure and the system will be adding something fundamentally positive to the game. Because, from what I've seen, the gimmick they stuck us with has done more harm than good.

[Gremmlynn]

2) Don't see the need for this, think guild leaders should be more choosy when accepting new members, no need for turbine to program this.

Meh, I just consider everyone to be on permanent probation (even the GL in the sense that having a guild that everyone quits due to them isn't much of a guild). No sense in being choosy when all it takes is one button push to eliminate a disruptive element, though often a private comment is all it really takes.

[Tshober]

Meh, I just consider everyone to be on permanent probation (even the GL in the sense that having a guild that everyone quits due to them isn't much of a guild). No sense in being choosy when all it takes is one button push to eliminate a disruptive element, though often a private comment is all it really takes.

Exactly. Why get all crazy over simple membership? It's not like you are making them an officer with the power to do real harm to your guild. Members can't do much damage even if they try really hard and can be booted so easily if they do try that it is not worth bothering to be ultra picky. And the vast majority will gladly play by the rules and try to help the guild succeed. The troublemakers can easily be weeded out later.

Only if you view your guild as a very exclusive/elite club, rather than as a cooperative/social venture, is there any reason for great scrutiny of new members. There are some players who view it that way but, IMO most players do not and for most players joining such a guild would not be very much fun anyway.

[Tshober]

But I'm not getting back into that. I'll just comment that devs have posted that this current temporary system is not intended to be final, and that it is not fair for small guilds to wait so long for a new system. This implies that there is an issue for small guilds with the current temporary system, and thus I still hope that the devs will come up with a new system soon, that will relieve the small guilds of their current renown burden.

I'm sure you meant decay burden, and not renown burden, since renown is good and helps you level up and decay is, well, a burden. I am also hopeful that the devs will see that it would be more fair to extend the decay relief they have already given to guilds with more than 10 players to the small guilds that have not received any decay relief yet at all. Or, better yet, just remove the burden (decay) entirely for all guilds regardless of size or play-style.