Guild Renown Changes

[Gremmlynn]

Still - why don't you do just that simple request and answer his challenge and post the math?

Because that would just set me up to be called a liar that posts phony numbers that support my position. Also because I really don't care what the results are as I'm opposed to per member mechanics regardless.

Frankly, if I cared about how well my guild is doing I would play an a more active server in a more active guild. It's players like me who really don't give a rats ass that I'm more worried about being disadvantages by those who are worried about the ability to gain guild levels. The only system I'm interested in is one that lets those who enjoy the system be in guilds with those who could care less without it effecting either.

[eris2323]

Because you are using math to obscure social and psychological issues. Perception is greater than reality in this case. Even if the system would help 100% of people which you acknowledge it won't. If people believe casuals and new players are unwelcome they become so and Turbine looses money.

Exactly right.

Bad math, bad assumptions, and no experience with large guilds and their mechanics.

The proposed system 'looks good' to small guilds on paper, but it's obviously self-serving; he wants to make a system that will benefit solo and tiny guilds over large guilds; not agreeing with that.

Not even agreeing that the system should be balanced for '1 player guilds', myself. That's just a slap in the face to all people who play as a team.

[UurlockYgmeov]

How do you know it links having earned renown to having logged in?
Not so sure about that, it would seem more likely to "punish" guilds by counting players who don't log in for decay and size bonuses would be more in their favor than giving those who don't log in a pass. That would be why the system came out with a 1 month decay timer it would seem.
It only needs to be fair for 5 or fewer player guilds if they choose to make it fair for them. I really doubt they will ever try to make it fair for 1 player "guilds" and think 6 is the min size they feel comfortable with due to the way size bonuses are set up.
you miss my point. I see them deciding that sizexlevelx100 to be more in line with what they are comfortable with than sizexlevelx2.5, add to that players counting for longer than just the one day they log in (or maybe play) and it gets us back where we started at.

It doesn't - but there is already a mechanism that can be used.

You are reading the Dev's minds and intent. Nobody can do that. The mere fact that the Dev's did the temporary changes already contradicts your statement.

By being paranoid and presuming that the dev's are out to get you you miss the fact that they play the game as well as they need to game to be fun in order to keep it alive.

So trying to guess the dev's intentions is moot and a waste of time. We need to tell them (within the limits of what they are willing to do - and they have already shown us they are willing to adjust decay but not eliminate decay altogether).

Because that would just set me up to be called a liar that posts phony numbers that support my position. Also because I really don't care what the results are as I'm opposed to per member mechanics regardless.

Frankly, if I cared about how well my guild is doing I would play an a more active server in a more active guild. It's players like me who really don't give a rats @33 that I'm more worried about being disadvantages by those who are worried about the ability to gain guild levels. The only system I'm interested in is one that lets those who enjoy the system be in guilds with those who could care less without it effecting either.

— edited for content

Alright - then screenshot it. Can't be called a liar if you document it.

I am only interested (personally) in a guild system that all can enjoy - including me - but must be fair for all guilds - and force none to be a 'certain' appropriate size. If a person wants to buy with real money a charter, a ship, and gold seal amenities and renown elixirs - then the more for them and the company. I know the level 55 ship the guild I am in just bought was split between at least 10 accounts.

Be fair, be sensible, be respectful of others play styles.

[eris2323]

It doesn't - but there is already a mechanism that can be used.

You are reading the Dev's minds and intent. Nobody can do that. The mere fact that the Dev's did the temporary changes already contradicts your statement.

By being paranoid and presuming that the dev's are out to get you you miss the fact that they play the game as well as they need to game to be fun in order to keep it alive.

So trying to guess the dev's intentions is moot and a waste of time. We need to tell them (within the limits of what they are willing to do - and they have already shown us they are willing to adjust decay but not eliminate decay altogether).



Alright - then screenshot it. Can't be called a liar if you document it.

I am only interested (personally) in a guild system that all can enjoy - including me - but must be fair for all guilds - and force none to be a 'certain' appropriate size. If a person wants to buy with real money a charter, a ship, and gold seal amenities and renown elixirs - then the more for them and the company. I know the level 55 ship the guild I am in just bought was split between at least 10 accounts.

Be fair, be sensible, be respectful of others play styles.

Ah; well as many people have pointed out, your system is NOT fair to large, casual guilds, and will cause some guilds to start to once again shun the new or casual player.

That's certainly not fair for all.

You are also reading intentions into the devs non-existent words....

Where did they ever say that old guilds that are still in the system are causing lag, and why have they never extended renown to affect all guilds, and not just level 25+?

I mean, could be I'm wrong, but I don't think so. Let's see a link that proves that we need to 'cull inactive guilds'.

Seems to me they could program any number of things into the system to solve such a problem, *IF* such a problem exists, and is not solely in your mind as an excuse to destroy other peoples guilds.

Your system is offensive to me - it is an obvious scheme to destroy other peoples guilds and help your own.

[Tshober]

Because you are using math to obscure social and psychological issues. Perception is greater than reality in this case. Even if the system would help 100% of people which you acknowledge it won't. If people believe casuals and new players are unwelcome they become so and Turbine looses money.

Yes, this is a very good point. As long as players understand that adding a new member will increase the guild's decay penalty, they will be very unlikely to take anyone who is not a large renown contributor. That is why we really need to stay away from such plans.

[Gremmlynn]

It doesn't - but there is already a mechanism that can be used.

You are reading the Dev's minds and intent. Nobody can do that. The mere fact that the Dev's did the temporary changes already contradicts your statement.

By being paranoid and presuming that the dev's are out to get you you miss the fact that they play the game as well as they need to game to be fun in order to keep it alive.

So trying to guess the dev's intentions is moot and a waste of time. We need to tell them (within the limits of what they are willing to do - and they have already shown us they are willing to adjust decay but not eliminate decay altogether).

You mistake cynicism for paranoia. Personaly I'm to cynical to believe that even if the devs wanted to do things your way and wrote up the code, someone with a more profit orientated agenda wouldn't make then change values to something they came up with in a few seconds of ham fisted skimming and break it.

Alright - then screenshot it. Can't be called a liar if you document it.

I feel an open guild invitation is a more than a generous offer if he's so interested in the data. I'm just not interested enough in the results to put forth the effort.

I am only interested (personally) in a guild system that all can enjoy - including me - but must be fair for all guilds - and force none to be a 'certain' appropriate size. If a person wants to buy with real money a charter, a ship, and gold seal amenities and renown elixirs - then the more for them and the company. I know the level 55 ship the guild I am in just bought was split between at least 10 accounts.

Be fair, be sensible, be respectful of others play styles.

As I said, I am only interested in eliminating any side effects due to this system from anyone who chooses to ignore it's existence. This includes the unimpeded ability to guild with those that choose to play it. That, to me, is the only way to be fair, sensible or respectful of others.

You on the other hand just seem to be interested in making a system that's fair to those who want to play it with no regards to the side effects to those who don't, but want to continue to play with those who do for other reasons.

[UurlockYgmeov]

You mistake cynicism for paranoia. Personaly I'm to cynical to believe that even if the devs wanted to do things your way and wrote up the code, someone with a more profit orientated agenda wouldn't make then change values to something they came up with in a few seconds of ham fisted skimming and break it.
I feel an open guild invitation is a more than a generous offer if he's so interested in the data. I'm just not interested enough in the results to put forth the effort.
As I said, I am only interested in eliminating any side effects due to this system from anyone who chooses to ignore it's existence. This includes the unimpeded ability to guild with those that choose to play it. That, to me, is the only way to be fair, sensible or respectful of others.

You on the other hand just seem to be interested in making a system that's fair to those who want to play it with no regards to the side effects to those who don't, but want to continue to play with those who do for other reasons.

IMHO Cynicism and paranoid. Altruism is non-existent - there is always a WIIFM. For me I fight this fight for my friends so they don't have to, and so that when the guild I am in hits level 65+ we can continue to progress in a fair way.

If they don't want to play with decay then they don't have to - they can just not be in a guild and use the friends list and so on. I have also provided suggestions that also improve the game for those who just want to be social. I keep my personal feelings out of this as much as is humanly possible - infact I just want to have an unbiased system which we don't currently have. unbiased means without bias for any size or level of guild - from one account to max accounts. I just want what everyone wants - to have fun in game with out be discriminated against.

One more point - just because you play the way you play doesn't mean everyone does - and forcing them to play your way just to fit into a system is wrong.

BTW - am in game - in wayfinder as Uurlock waiting guild invite. will take the screenshots, redact for character names, and count / do math. Am waiting. will delete from select screen when done.

[Tshober]

One more point - just because you play the way you play doesn't mean everyone does - and forcing them to play your way just to fit into a system is wrong..

Yes, exactly. I wish your plan actually took that to heart. If it did, we would be in agreement.

[Drakesan]

One more point - just because you play the way you play doesn't mean everyone does - and forcing them to play your way just to fit into a system is wrong.

That is exactly the problem with your proposed system. It takes us back to a modified version of the old system.

I do, and will continue to, support and advocate a system that will give a boost to small guilds, but NOT at the expense of larger guilds. And there is the crux of the debate: how to allow all size guilds advance without hitting the math wall that doesn't allow a guild to advance.

Us large, casual guilds hit that wall some years back. Yes, years. The recent change allowed a lot of guilds to once again advance in levels and not have us contemplating removing people. Wonderful!

Just because I am too lazy to go look it up, does anyone have the data of the # of guilds that gained levels 6 months before the change, and those that have gained since? I really am curious if there was an increase, decrease, etc.

Edit: Cyr said it best. (see my sig below.)

[UurlockYgmeov]

Thank you to Gremmlynn for the invite and here is the data (and the redacted screenshots to provide the veracity / legitimacy of the information provided). As promised deleted character from select screen as soon as I took the screenshots.

Now during the screenshotting - a member ('M') logged in and out within one minute - (personal note that doesn't affect the data: seems to be a very friendly welcoming guild - in fact the guild MotD was very similar to the MotD that the guild I belong to has).

I included 'M' and myself (the screenshots show my character/account) in the math below. Total came to 30 members showed last on during the last 23.59 hours. Divide that by 3 to account for mail logs and same account characters comes to 10.

Simple static variables: guild is level 51 currently. Has a 98 modified account size (214 active accounts - 124 inactive accounts + 8 recent departures)

Under old decay - would have been 11,700 per day (98 * 119.3859) and this works out to 119 per member affecting decay.

Under temporary decay - should be 2,388 per day (20 * 119.3859) and this works out to 24 per member (2,388 / 98)

Under proposed decay - would be about 1,275 decay per day (51 * 2.5 *(30/3)) and this works out to 43 per member.

Your guild would do better under the proposed system, now and in the future.

Level 75 math - same membership / activity:
Old: 72,352
Temp: 14,766
Proposed: 1,875

Level 100 math - same membership / activity
Old: 330,750
Temp: 67,500
Proposed: 2,500

Redacted Screenshots:

[UurlockYgmeov]

That is exactly the problem with your proposed system. It takes us back to a modified version of the old system.

I do, and will continue to, support and advocate a system that will give a boost to small guilds, but NOT at the expense of larger guilds. And there is the crux of the debate: how to allow all size guilds advance without hitting the math wall that doesn't allow a guild to advance.

Us large, casual guilds hit that wall some years back. Yes, years. The recent change allowed a lot of guilds to once again advance in levels and not have us contemplating removing people. Wonderful!

Just because I am too lazy to go look it up, does anyone have the data of the # of guilds that gained levels 6 months before the change, and those that have gained since? I really am curious if there was an increase, decrease, etc.

Edit: Cyr said it best. (see my sig below.)

See real life data from a large guild just posted above. Proposed system helps them - and the proposed system only continues to increase its benefit to them as they go up in levels.

I agree with your sig. Our proposal allows for just that.

[Gremmlynn]

If they don't want to play with decay then they don't have to - they can just not be in a guild and use the friends list and so on. I have also provided suggestions that also improve the game for those who just want to be social. I keep my personal feelings out of this as much as is humanly possible - infact I just want to have an unbiased system which we don't currently have. unbiased means without bias for any size or level of guild - from one account to max accounts. I just want what everyone wants - to have fun in game with out be discriminated against.

One more point - just because you play the way you play doesn't mean everyone does - and forcing them to play your way just to fit into a system is wrong.

BTW - am in game - in wayfinder as Uurlock waiting guild invite. will take the screenshots, redact for character names, and count / do math. Am waiting. will delete from select screen when done.

No, they can't just use their friends list. First off they would have to make the friends, that generally happens by joining a guild. Second, a friends list doesn't give access to your friends friends or their friends, etc, that being in a guild with all those people does give access to.

You see, playing my way in no way impedes others playing theirs, unless "their way" is to force something on to me. Playing your way means those who play occasionally might as well not play at all as the only guilds they would likely have access to are those with others who play to occasionally to reliably be on at the same time to play with.

Also, got your PM, the character Uurlock does not exist according to the mail invite and is unavailable according to chat.
Edit: Ah, you got an invite and deleted. By the way M was me timing out on log in trying to invite you, wish they'd do something about that little annoyance too.

[UurlockYgmeov]

Also, got your PM, the character Uurlock does not exist according to the mail invite and is unavailable according to chat.

Thank you - was invited and took screenshots, and as promised deleted from character select screen.

Math / screenshots above.

also - I have many people on my friends list just from PUG's; but the proposal also includes strong suggestion that the dev's work on improving the friends list as well.

[Charononus]

snip

Proves nothing but you can do math. The problem is not math it's social and psychological. Math has absolutely ZERO to do with it. Math is not the problem the answer the solution or a proof in this case. You are dealing with a social science in this case not arithmetic.

[Tshober]

See real life data from a large guild just posted above. Proposed system helps them - and the proposed system only continues to increase its benefit to them as they go up in levels.

I agree with your sig. Our proposal allows for just that.

It's nice that it helps for that one day. But that does not even address or take into account or have any relevance at all to the real problem with your plan. The real problem is your plan will have players who earn less renown than their guilds will lose to decay by inviting them. And there will be just as much incentive for guilds to shun/kick those players as they had under the old system. It does not matter that there will be fewer of them. It does not matter that the guild will have less decay than the old system. Your plan will still discriminate against those players. It could be fixed easily but you refuse to fix it because you say guilds must be able to stagnate and lose levels. I'm sorry but that is just not good enough.

You yourself said that forcing players to play your way is wrong. Forcing players to farm renown every time they log in is wrong. And all your baloney about opting out of guilds and using friend lists is hypocritical in the extreme. You are telling them you must play my way or be forced out. Do you have any self awareness at all? I sure can't detect any.

[UurlockYgmeov]

Right about now am praising the high gods for the /squelch. :P

Am sure that the trolls and flamers are out in full strength saying that math is wrong, math is not showing the whole picture - that math is irrelevant and means nothing.

Math is the basis for everything including basic psychology.

Am just sure that IMHO that the trolls and flamers are just mad because my point has been proven so overwhelmingly and simply.

The proposed system is hands-down better than the temporary and unbelievably better than the previous decay system.

Please - anyone else want me to show how the system would benefit you and your guild? Any size and server. Just send private message.

The proposed system allows everybody to play the way they want - with whom they want - within the limits of the EULA and basic game mechanics. Doesn't force anyone to play anyway.

[Tshober]

Right about now am praising the high gods for the /squelch. :P

Am sure that the trolls and flamers are out in full strength saying that math is wrong, math is not showing the whole picture - that math is irrelevant and means nothing.

Math is the basis for everything including basic psychology.

Am just sure that IMHO that the trolls and flamers are just mad because my point has been proven so overwhelmingly and simply.

The proposed system is hands-down better than the temporary and unbelievably better than the previous decay system.

Please - anyone else want me to show how the system would benefit you and your guild? Any size and server. Just send private message.

Do you really believe you are fooling anyone with this? Anyone who has read the thread closely and has a basic understanding of the decay system (ie. any dev) will understand our point and all your bragging about your superiority and ignoring other posters when they bring up legitimate issues will mean nothing in the end. But, by all means, enjoy the bliss.

[eris2323]

Proves nothing but you can do math. The problem is not math it's social and psychological. Math has absolutely ZERO to do with it. Math is not the problem the answer the solution or a proof in this case. You are dealing with a social science in this case not arithmetic.

That is exactly right.

I don't really care that his system reduces decay by such a huge amount. It is obvious that it will favor tiny and solo guilds, and I do not think the system should give such a huge bonus to solo and tiny guilds; they deserve a break, but not something that penalizes large guilds.

If the devs were going to reduce it to so little, it seems like it'd make more sense just to turn it off, rather than waste the hours and months to re-create a system that will change people back into just numbers for turbines playing-grind-monthly-meetings.

Would be easier to just turn off decay, in other words. Why bother coding this mess of a system, which has so many issues?

I still don't see why his system has to include a way to steal guilds from people that he don't consider are playing enough, either.

[Charononus]

Do you really believe you are fooling anyone with this? Anyone who has read the thread closely and has a basic understanding of the decay system (ie. any dev) will understand our point and all your bragging about your superiority and ignoring other posters when they bring up legitimate issues will mean nothing in the end. But, by all means, enjoy the bliss.

Honestly, and I'm not trying to insult him with this, so I'm going to try to phrase this as delicately as I can. I think Uur may be suffering from a social developmental disorder such as autism, asperger ext. This is not an insult, I've worked with many with such disorders and my own daughter has autism. However one thing that can happen quite often with high functioning patients of such disorders is that they become fixated on math being the only important thing even in social situations and can lose focus and understanding of the whole picture no matter how intelligent they are. Claiming that math is the root of psychology earlier is a good example of this. It's not an insult once again but an observation and I for one feel nothing but compassion and sympathy for those effected by such disorders. It may not be true in Uur's case I'm not a doctor and have not met him but from a laymen perspective it's possible. Once again only sympathy and compassion.

[Lowz]

Right about now am praising the high gods for the /squelch. :P

Am sure that the trolls and flamers are out in full strength saying that math is wrong, math is not showing the whole picture - that math is irrelevant and means nothing.

Math is the basis for everything including basic psychology.

Am just sure that IMHO that the trolls and flamers are just mad because my point has been proven so overwhelmingly and simply.

The proposed system is hands-down better than the temporary and unbelievably better than the previous decay system.

Please - anyone else want me to show how the system would benefit you and your guild? Any size and server. Just send private message.

The proposed system allows everybody to play the way they want - with whom they want - within the limits of the EULA and basic game mechanics. Doesn't force anyone to play anyway.

you are right uurlock - the (in my humble opinion) the flamers and trolls will now fling mud and dirt at you just to hide the facts. heck one is even calling you mentally insufficient and having autism. wow.... insulting.