Guild Renown Changes

[Viisari]

Another solution would be to recruit, and get away from that magic number of 'exploit the guild system with 6-12 accounts' that everyone has been using for a year, or more, now. Give some new players a home. Teach them the ropes.

Why Turbine gives such a huge bonus to small guilds is beyond me. They should be rewarding those who engage their players.

You do realize that there are plenty of other reasons than guild renown for having a small guild?

Like, maybe, I dunno, wanting a small, organized and active group of people to play with? Or having a guild that only has IRL friends in it like my very first guild.

Thinking that every small guild was just looking to exploit the system is ********. Some of us don't want to randomly just recruit lots of people, guild renown doesn't even enter the equation much of the time. Our guilds are more about small, tightly knit groups rather than having tons of random people with the same guild name.

If this new system is to stay then just remove guild levels completely because they're going to mean nothing at all.

[eris2323]

You do realize that there are plenty of other reasons than guild renown for having a small guild?

Like, maybe, I dunno, wanting a small, organized and active group of people to play with? Or having a guild that only has IRL friends in it like my very first guild.

Thinking that every small guild was just looking to exploit the system is ********. Some of us don't want to randomly just recruit lots of people, guild renown doesn't even enter the equation much of the time. Our guilds are more about small, tightly knit groups rather than having tons of random people with the same guild name.

If this new system is to stay then just remove guild levels completely because they're going to mean nothing at all.

If you choose to play with a self-imposed penalty (like a small guild, or a permadeath guild), I do not see why the rest of us have had to suffer.

During all this time, the large guilds have been suffering, as people left to form these uber-small guilds to game the system. So, I don't have a lot of sympathy.

Some succeeded, some failed. Good luck to them.

A very large percentage of guild leaders would love a change to renown. We're worried about vastly more players than you. Under the new, proposed system, there is a solution to your problem - recruit. Under the old system, there was a solution to our problem - kick out casual players.

Your solution is less painful than our old solution. Feel thankful. I do hope in the future, the system will be changed to something that will allow all guilds to rise in levels, but I am not sure a guild of 6 people should be able to make it to level 100 in less than say, 6 years or so.

As the leader of a large guild with MANY casual players, I can say we did not shoot up in levels during this test. It was nice to not see the same decay every day, and to see a little, tiny bit of growth during this time.

I still hope this change becomes a permanent change - our guild would like to return to closer to our roots, and invite some poor newbies to game with us, and learn the games - so we can share in their fun journey.

But we can't, ever - without a major change to the renown system.

[Cernunan]

Another solution would be to recruit, and get away from that magic number of 'exploit the guild system with 6-12 accounts' that everyone has been using for a year, or more, now. Give some new players a home. Teach them the ropes.

Why Turbine gives such a huge bonus to small guilds is beyond me. They should be rewarding those who engage their players.

As usual you are being rude to those who do not agree with you.

The fact is that some of use value quality over quantity. Having been the leader of both a huge guild, as well as my current small guild, I just prefer to be in a group of friends who play and think and talk the way I do.
We have played and supported the game for YEARS. We find this environment much preferable to being in a guild of hundreds of people we do not even know, for the sole reason of waving hi to strangers.

Some of us do not care that larger guilds have it easier now. I am glad that you are happy. Have fun.
What we do care is that the new changes gut the equity of the system, so that small, organized, friend guilds of people who have played since the game started are no longer on an even playing field with those who have to build huge glut guilds of complete strangers.

[eris2323]

As usual you are being rude to those who do not agree with you.

The fact is that some of use value quality over quantity. Having been the leader of both a huge guild, as well as my current small guild, I just prefer to be in a group of friends who play and think and talk the way I do.
We have played and supported the game for YEARS. We find this environment much preferable to being in a guild of hundreds of people we do not even know, for the sole reason of waving hi to strangers.

Some of us do not care that larger guilds have it easier now. I am glad that you are happy. Have fun.
What we do care is that the new changes gut the equity of the system, so that small, organized, friend guilds of people who have played since the game started are no longer on an even playing field with those who have to build huge glut guilds of complete strangers.

If you perceived rudeness, sorry. That was not my intent.

I know all my guildies, a little - i built a community for us.

I have put a lot of working into creating the things that Turbine has not given us.

My large guild is my home. I am sorry you have not been able to find a home like ours.

[Viisari]

If you choose to play with a self-imposed penalty (like a small guild, or a permadeath guild), I do not see why the rest of us have had to suffer.

So wanting to build a specific kind of guild is supposed to be a "self-imposed penalty"? Seriously?

During all this time, the large guilds have been suffering, as people left to form these uber-small guilds to game the system. So, I don't have a lot of sympathy.

Large guilds are also the ones who got the best ship buffs first , not many of them have many, if any, noteworthy buffs left to get.

A very large percentage of guild leaders would love a change to renown. We're worried about vastly more players than you. Under the new, proposed system, there is a solution to your problem - recruit. Under the old system, there was a solution to our problem - kick out casual players.

The old system was in need of some tweaking, but in typical Turbine fashion they just straight out brought the sledgehammer out and smashed the system completely.

And your solution "to my problem" is the same as telling people to kick out casuals under the old system. You say you want casuals in your guild and don't want to kick them? We have always been very specific in our recruiting, basically you'd have to know one or several people from our guild for a good long while if you want in.

Our guild is built with some very specific ideas, and now you're telling us to just abandon those?`

See how the tables are now completely opposite from before? Large guilds get all the benefits in the world while small guilds have little to no benefits as far as renown is concerned.

Your solution is less painful than our old solution. Feel thankful. I do hope in the future, the system will be changed to something that will allow all guilds to rise in levels, but I am not sure a guild of 6 people should be able to make it to level 100 in less than say, 6 years or so.

You presume much. "Our solution" is something that we will never do because it does not fit the idea of our guild. At all.

On the other hand "your solution" under the old system was kicking out people who hadn't logged in for months or years. Why is kicking someone who has not logged in for years an issue in the first place? If they were ever to come back they could just join up again.

I still hope this change becomes a permanent change - our guild would like to return to closer to our roots, and invite some poor newbies to game with us, and learn the games - so we can share in their fun journey.

But we can't, ever - without a major change to the renown system.

And now that the system benefits your guild you're happily telling everyone that it's fine and everyone should just completely change the way their guilds operate to compensate? Classy.

I've stated in the past that I don't really care if the renown system is changed, but I guess I should've added that any such change should at least done sensibly and not with the typical sledgehammer approach like was done here again.

My large guild is my home. I am sorry you have not been able to find a home like ours.

But we do have a home we've built. And your solution is to completely demolish that.

[eris2323]

And now that the system benefits your guild you're happily telling everyone that it's fine and everyone should just completely change the way their guilds operate to compensate? Classy.

I've stated in the past that I don't really care if the renown system is changed, but I guess I should've added that any such change should at least done sensibly and not with the typical sledgehammer approach like was done here again.

Actually, I said I like the changes, and was hoping for more, as the devs have stated this was an easy-fix for them, and a test.

Since you are one of 'those' who puts words in my mouth, without following closely enough to realize you are wrong, this ends now. Good luck with your small guild!

Building a permadeath guild is a self-imposed penalty. So is building a guild with 2 players.

[Tshober]

You do realize that there are plenty of other reasons than guild renown for having a small guild?

Like, maybe, I dunno, wanting a small, organized and active group of people to play with? Or having a guild that only has IRL friends in it like my very first guild.

Thinking that every small guild was just looking to exploit the system is ********. Some of us don't want to randomly just recruit lots of people, guild renown doesn't even enter the equation much of the time. Our guilds are more about small, tightly knit groups rather than having tons of random people with the same guild name.

If this new system is to stay then just remove guild levels completely because they're going to mean nothing at all.

Of course not EVERY guild in the optimal size range for leveling under the old decay system chose that size deliberately to level up higher. But there is no denying that SOME guilds in that size range were made specifically for leveling up higher. If this change remains in place, then it will become pretty obvious which guilds were small because they really like being small and which were small because they really like leveling up. The former will remain small and the latter will jump to faster leveling guilds.

If the change remains in place, I would like to see the devs help out the smaller guilds some by increasing the small guild bonuses (within reason) so the tiny and small guilds remain viable. The players who really want to level up will migrate to whatever guild size is perceived as being the optimal for leveling. The rest of us will remain where we are now because we did not choose where are are based on leveling considerations.

[Viisari]

Actually, I said I like the changes, and was hoping for more, as the devs have stated this was an easy-fix for them, and a test.

Since you are one of 'those' who puts words in my mouth, without following closely enough to realize you are wrong, this ends now. Good luck with your small guild!

But you did tell us to recruit more players, which is the same telling us to completely change the way our guild operates.

No one has put any words in your mouth.

Building a permadeath guild is a self-imposed penalty. So is building a guild with 2 players.

I do not care about permadeath, and look! He's making silly assumptions again! Our guild has far more than 2 players, last time I check we were at 21 active accounts I think.

And thinking that wishing to build a small guild is, or should be a limitation is just flat out ********.

[Viisari]

Of course not EVERY guild in the optimal size range for leveling under the old decay system chose that size deliberately to level up higher. But there is no denying that SOME guilds in that size range were made specifically for leveling up higher.

Just as there were guilds who were only mass recruiting because that helped them blaze through the levels so quickly.

Only that doesn't work all the way, so for optimal playing the system you'd have to first mass recruit and then start kicking the people who aren't active enough when you hit level 65 or so.

With the new system large guilds have every single advantage, so if these changes stay in place we'll start seeing huge guilds again with the single purpose of getting to high guild levels.

[eris2323]

But you did tell us to recruit more players, which is the same telling us to completely change the way our guild operates.

No one has put any words in your mouth.



I do not care about permadeath, and look! He's making silly assumptions again! Our guild has far more than 2 players, last time I check we were at 21 active accounts I think.

And thinking that wishing to build a small guild is, or should be a limitation is just flat out ********.

I suggested a fix for what you perceive is an injustice in the system, which I do not perceive is an injustice in the system. It is a simple fix, and you would make new friends and level faster!

I use the number 2 to demonstrate my point. I did not mean YOUR guild had only 2 people in it. I mean, that when a guild is permadeath, or a guild of one, one has chosen a self imposed penalty, to make the game to your liking.

Small guilds like that, I believe, SHOULD take forever and a day to get to level 100, but should still have a chance of getting there.

Guilds that are homes to hundreds of accounts - seperate people, should be getting a bonus, for maintaining their community and growing something people want to be a part of. We SHOULD be levelling much faster than any 12 person guild, ever. In my opinion, of course.

I do not want to suffer because of someone elses self-imposed penalty.

Never once did I 'you're happily telling everyone that it's fine'.

This is where I take offence.

[Viisari]

Guilds that are homes to hundreds of accounts - seperate people, should be getting a bonus, for maintaining their community and growing something people want to be a part of.

This applies to small guilds as well, some issues are easier for large guilds and some are more difficult for them just as some issues are easier for small guilds and others are difficult for them. Both have their own goals and communities.

Small guilds like that, I believe, SHOULD take forever and a day to get to level 100, but should still have a chance of getting there.

We SHOULD be levelling much faster than any 12 person guild, ever. In my opinion, of course.

And that means this is utter nonsense. There's no reason why small OR large guilds should have any advantages over the other as far as the system itself goes. People should be free to choose what size of a guild they wish to build, how renown works should not enter the equation at all.

Both systems have failed in this but the previous system wasn't this unfair towards any kind of guild at any point. In the past different sizes had their benefits at different guild levels, now it's just go big all the way if you want renown.

What the old system did succeed in was the its designed intent though: The very highest levels were very difficult to achieve and were an accomplishment. That is no longer the case however, so even the intent behind the system has changed.

[Tshober]

Just as there were guilds who were only mass recruiting because that helped them blaze through the levels so quickly.

Only that doesn't work all the way, so for optimal playing the system you'd have to first mass recruit and then start kicking the people who aren't active enough when you hit level 65 or so.

With the new system large guilds have every single advantage, so if these changes stay in place we'll start seeing huge guilds again with the single purpose of getting to high guild levels.

If a guild becomes very large through recruiting (mass or otherwise) and retains those members and the members like the guild and keep playing DDO, that is a good thing, as far as I am concerned. Mass recruiting only becomes exploitive if you abuse the new players by later mass kicking them. There have already been a number of good suggestions made in this thread for ways to punish guilds for mass kicking. I support such penalties for mass kicking, as long as there is a reasonable time limit after which the penalty does not apply. For instance, if a member has not logged in for more than say 3 months, then the penalty should not apply because the player has obviously stopped playing DDO.

[Viisari]

If a guild becomes very large through recruiting (mass or otherwise) and retains those members and the members like the guild and keep playing DDO, that is a good thing, as far as I am concerned.

Sure, just as a new player finding a small guild with a bunch of players he loves playing with is a good thing.

There's absolutely no reason any size of guild should be favored. The old system favored very high activity of players with some leanings towards small guilds At the very highest guild levels; before that it overwhelmingly favored large guilds because decay was not an issue. The issue was that the very big guilds never, ever had anywhere near the same average activity as small guilds did.

So the system did actually accomplish what it was designed to do, reward very high average activity with the very highest guild levels. With the current system large guilds might as well have no guild renown to consider while it remains pretty much the same for the small guilds. And for small guilds they still do have to consider their size unless they go all the way, because if they start recruiting they'll also start losing their renown bonuses.

[Tshober]

Sure, just as a new player finding a small guild with a bunch of players he loves playing with is a good thing.

There's absolutely no reason any size of guild should be favored. The old system favored very high activity of players with some leanings towards small guilds At the very highest guild levels; before that it overwhelmingly favored large guilds because decay was not an issue. The issue was that the very big guilds never, ever had anywhere near the same average activity as small guilds did.

So the system did actually accomplish what it was designed to do, reward very high average activity with the very highest guild levels. With the current system large guilds might as well have no guild renown to consider while it remains pretty much the same for the small guilds. And for small guilds they still do have to consider their size unless they go all the way, because if they start recruiting they'll also start losing their renown bonuses.

I generally agree with your description of the change that has been made so far. But you left out the fact that the change eliminated the barriers to advancement for many guilds and significantly reduced the incentives to shun casual/social players. I view those as overwhelmingly positive changes. So my preference is to retain the change and those positives and build on it to make it even better. There have been many suggstions that would do exactly that. Increasing small guild bonuses to help keep small and tiny guilds viable. Penalizing guilds for mass kicking their membership after they level up. Perhapes even eliminating decay entirely. All of those and many more could be considered to improve upon the goodness that has already been achieved.

[Chaos000]

A 15% boost doesn't cut it. It based on the assumption that all people in small guilds are active and all play ever day and that people in large guilds log in only once per month. Those are false assumptions. Small guilds have the same issue that large guilds have with game play time and activity levels.

I would assume that a 2 person guild is fairly active... pretty sure it would be a whole lot easier to coordinate in smaller numbers... how else would they get any progression under the old system?

Taking guild size out of the equation is a good move. And to be honest removing guild decay once and for all is about as likely to happen as dungeon alert being taken out of the game. It's going to be there in some form whether we like it or not.

If the disparity is ~15%, simple solution = 15% boost. I am ok with small guilds being just as viable as a large guild but incentives to remain exclusively small? (like limiting guild size to the magic number of 6... why not 7? one more or less player is going to ruin your magic 300% multiplier?)

If we do go back to the old system the decay per active account should be monthly (as active accounts are counted as logged in once per month) or the number of active accounts should be assessed on a day-to-day basis. (as in logged in a 24 hour period)

Reducing decay based on the age of the guild is another idea... 1+ years = 25% decay reduction, 3 = 50%, 5+ years = 75%, 10+ years (if it ever gets to that) = 100% decay reduction. New invite everyone guilds tend to have a fairly short life anyhow so this will benefit the old establish guilds the most.

[Viisari]

But you left out the fact that the change eliminated the barriers to advancement for many guilds and significantly reduced the incentives to shun casual/social players. I view those as overwhelmingly positive changes.

The changes may have had some positive results, but the way it was achieved was just terrible. If those were the goals then just tweaking the old system would've been enough.

Now the system also inherently favors very large guilds.

The developers also need to make clear if it's intentional for the guild levels after 85 or so to become completely meaningless; they were designed to have very little in the way of any rewards and be about prestige and fame, with these changes that is simply not the case anymore.

[Bal-Sagoth]

Tolero, renown decay is back taking guild size into account. We lost 41k two days in a row now.

Greetings! We are putting forth modifications currently trying out some temporary adjustments to the Guild Renown system and monitoring the outcome and feedback this week. The intent is to address concerns from guilds and guild leaders regarding the impact of optimizing guild size in order to gain or maintain guild levels. We’ll be making additional balance changes that we think you and your guildmates will appreciate, but for now we have applied the changes without downtime. As of today, you will notice two changes to your renown rates:

1. Renown decay no longer takes guild size into account. This should ease the pressure for guild leaders to “kick” members from the guild to offset daily renown decay rates. Renown decay now only takes a guild’s level into consideration rather than its size.
2. Renown ransack has been increased. Previously when a guild earned levels in a day, it would gradually reduce the renown drop rates. We’ve increased the rate so that a guild can only earn roughly 3 levels in a single day. This should prevent large guilds from completely dominating the field in terms of levels per-day.

There are some balance Pros and Cons to this method, but we’d like guilds to give us feedback about their experiences using the new settings this week. If players like the settings, or feel it is workable with minor tweaks, then we are ready to keep them! If players find the changes make matters worse, then we are scheduled to revert them. So this week, we encourage guild leaders/members to use this thread to give us feedback about how the changes are impacting your guild leveling dynamics. Important feedback for us is points where frustration has eased (or increased). Thanks for your participation as we work to improve our guild leveling system!

[DogMania]

Tolero, renown decay is back taking guild size into account. We lost 41k two days in a row now.

Yep Maybar Off Guild renown decay back to what it was

[theslimshady]

all these pages of debate are moot if any have been paying attention the new system was on from mon-weds only and was reverted back for thusday and friday so even if mabar gets fixed it will prob be the old bleed out renown festivals of old

so back to the ole way of ignoreing renown decay or
dont feel happy about the festivals
watch your guild level never go up and drop when all others are having fun killing udead ----------------------------happy halloween

[Tshober]

Yep Maybar Off Guild renown decay back to what it was

This was reported yesterday too. Seems Mabar has undone the renown change.