Guild Renown Changes

[theslimshady]

yes i was thinking its a really big issue right now and maybe related to the mabar crash and burn i am afraid to check my bags this year

[Shmuel]

People seem to have a lot of opinions on this subject. Some see a problem with lots of level 100 guilds, others seen no problem, some want bonuses for casual players, some want active players to have a meaningful advantage since they p;lay more....

What if:

There was NO maximum guild level. Instead, guilds could keep advancing indefinitely, up to guild levels in the thousands even. Each level would take more renown to get than the last, just like it is now, and the amount of increase would also keep increasing, maybe by x^1.1 or something.

Along with this, have no decay at all, unless the effective guild level becomes zero. In that case, take 25% of the guild's total renown away each day that no account has logged on. This would eliminate guilds held by inactive players from being a major factor.

Keep the bonuses for small guilds, and allow that to only factor in active accounts.

Instead of absolute numerical levels needed to gain ship buffs and other guild bonuses, like it is now where for example you need to be level 50 to gain the 2nd non-store bought ship, have those things based on where your guild stands relative to other guilds at the time.

So for example if your guild had as much or more renown than the mean renown for all guilds on the server, you would have the same bonuses as you get now at level 50. To have a +2 chr shrine, you would need to be in the top 55%, for the final ship, your guild would need to be in the the top 15% of all guilds, in terms of renown currently held by all guilds.

Some of the numbers might need to be adjusted down a bit, maybe something like 10th, 15th, 30th, 35th, 60th, 65th percentile for ships or something else which could be debated. separately.

Should allow people to keep advancing, let the people who NEED to show everyone else how much better they are have a level 3000 guild, let everyone else be in whatever guild and keep the people we like without worrying about decay, and also mean if you want the top-tier buffs, you will have to keep moving, which Turbine wants to keep us all in the grind- but only at basically the same pace as everyone else on the server. Everyone wins. No?

[Tshober]

People seem to have a lot of opinions on this subject. Some see a problem with lots of level 100 guilds, others seen no problem, some want bonuses for casual players, some want active players to have a meaningful advantage since they p;lay more....

What if:

There was NO maximum guild level. Instead, guilds could keep advancing indefinitely, up to guild levels in the thousands even. Each level would take more renown to get than the last, just like it is now, and the amount of increase would also keep increasing, maybe by x^1.1 or something.

Along with this, have no decay at all, unless the effective guild level becomes zero. In that case, take 25% of the guild's total renown away each day that no account has logged on. This would eliminate guilds held by inactive players from being a major factor.

Keep the bonuses for small guilds, and allow that to only factor in active accounts.

Instead of absolute numerical levels needed to gain ship buffs and other guild bonuses, like it is now where for example you need to be level 50 to gain the 2nd non-store bought ship, have those things based on where your guild stands relative to other guilds at the time.

So for example if your guild had as much or more renown than the mean renown for all guilds on the server, you would have the same bonuses as you get now at level 50. To have a +2 chr shrine, you would need to be in the top 55%, for the final ship, your guild would need to be in the the top 15% of all guilds, in terms of renown currently held by all guilds.

Some of the numbers might need to be adjusted down a bit, maybe something like 10th, 15th, 30th, 35th, 60th, 65th percentile for ships or something else which could be debated. separately.

Should allow people to keep advancing, let the people who NEED to show everyone else how much better they are have a level 3000 guild, let everyone else be in whatever guild and keep the people we like without worrying about decay, and also mean if you want the top-tier buffs, you will have to keep moving, which Turbine wants to keep us all in the grind- but only at basically the same pace as everyone else on the server. Everyone wins. No?

You mean something like this: http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=385226

[Shmuel]

You mean something like this: http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=385226

In the sense of not limiting number of levels, yes, in the sense of the other rues you posted there, not so much. Seems a little complex.

The way I thought of it, each guild attains a level, and then also a percentile based on comparison with other guilds, and the percentile determined amenities. Meaning if you start slacking off and too many other guilds get ahead of you, you start to lose the ability to get amenities. Essentially like decay, but where instead of some arbitrary number picked by a programmer for the decay modifier, your ability to stay in the top 50%, 75%, 2% whatever of guilds was determined by how much renown you get compared to the other guilds, not just compared to some number picked by a dev.

All that other stuff about kicking people etc seems unnecessary to me, since any decent guild will not be doing that kind of stuff, and if the guild leader is the kind of person who does that stuff, i highly doubt they get invited to lots of groups anyway. announcements seem like fluff, and for people in level 100+ guilds, the cost of the amenities, with one or two exceptions, is trivial.

[Tshober]

In the sense of not limiting number of levels, yes, in the sense of the other rues you posted there, not so much. Seems a little complex.

The way I thought of it, each guild attains a level, and then also a percentile based on comparison with other guilds, and the percentile determined amenities. Meaning if you start slacking off and too many other guilds get ahead of you, you start to lose the ability to get amenities. Essentially like decay, but where instead of some arbitrary number picked by a programmer for the decay modifier, your ability to stay in the top 50%, 75%, 2% whatever of guilds was determined by how much renown you get compared to the other guilds, not just compared to some number picked by a dev.

All that other stuff about kicking people etc seems unnecessary to me, since any decent guild will not be doing that kind of stuff, and if the guild leader is the kind of person who does that stuff, i highly doubt they get invited to lots of groups anyway. announcements seem like fluff, and for people in level 100+ guilds, the cost of the amenities, with one or two exceptions, is trivial.

Hmmm, others have complained that it seemed complex as well. It seemed very simple and straightforward to me.

The announcements are fluff and the cost of the amenities is trivial. They were chosen that way on purpose so that there is no real benefit of leveling up beyond level 100 other than "bragging rights". That eliminates all incentive to exclude casual/social players from your guild. And this is why I don't like your version as well because it retains an incentive to filter out casual/social players.

The fear of large guilds kicking most of their members is the 2nd most common complaint about the change that the devs made. The most common one being that it is unfair to tiny guilds.

[slarden]

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.

I know many people in small guilds that don't play much. I think they should declare a decay holiday until they figure out a better system, i.e., remove the decay completely or cut it in half using the old system. My guess is that a very small percentage of the DDO players will be disappointed by the removal of decay.

I think the monthly system would work. They can also look at decreasing the decay formula for larger guilds by maybe 50% so that a 200 person guild only suffered renown based on 100 - this would assume that the larger guilds can't manage their members the way a small guild can.

All in all, I say get rid of decay or cut it in half as a quick fix. The system is similar to chess ratings where you hit a wall based on your skill level. For guilds they hit a wall based on how active their players are. The wall is set too low.

[UrbanPyro]

Deleted.

[marybee]

Being a Small Guild at the moment, we did not notice a change in decay. I will await to see if our allied guilds are better off though. It sounds like they should be with this new system if it's still in place.

I think it's great to look at this and thank you for listening to people's very real concerns. Everyone has their own idea of what a guild should be, and that's fine as I think there will be a guild out there for each of us as we find others who think and play like we do. Many of us want to encourage new players and get their guild to grow. They also hope that old players just might come back again! Hopefully we can find a system that will be welcoming to all kinds of players, even those who are too busy in Real Life to play for hours each day. The few hours a week or even a month players are just as valid a part of our community as those who can afford to play for hours each day. At least that's what I think.

Marybee (Lyfa, Leader of the Little Dogs, Orien)

[DocBenway]

I know Mabar is broke and demanding all the attention, but the test lasted 3 days and there has been no reply to any feedback about its abrupt end.

Hey in there!


Is it supposed to be reverted to former rates?

[Dekh]

On a related note....

Dear Turbine.

Please remove the guild 'leaderboards' entirely.

I am interested in playing a PVE game, and not a PVP game. And some seem to think the guiild system is a competition, instead of players finding and making their own homes.

I am not here to PVP.

Please remove guild leaderboards entirely. I don't care about joe schmoes guilds.

Guild System is a competition, otherwise why they make a levels with corresponding level-reward ?
All games online where u play with or against other people is a competition, if u want PVE play offline

[Tshober]

Guild System is a competition, otherwise why they make a levels with corresponding level-reward ?
All games online where u play with or against other people is a competition, if u want PVE play offline

Every player I hang out with views guilds as being about cooperation and helping each other out and socializing, none of which you can do in offline games. Studies of MMO's have shown that the number one thing that keeps people playing them is the social environment and online friendships they build. In this very long thread about guilds, you are only the 2nd poster to say that you think DDO guilds are about competition.

If you are trying to compete with my guild, then you are wasting your time because we don't want to compete with you. We are just trying to gain guild levels to help out our members. We are not even in a big hurry to do so, but we do want to get there eventually. I believe most players see their guild as being about cooperation and not about competition. Seems like it would be a pretty unsatisfying "victory" for you since most of your "opponents" don't want to compete and are not even aware it is a competition.

[Dekh]

Every player I hang out with views guilds as being about cooperation and helping each other out and socializing, none of which you can do in offline games. Studies of MMO's have shown that the number one thing that keeps people playing them is the social environment and online friendships they build. In this very long thread about guilds, you are only the 2nd poster to say that you think DDO guilds are about competition.

If you are trying to compete with my guild, then you are wasting your time because we don't want to compete with you. We are just trying to gain guild levels to help out our members. We are not even in a big hurry to do so, but we do want to get there eventually. I believe most players see their guild as being about cooperation and not about competition. Seems like it would be a pretty unsatisfying "victory" for you since most of your "opponents" don't want to compete and are not even aware it is a competition.

Yes i'm only the 2nd poster to say ddo guilds are about competition. Each of us plays with different ideals, but often the objective is the same. This will be not unsatisfying "victory" for me since most of the people (like you) don't want to compete in this competition, but will be a pretty satisfying victory for me compete with all those people that compete in this race.
And trust..the people you think do not take it as a competition are few..and they will not admit.

Peace.

[eris2323]

Seems to me if i wanted a competition amongst guilds, I'd be playing... guild wars?

I dunno, probably something with PVP... but since I'm not....

Please remove guild leaderboards entirely.

[Viisari]

If you are trying to compete with my guild, then you are wasting your time because we don't want to compete with you.

But some guilds do compete with other guilds, in guild renown, speed runs, number of TR's, who gets the first elite/epic elite raid completions from new raids etc etc.

DDO might be mainly a PVE game but that does not mean that there's no competition nor should such things be denied from people.

Why do you wish to see the guild leaderboard gone anyway? Most people probably don't even know such thing exists, nobody forces you to ever look at it and the only thing it tells is the amount of renown and the level a guild has. It's also quite useful for datamining.

PS. please fix the challenge leaderboard already. <edit> nvm looks like it's fixed

[Dirac]

Yes i'm only the 2nd poster to say ddo guilds are about competition. Each of us plays with different ideals, but often the objective is the same. This will be not unsatisfying "victory" for me since most of the people (like you) don't want to compete in this competition, but will be a pretty satisfying victory for me compete with all those people that compete in this race.
And trust..the people you think do not take it as a competition are few..and they will not admit.

Peace.

That's cool. I think we agree on the result. You are in favor of removing all renown decay so the competition is fair, right?

[Dirac]

But some guilds do compete with other guilds, in guild renown, speed runs, number of TR's, who gets the first elite/epic elite raid completions from new raids etc etc.

DDO might be mainly a PVE game but that does not mean that there's no competition nor should such things be denied from people.

Why do you wish to see the guild leaderboard gone anyway? Most people probably don't even know such thing exists, nobody forces you to ever look at it and the only thing it tells is the amount of renown and the level a guild has. It's also quite useful for datamining.

I think this is true and a positive aspect of the game. However, like PvP, it is important that the "guild wars" aspect of guild renown is a separate activity, so those who don't want to participate aren't affected negatively.

How about if we make it a choice for each guild? Each guild can choose not to have any renown decay. However, if they choose no decay, they can't be listed on the leaderboard, nor will their guild level be listed under their character name in game.

[Chaos000]

But some guilds do compete with other guilds, in guild renown, speed runs, number of TR's, who gets the first elite/epic elite raid completions from new raids etc etc.

DDO might be mainly a PVE game but that does not mean that there's no competition nor should such things be denied from people.

When I come across comments like this I can't help but wonder if they should not add any additional ship buff perks and allow the guild level to exceed 100 with no additional benefit other than the number being different.

Have it so that all guilds regardless of size will eventually progress to 100 after which decay increases after that point will not be adjusted to appease those who use renown as a source of competition

[Yan_PL]

Sorry. I've just read the whole thread and I can't be sure what's the current formula anymore, so many varied opinions. so, instead I'll just ask:
I'm in a lvl 77 guild which has 59 total members, 1 recent departure, and 6 inactive pplz (who are friends that we didn't want to boot). which means there are 53 people who logged in during last month;

How much renown do we lose daily to decay?
How much renown each active player in my guild needs to get to counteract decay? What if 20 of those people don't seem to be playing much (they seem to be piking), thus leaving other 33 people to get the renown?

My guess is, 17576 daily renown total (20*878.82), 331.6 per person, 532.6 per person if 20 people pike.

under assumption of 10 account minimum lifted: 14061, 265.3, 426

However, If my memory serves me well, guild renown dropped from 22,870k to 22,830k today.

also, how do you think - is it easy to maintain low piker percentage in 200+ account guild? Low member count guilds can do that much more easily.

[Tshober]

But some guilds do compete with other guilds, in guild renown, speed runs, number of TR's, who gets the first elite/epic elite raid completions from new raids etc etc.

DDO might be mainly a PVE game but that does not mean that there's no competition nor should such things be denied from people.

I will grant you that there are some people who feel they must make everything into a competition.

Why do you wish to see the guild leaderboard gone anyway? Most people probably don't even know such thing exists, nobody forces you to ever look at it and the only thing it tells is the amount of renown and the level a guild has.

I was not the one who suggested removing it. But I have suggested removing all of myddo.com before, except for the lotteries.

It's also quite useful for datamining.

You would be more likely to get accurate information from dataminig theonion.com than you would datamining myddo.com. Myddo is the most buggy and inaccurate such site I have ever seen. Most of the characters it shows on my account were deleted or re-rolled years ago. I would not trust anything at all that came from that useless web site. If it were not for the lotteries that I love, despite the fact that most of my winnings never get delivered because the characters don't exist anymore, I would say turn the whole thing off and stop misleading people with false data.

[Viisari]

When I come across comments like this I can't help but wonder if they should not add any additional ship buff perks and allow the guild level to exceed 100 with no additional benefit other than the number being different.

I would prefer to keep the levels at 0-100, it's simple and elegant. Adding more levels would make the system less simple and less elegant, to me anyway.

Have it so that all guilds regardless of size will eventually progress to 100 after which decay increases after that point will not be adjusted to appease those who use renown as a source of competition

I also don't understand why some people have such a great need to get to level 100, it's just a number and it provides basically no benefits. By level 70 you have basically everything important, by level 85 you have the last ship and after that you can't really argue that you want more stuff.

At that point wanting to gain more levels is just about stroking your personal ego. And hey, that's exactly what the old system was designed to be about at those levels only it was specifically built in a way that you'd really have to work for that ego boost.

That's just fine to me, if everyone could just progress to the max level given enough time the levels would become meaningless, they'd be just another time sink like all the rest.

I was not the one who suggested removing it. But I have suggested removing all of myddo.com before, except for the lotteries.

Even if inaccurate in some cases, MyDDO is still an useful tool. If it is removed there are still other methods for accessing the same character information so in the end removing it would achieve nothing.

You would be more likely to get accurate information from dataminig theonion.com than you would datamining myddo.com.

As far as I can tell the guild leaderboard is pretty accurate and that's what I was referring to as far as gathering data goes.