Guild Renown Changes

[Charononus]

Show me the Beef - give me concrete names (verifiable) of guilds with only 1 account in them that are level 100.

zonix I think his name is did it, don't know toon, server, or guild name.

[eris2323]

zonix I think his name is did it, don't know toon, server, or guild name.

Yeah, the guy who gamed the system during build your guild event, got a solo guild to level 100 in record time, and got a congrats from the devs for gaming the system.

So we can surmise from that that they don't mind if you game the system.

[UurlockYgmeov]

zonix I think his name is did it, don't know toon, server, or guild name.

that is what I thought as well - but isn't a one-account guild. Is a six account guild, yes all six one person - but still six accounts.

[eris2323]

that is what I thought as well - but isn't a one-account guild. Is a six account guild, yes all six one person - but still six accounts.

Good, so you know it happens already - and you can accept my statement that it happens based on that.

No more 'proof' needed.

[UurlockYgmeov]

LOL - I'm sorry, I have better things to do with my time - you may take a look at the broken stats amongst servers again via myddo, if you'd like - they're not accurate, but I'm sure you'll find a few.

Do keep in mind, unless they've made a major change to myddo; it will only list number of characters; not number of accounts - so it is impossible to 'prove' anyways.

I also know of a few 'guilds' that game the system - 5 fake accounts, solely to get to the sweet spot of guild renown bonus.

But the devs allow that sort of activity, even though in my mind, it's cheating

IMO You keep claiming wild speculations - and when asked to show your work and show your facts - you try to change the topic and start hammering away catch phrases and try desperately to slink out of the spotlight of truth.

[eris2323]

IMO You keep claiming wild speculations - and when asked to show your work and show your facts - you try to change the topic and start hammering away catch phrases and try desperately to slink out of the spotlight of truth.

We did show our work.

I'm just not willing to totally out a few 'solo' guilds on the public forums solely to satisfy your burning need to argue.

However, if you think you are sensing a reluctance in me to actual pander to you, or pay much attention to you; you're right. I'm not real fond of people who never, ever listen and communicate, and want to solely cry out "I'M RIGHT, I'M RIGHT, I'M RIGHT LISTEN TO ME" instead of actually talking about the pros and cons; and then you squelch those who don't agree, so why should I bother?

[Charononus]

We did show our work.

I'm just not willing to totally out a few 'solo' guilds on the public forums solely to satisfy your burning need to argue.

And it doesn't change that decay per account damages the playerbase's sense of community.

[eris2323]

And it doesn't change that decay per account damages the playerbase's sense of community.

Exactly - THAT is the fundamental flaw in his whole plan.

That attitude destroys games; it was well on its way before the devs put in the emergency fix they did.

I believe we should follow along the intentions of the new rules to not exclude people based on casualness, social playing or just not having enough time to pay back a renown debt per day based on account.

It would be excellent to give the tiny and small guilds another renown decay break, I'm not against that; I'm just totally against any return to a system that counts accounts and then gives you a debt based on that.

[Auralana7214]

I am totally confused about what is going on in this thread. Did I just see a line graph? I understand Pie charts better, and preferably they have real pie.

[eris2323]

I am totally confused about what is going on in this thread. Did I just see a line graph? I understand Pie charts better, and preferably they have real pie.

It currently requires a full time commitment to keep up with this thread, it is a lot of text going by.

Now I want pie. Thanks a lot.

[Auralana7214]

And it doesn't change that decay per account damages the playerbase's sense of community.

+1 for eloquence! That's exactly the point!

[Charononus]

I am totally confused about what is going on in this thread. Did I just see a line graph? I understand Pie charts better, and preferably they have real pie.

Uur wants to go back to the old system of decay just with lower amounts where casual/new players can hurt a guilds renown leading to casual/new players not being able to get into decent guilds where they can be part of a community. He feels that since more players can earn more renown faster they need to be punished for creating a large community.

[UurlockYgmeov]

Good, so you know it happens already - and you can accept my statement that it happens based on that.

No more 'proof' needed.

sorry charlie, that is not a one account guild.

[eris2323]

sorry charlie, that is not a one account guild.

Who is charlie, is that another attempt at an insult? Based on which book this time?

You obviously just want to argue semantics, I'm not into that.

If it's 'one person' behind a guild, it's a solo guild.

I don't care how many fake accounts they set up to game the system and make sure they get the biggest renown bonus, it's still one person.

[UurlockYgmeov]

Uur wants to go back to the old system of decay just with lower amounts where casual/new players can hurt a guilds renown leading to casual/new players not being able to get into decent guilds where they can be part of a community. He feels that since more players can earn more renown faster they need to be punished for creating a large community.

untrue and completely false.

[eris2323]

untrue and completely false.

Actually, to me, it totally seems like that's what you want - and your system promotes it, as well.

Perhaps you should work on your presentation; or perhaps you need to take the advice of soooo many people, and change the fundamental flaw in it.

[UurlockYgmeov]

I am totally confused about what is going on in this thread. Did I just see a line graph? I understand Pie charts better, and preferably they have real pie.

Ah - another Griffon's Nest.

Pie charts don't work well when comparing these types of information.

We have been asked to come up with a better renown decay system.

Here is mine - and all I ask it that you review it with an open mind and take time to think it over.

CORE CONCEPTS:

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. only those members who generate renown are counted toward modified guild size and only for the day they generate 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)). 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.
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. One other suggestion would be to put a plaque on each ship portal by the door that can be clicked on for more guild information. Some basic stats would also be neat, but not necessary, because stats on my.ddo are so out of touch with reality.
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)
5. Add a simple walkthrough to the guildship showroom. Allow people to get on a ship with all the hookpoints showing so they can see if they want to upgrade or buy a ship. Only the Captain is on the ship. Thank you to Skarlet for the suggestion!

Humorous anecdote.
"If a guild isn't making itself famous - then history will forget it, and it will slide into object obscurity.

But if a guild is out questing - doing heroic deeds and legendary victories that the mistrals will sing about (and be paid in renown - maybe that is what happens to the renown decayed? the mistrals ate it? :P ) then the guild will be remembered. However, memory is a fickle beast, very short and not long lived, faded glory fades fast unless quickly renewed with bold deeds."

[Tshober]

Uur wants to go back to the old system of decay just with lower amounts where casual/new players can hurt a guilds renown leading to casual/new players not being able to get into decent guilds where they can be part of a community. He feels that since more players can earn more renown faster they need to be punished for creating a large community.

I have asked him to fix his plan by ensuring that no players will be able to earn less than zero net renown. That way no players will cause their guild to lose renown, and guilds will not be rewarded (with more net renown) for shunning/kicking such players. He has refused to make that change because he feels strongly that guilds must be able to lose levels. Exactly why this must be so is very unclear, to say the least.

[Charononus]

snip to avoid spamming the same thing over and over and over and over and over again

The fundamental problem here is that the casual player has only time for say one quest, they get one or two chests, they don't earn enough to cover their decay. This means they are unwelcome in the guild. This means that guilds become exclusive again because of risk aversion. This means casuals and new players are alienated. Alienated players leave the game. People leaving the game means less money.

The one chest player may not happen often but it will happen and because it happens sometimes risk aversion will make it spread to all unknown players could be harmful and we have the old system again and all it's bad social elements.

[Charononus]

I have asked him to fix his plan by ensuring that no players will be able to earn less than zero net renown. That way no players will cause their guild to lose renown, and guilds will not be rewarded (with more net renown) for shunning/kicking such players. He has refused to make that change because he feels strongly that guilds must be able to lose levels. Exactly why this must be so is very unclear, to say the least.

I know that's why imo he wants to punish large guilds who foster a sense of community for all players. I don't get it, it harms the game, it's why I sometimes think he works for NWO.