Guild Renown Changes

[eris2323]

I offered a suggestion to improve your proposal but you rejected it because you said "not all guilds should be able to reach level 100". How ironically hypocritical of you to be getting all sanctimonious about needing to eliminate the "glass ceiling" when you yourself want to impose that same glass ceiling on other guilds. I can provide a link if you deny saying this, so don't bother.

I want ALL guilds to be able to advance and eventually reach the highest levels. You don't.


Here's the link:

He wants to ruin the game for all large guilds, in favor of his tiny guild.

Sigh.

What garbage.

[Tshober]

He wants to ruin the game for all large guilds, in favor of his tiny guild.

Sigh.

What garbage.

Yes, his plan is designed to ensure that HIS guild will reach 100 but other guilds will not. What a guy!

[UurlockYgmeov]

I want ALL guilds to be able to advance and eventually reach the highest levels. You don't.

False - all guilds should have the ability to reach level 100 - but not all guilds will is a better way of phrasing what I mean.

My system has no glass ceiling. The only limit to a guild ability to advance in levels is its activity level and time.

A ten member guild, a one-hundred member guild, and a one-thousand person guild all have the ability to reach level 100 - just not all will, and those that do will take different amounts of time.

Yes, his plan is designed to ensure that HIS guild will reach 100 but other guilds will not. What a guy!

Utter poppycock! A Gibbering Mouther makes more sense!

Again - come up with solutions rather than throwing mud and trying to spin words and meanings.

[Lowz]

I offered a suggestion to improve your proposal but you rejected it because you said "not all guilds should be able to reach level 100". How ironically hypocritical of you to be getting all sanctimonious about needing to eliminate the "glass ceiling" when you yourself want to impose that same glass ceiling on other guilds. I can provide a link if you deny saying this, so don't bother.

I want ALL guilds to be able to advance and eventually reach the highest levels:

Then fix your idea and eliminate the favoritism completely! You suggestion keeps the favoritism and just hides it behind words. His system fixes it and removed the favoritism completely. It is sad IMHO that you cannot see this and continue to blindly rant and show hatred toward him

Yes, his plan is designed to ensure that HIS guild will reach 100 but other guilds will not. What a guy!

Your arguments are devolving even further into inaneness without any solid evidence. The proposal should be made real now! He has clearly stated this time and time again. Yes every guild can become level 100, but not all guilds will, unlike the current broken system which prohibits all but large guilds from getting very far past level 65ish, and the previous one which made it nearly impossible for large guilds to reach 100.

with all due respect, IMHO start offering real solutions not personal attacks and twisting words from kobold's forked mouth.

Utter poppycock! A Gibbering Mouther makes more sense!

Ummm - what the heck is a gibbering mouther? :P

[Tshober]

False - all guilds should have the ability to reach level 100 - but not all guilds will is a better way of phrasing what I mean.

My system has no glass ceiling. The only limit to a guild ability to advance in levels is its activity level and time.

Is anybody buying this baloney? They all should be able to, except for when they don't have time or enough activity? There is no limit, except for time and activity level? What the heck does that mean? What system does NOT have that characteristic?

There are already many tiny guilds at level 100 under the current system, which for tiny guilds is exactly identical to the old system in terms of decay. They did not seem to hit any glass ceiling so I guess the current system is just as glass ceiling free as your plan. But you know what, until the current system was implemented there were ZERO large guilds at level 100. Isn't that something! I guess the current system has no glass ceiling for anybody. So how is your system any better? Seems to me it is, at best, the same and at worst like the old decay system that locks out large guilds.

[UurlockYgmeov]

Then fix your idea and eliminate the favoritism completely! You suggestion keeps the favoritism and just hides it behind words. His system fixes it and removed the favoritism completely. It is sad IMHO that you cannot see this and continue to blindly rant and show hatred toward him



Your arguments are devolving even further into inaneness without any solid evidence. The proposal should be made real now! He has clearly stated this time and time again. Yes every guild can become level 100, but not all guilds will, unlike the current broken system which prohibits all but large guilds from getting very far past level 65ish, and the previous one which made it nearly impossible for large guilds to reach 100.

with all due respect, IMHO start offering real solutions not personal attacks and twisting words from kobold's forked mouth.



Ummm - what the heck is a gibbering mouther? :P

something that lives on the forums and sputters nonsense through many mouths. It seems to have driven all the hard working kobolds away from this thread!

[Tychagara]

something that lives on the forums and sputters nonsense through many mouths. It seems to have driven all the hard working kobolds away from this thread!

+1
And it trys to bury good ideas under posts...

[eris2323]

Luckily, the devs are entirely silent - I'm done with this argument for now, you guys just repeat the same garbage over and over and the proposal is nothing more than a transparent attempt to help the guild of the user who suggested it.

Any dev worth their salt who has been reading the thread would immediately see it's garbage, with all the outrage and reasons other have posted.

I'm done with this for the evening, I'm sick of getting spammed with pages of garbage about how it's not a transparent attempt for an easy button for small and solo guilds, and wants to bring back the horrible mechanic of paying per account for renown decay.

You are unqualified to change the game systems.

[eris2323]

I don't know, could be, but I'm sick of the same 4 random people supporting one stupid idea the same way, with repeated spam, day after day after day.

The mods have easy plugins to detect ip address... but frankly, these 4 people are filling up this thread with the same repeated garbage day after day after day; turbine should close this thread... or something.

Luckily the devs and mods don't usually take the words of only 4 people into consideration when making their decision, and not a single one of of any official turbine staff have endorsed this transparent plot...

SooOooOOOo at this point, these 4 people are just wasting all of our time.

[Tshober]

The mods have easy plugins to detect ip address... but frankly, these 4 people are filling up this thread with the same repeated garbage day after day after day; turbine should close this thread... or something.

Oh how I wish they would close this thread. I am sick of having to keep arguing for months on end. But I am afraid that if I don't, somebody might convince the devs that we actually need to go back to something like that horrible old decay system.

[Lowz]

Oh how I wish they would close this thread. I am sick of having to keep arguing for months on end. But I am afraid that if I don't, somebody might convince the devs that we actually need to go back to something like that horrible old decay system.

You are correct - the same 4 filling the thread with hateful bigoted anti-small guild talk.

Well - we never left the old horrible system, just flipped who got the glass ceiling.

[avery61]

I'm very happy with the current guild decay system, but I've been in pretty large, fairly active guild for several years now. I do not see an issue with all guilds, small or large, having the capability of hitting level 100. Doesn't hurt anyone imo.

[Tshober]

Well - we never left the old horrible system, just flipped who got the glass ceiling.

No guild is getting any more decay under the current system than they were under the old system. None. Every guild with more than 10 players is getting less decay. All that needs to be done is to extend that decay reduction to the tiny guilds too.

[Tshober]

Luckily, the devs are entirely silent - I'm done with this argument for now, you guys just repeat the same garbage over and over and the proposal is nothing more than a transparent attempt to help the guild of the user who suggested it.

Any dev worth their salt who has been reading the thread would immediately see it's garbage, with all the outrage and reasons other have posted.

Yeah, I am confident that the devs will easily see through this guy and his sock puppets. He wants his guild to be able to reach 100 but he wants other guilds to be stuck forever at lower levels. And when I pointed out that he actually said that explicitly, his response was hilarious.

[Wipey]

Guess you are just not active enough.

Small guild member have to pull 5 - 10 times more renown ( even with size bonus ) than some large guild member under new system for the same progress if you do some math, so please just be quiet about " not being active " already.

The change reduced decay for some guilds tenfold, so naturally small guilds will want to know if there is going to be any change. I don't remember similar hostility against casual guild concerns asking for change.

[Tshober]

Small guild member have to pull 5 - 10 times more renown ( even with size bonus ) than some large guild member under new system for the same progress if you do some math, so please just be quiet about " not being active " already.

The change reduced decay for some guilds tenfold, so naturally small guilds will want to know if there is going to be any change. I don't remember similar hostility against casual guild concerns asking for change.

I was not the one who said lower activity guilds should not be able to reach level 100. That was the guy that keeps spamming his proposal. I was just using his own argument against him. I even quoted his statement that "not all guilds should be able to reach level 100".

I want ALL guilds to be able to advance and to be able to reach level 100 eventually, regardless of size and regardless of play-style. That is why I am advocating extending the decay relief to the smallest guilds that have not received any yet. And I have been advocating for total eliminating decay for over a year in these forums. No one that I am aware of has advocated longer or harder than me to reduce or eliminate decay so all guilds can level up.

My "hostility" is toward taking us back to a system that divides players into desirable and undesirable based on whether they earn more renown than they cost in decay. That is how the old decay system worked and how his proposed system would work. The current system does not do that and it can be easily extended to bring decay relief to the smaller guilds without going back in the direction of the old system.

[eris2323]

I was not the one who said lower activity guilds should not be able to reach level 100. That was the guy that keeps spamming his proposal. I was just using his own argument against him. I even quoted his statement that "not all guilds should be able to reach level 100".

I want ALL guilds to be able to advance and to be able to reach level 100 eventually, regardless of size and regardless of play-style. That is why I am advocating extending the decay relief to the smallest guilds that have not received any yet. And I have been advocating for total eliminating decay for over a year in these forums. No one that I am aware of has advocated longer or harder than me to reduce or eliminate decay so all guilds can level up.

My "hostility" is toward taking us back to a system that divides players into desirable and undesirable based on whether they earn more renown than they cost in decay. That is how the old decay system worked and how his proposed system would work. The current system does not do that and it can be easily extended to bring decay relief to the smaller guilds without going back in the direction of the old system.

I totally understand how you feel, and this guy's proposal is total garbage; it IS very funny how he didn't respond to you.

Because that's all he wants, he wants something to make his little solo guild get to level 100, and the rest of us can die.

Frankly, I agree - there ARE tiny and solo guilds at level 100, if this guy is having problems, he's not playing enough. Something is obviously wrong, since others can do it, and he can't - and by his own words not ever guild should make it to level 100.

Guess he needs to play more, spam less.

The rest of us support a lowered decay rate for small guilds, we do NOT support this persons disgusting proposal of bringing back the hatred towards casual players.

And I also understand your frustration with this thread. This guys whole argument is 'my solo guild isn't gaining levels quick enough, so i want to return to the old system'. But it is worrying if the devs ever go back to such a disgusting antisocial system, so I feel the same way.

It's total and complete garbage, the whole proposal.

I'm for a reduction in decay for all guilds - if it's needed, do it.

This guy just wants large guilds to suffer, solely so he can gain levels and maintain them easier as a solo guild.

I would support Gremmlynns proposal, which would reduce guild decay to a lower min for small guilds, while keeping the 10 person max for large guilds... it does seem a little more fair... but in the end, this whole decay mechanic is garbage, and should be removed.

[eris2323]

Small guild member have to pull 5 - 10 times more renown ( even with size bonus ) than some large guild member under new system for the same progress if you do some math, so please just be quiet about " not being active " already.

The change reduced decay for some guilds tenfold, so naturally small guilds will want to know if there is going to be any change. I don't remember similar hostility against casual guild concerns asking for change.

Gremmlynns proposal goes like this;

Guild members divided by 3 = new account multiplier.

Min 2, Max 10.

So the renown will never go up for anyone - all guilds that are 27 or less accounts will get ANOTHER renown decay decrease, as their max 10 accounts is no longer valid.

Therefore, a solo guild would only have a multiplier of 2.

AND they'd get to keep their small guild bonus.

Does that sound fair? It sounds more than fair to me, the renown cost will be reduced by a LARGE margin for tiny, small, and solo guilds.

And it won't entirely destroy the system and put a price on casual players heads.

[Cordovan]

Folks need to stop with the insults and personal attacks. Debate this subject civilly, please.

[UurlockYgmeov]

Folks need to stop with the insults and personal attacks. Debate this subject civilly, please.

Thank you.