Guild Renown Changes

[DocBenway]

The devs realized their system was driving away players, and tried to make a change.

I still want to know why they ignored threads asking about that minimum decay size for over 8 months

Some people won't even let the test run without concluding that their guild is doomed, and they are looking to merge now, to throw away all their hard work... and some are willing to wait to see what happens.

You are picking outlying extreme 1% views, just on the opposite side of the spectrum from your own extreme 1% views.

After all, we suffered with renown for years now, and we waited to see what would happen.... and finally, something did.

That's funny, because my guild enjoyed renown not existing for a year, before having the system inflicted on us.

We started roadblocked like everyone else. The roadblock was removed for a large chunk of the playerbase. I am completely willing to let the test run its course, but by no means willing to let them forget those still roadblocked artificially while the test is on or not. That's why I've been asking about the minimum size, without response, for 8 months.

[fmalfeas]

Well, the test is really just starting up, but honestly, in my opinion...

About time.

The forced bottlenecking by penalizing guilds for size, I don't think that was a good decision to begin with. Especially then going and tying that to ship amenities and buffs, thus encouraging people to game /other people/ to gain maximum advantage for their characters.

Three cheers for the test, may it reign long!

[lokey440]

It would be great for our Guild wich is mostly casual but has a good solid base of steady members to be able to get the guild level up a bit more without having to kick members that are inactive for a while,
I am not sure about how the system works but we've been stuck around level 60 for a long time with a guild that is almost always filled up.
So as long as there are no disadvantages it would be great to see the decay a lot lower.

greetz from the Netherlands

[ninjadwarf_uk]

I find it amusing how people have the belief that they can control the rest of us because it doesn't suit their beliefs.

Amazing.

I have a small guild. (19 accounts) mainly made up of friends and family. So tell me, why are we not allowed our own guild, whatever size.

And while your at it maybe you can dictate to the world how to resolve world peace.

I'm not telling you that you can't have a small guild, and in fact you're 19 accounts isn't the size guild I was talking about, I was saying that really tiny guilds shouldn't get bonuses to levelling because those guilds (as entities, nor the players within them) don't add to the social structure of the game.

[ninjadwarf_uk]

No offense taken, it appears the developers agree with you as well based on the new system that was rolled out. It is not really good or bad - it just is what it is. At the end of the day this is only a game.

And by the way there are channels, LFMs, and public chat areas where people can communicate. Try those some time as they are used by large guilds, small guilds and in-between guilds all the time. I like diversity - it is a good thing. I don't really want to get caught up in the drama of a mega-guild or be part of a guld that thinks your way. This is the type of mentality that made us start our own small guild in the first place.

I think you misunderstand what I think the aim of a guild is.

Take your small close nit guild, is the perfect starting point, but rather than just staying small recruit.

Recruit like minded people, take time to run with them first, interview as it were. As you gradually add more members these people become integrated into the guild, become friends and learn from your more experienced existing members. They feel socially invested in the guild and the game. This process is ongoing meaning the guild organically grows and benefits it's members.

Small guilds of a few friends don't add value this way, channels don't promote the same sense of belonging, large recruit anyone guilds also often don't provide this benefit, but a guild that indiscriminately recruits without investing in new members is likely to fall apart anyhow.

That's what I believe the purpose of a guild is, to take new players, give them a home with like minded experienced players, help them and get them socially invested in the game. This helps build a strong community, and helps get new players to stay playing, and more players benefits us all.

[DocBenway]

I'm not telling you that you can't have a small guild, and in fact you're 19 accounts isn't the size guild I was talking about, I was saying that really tiny guilds shouldn't get bonuses to levelling because those guilds (as entities, nor the players within them) don't add to the social structure of the game.

False. A single unguilded player adds to the social structure of the game.

I think you misunderstand what I am think the aim of a guild is.

I think you misunderstand the fact that you do not get to define any guild but your own

Recruit like minded people, take time to run with them first, interview as it were. As you gradually add more members these people become integrated into the guild, become friends and learn from your more experienced existing members. They feel socially invested in the guild and the game. This process is ongoing meaning the guild organically grows and benefits it's members.

And when those members opt out of further growth because they like their guild as it it, they are doing it wrong. I see.

Small guilds of a few friends don't add value this way, channels don't promote the same sense of belonging

To you.

That's what I believe the purpose of a guild is

That's fine, just don't impose your beliefs on my, or anyone else's guild.

[Tshober]

Small guilds of a few friends don't add value this way, channels don't promote the same sense of belonging, large recruit anyone guilds also often don't provide this benefit, but a guild that indiscriminately recruits without investing in new members is likely to fall apart anyhow.
.

I have a somewhat different view. The smaller the guild, the more likely it is to fall apart and dissolve. People leave the game. It is a fact of MMO life. If you have a small guild, all it takes is a for a few key people to leave the game and the guild can easily collapse and dissolve. For the same reason, any large or medium sized guild that does not constantly recruit new members will dwindle and eventually collapse.

Large guilds that do keep recruiting have a different problem. They are more likely to split because of the diverse interests of all of their members. But splits do not threaten the survival of the guild as long as the splits are handled without massive drama. As long as they keep recruiting they can easily replace those who split off. Often, those who split off will even come back if their new guild does not go so well. At least that is how it works for my very large and very open guild. We have been going for 3 years now, open recruiting all the way. Not even a hint of a collapse.

We may be a product of the old decay system though. Practically no established guild on my server, other than mine, will accept a casual/social player so those that don't leave DDO entirely often find a home in my guild.

[ninjadwarf_uk]

False. A single unguilded player adds to the social structure of the game.

A single unguided player, and potentially every guilded player adds to the social fabric of the game of they choose to interact. A closed guild (the guild a an entity) only benefits it's members, not the wider social game.

And when those members opt out of further growth because they like their guild as it it, they are doing it wrong. I see.

That is they're choice, and if they've already reached a reasonable size then they continue fulfil a purpose of keeping the members, who probably are not all RL friends anymore, engaged.

That's fine, just don't impose your beliefs on my, or anyone else's guild.

I'm not, I'm just saying that the tiny friends club guilds do not add value to the wider social game and shouldn't get perks to allow them to level as fast as larger guilds.


I'll reiterate a guild isn't the same thing as the members of a guild, members can contribute even if the guild as an organisation doesn't.

[Dandonk]

A single unguided player, and potentially every guilded player adds to the social fabric of the game of they choose to interact. A closed guild (the guild a an entity) only benefits it's members, not the wider social game.

And a larger guild is less likely to be open, since they have all the players they need for their groups inside the guild? Whereas small guilds may have to pug, since they may not be enough on?

See, it's all in how you present it. Being open or closed does not, intrinsically, have anything to do with size.

[DocBenway]

I'm not, I'm just saying that the tiny friends club guilds do not add value to the wider social game and shouldn't get perks to allow them to level as fast as larger guilds.

I'm saying you are mistaken in your impressions. As fast as is not and will never be the issue. It is allowing them to progress at all. I don't care if a guild of 6000 gets to 100 in a day and it takes my band of merry pranksters 10 years. Knowing we are not artificially prevented from getting there by a system imposed on us after we'd been around for a year already, is the issue.

The "wider social game" is defined with different wording and means different things to each and every individual playing. When groups of these individuals find common ground in that definition, among other things, they might guild together. You have no place telling them that what they like, isn't how a guild is supposed to work.

A guild is defined by the spirit of its membership, not arbitrary size numbers.

And a larger guild is less likely to be open, since they have all the players they need for their groups inside the guild? Whereas small guilds may have to pug, since they may not be enough on?

See, it's all in how you present it. Being open or closed does not, intrinsically, have anything to do with size.

See?

[Viisari]

This is why the devs can't make all of us happy. Many of us disagree on what guilds should actually be.

A Guild, within the context of Dungeons and Dragons: Online, is a group of players who may share common interests and objectives. More often than not, a Guild operates on one, designated server.

There's nothing to disagree about. Size is irrelevant. There is no "should" either. There either is a guild or there is no guild, this is easily checked: if a person has a guild name under his character name he has a guild, if there is no guild name under his character name then he is not in a guild.

Simple, yes?

Nothing in this game even hints at how a guild should have some minimum number of people to be valid, that minimum size only exists in your head and nowhere else.

[eris2323]

There's nothing to disagree about. Size is irrelevant. There is no "should" either. There either is a guild or there is no guild, this is easily checked: if a person has a guild name under his character name he has a guild, if there is no guild name under his character name then he is not in a guild.

Simple, yes?

Nothing in this game even hints at how a guild should have some minimum number of people to be valid, that minimum size only exists in your head and nowhere else.

Excellent, if there is no disagreement, we will cap renown rewards - no small guild bonus until you have 20 people under your flag.

[DocBenway]

Excellent, if there is no disagreement, we will cap renown rewards - no small guild bonus until you have 20 people under your flag.

Fine, and every account over 20 decays as 10 people. That work for you? Arbitrary is arbitrary.

[katz]

ok. seriously guys.. tell me..... EXACTLY... how this will kill small guilds? i wanna hear this. cuz i ain't seein it.

this was not meant to be facetious or flippant. i want someone to come in here and really tell me exactly why my small guild is now defunct? i really don't understand what the issue is. why is ANY small guild doomed?










nothing has changed for the small guild. NOTHING. let me reiterate that one more time... NOTHING. we will gain and lose renown at EXACTLY THE SAME RATE as before. large guilds will gain at the same rate as before... they just get less of a kick-in-the-b***s for loss now. and yeah, that means that a semi-active large guild will level up faster than a semi-active small guild. SO WHAT.




Pointless Waste of Time - Leader of Unbroken Chain... 62nd level guild of only about 6 actives currently... many of the levels were gained with only 2-3 actives... and still chuggin' steadily along, TYVM.

[eris2323]

Just demonstrating my own point.

Obviously there *IS* disagreement as to what makes a guild.

And simple saying there isn't, won't solve anything.

[eris2323]

this was not meant to be facetious or flippant. i want someone to come in here and really tell me exactly why my small guild is now defunct? i really don't understand what the issue is. why is ANY small guild doomed?










nothing has changed for the small guild. NOTHING. let me reiterate that one more time... NOTHING. we will gain and lose renown at EXACTLY THE SAME RATE as before. large guilds will gain at the same rate as before... they just get less of a kick-in-the-b***s for loss now. and yeah, that means that a semi-active large guild will level up faster than a semi-active small guild. SO WHAT.




Pointless Waste of Time - Leader of Unbroken Chain... 62nd level guild of only about 6 actives currently... many of the levels were gained with only 2-3 actives... and still chuggin' steadily along, TYVM.

It's not changed. It's not defunct. Just some people calling "Doom"

People are only complaining, because some people are getting more than they were 2 weeks ago, and they are not.

It's all a matter of envy, now.

[Ungood]

I'm not, I'm just saying that the tiny friends club guilds do not add value to the wider social game and shouldn't get perks to allow them to level as fast as larger guilds.

I totally disagree with this. Smaller guilds are more often willing to PUG out spots on their groups and raids, giving others a chance to join in on their events, this having a much larger impact on the game then say.. having some newb get sucked into some mega-guild where they are lost among their own guild tag.

Sorry but, both have their place in this game, and both have a worth, neither is better or worse then the other, and I am quite offended to have people tell me I am less valuable to the game because I opted to run with a tight knit guild of friends, who group with me. TR with me, and we all know each other, and are willing to help each other out. While we accept new members we don't spam invite, and everyone in my guild is a person, not a name with a renown number attached to it.

[katz]

It's not changed. It's not defunct. Just some people calling "Doom"

yeah, i know. hence my post.

[Viisari]

That's what I believe the purpose of a guild is, to take new players, give them a home with like minded experienced players, help them and get them socially invested in the game. This helps build a strong community, and helps get new players to stay playing, and more players benefits us all.

That is what it means to you and you specifically. It does not mean that to every nor should it mean that to everyone.

The community in this game is not as clear cut as you seem to indicate either, there are multiple levels to it and you're operating on one of them. Me and the people I mostly associate with operate on a different level and don't generally go looking for newbies to help, that's not why we play the game. Me and most of the people I play with will however answer questions and give advice if we're asked or see someone doing something silly, some even do in fact go out their way to look for newbies to help.

That does not mean nor should it mean that we've some kind of an oblication to take more people in our guilds than we wish to. Heck, our guild page in MyDDO says: "Quality over quantity", what makes you think we'd want more people in our guild? Our guild is not there to help new people, our guild is formed on the idea of gathering a bunch of people who share the same ideas while also being very good players. There are in fact people we'd like to recruit or would recruit if they wanted to join, but those are people some of our guildies have known since before you had even heard about this game or people we've just played a lot with during the course of several years.

Your mindset about how there are or should be only one kinds of guilds is simply flat out wrong, and just because you do not see or understand the community as a whole doesn't mean these guilds are not contributing to it.

Just demonstrating my own point.

Obviously there *IS* disagreement as to what makes a guild.

And simple saying there isn't, won't solve anything.

The definition is very clear and size is not a part of it. The disagreement exists in your head.

[DocBenway]

Just demonstrating my own point.

Obviously there *IS* disagreement as to what makes a guild.

And simple saying there isn't, won't solve anything.

Ok, good. Now arbitrarily defining a guild will not improve the situation. It will just make players with guilds not fitting the definition move on. Making sure anyone's definition of guild is not restricted unduly by the system, will only encourage more play and possibly even bring more folks into these guilds, and thus the game, by watercooler word of mouth.

I have no problem with what they have done in the test. My problem is the test doesn't help everyone that suffers under the system. I understand this is a test and perhaps only part of overall change plans, but while they are seeing the effect on those it helps, I won't let them forget those it doesn't.

No Doom. Fact and reminder.