Guild Renown Changes

[9Crows]

No but when you have hundreds of these, someone is BOUND to login for a day and disappear again. We seriously suffered from this in my guild. Every week 2-4 people would poptart in and out. The choice was either kick everyone and suffer massive renown loss, or take your chances and not kick anyone hoping those that return stay long enough to make up for renown loss (almost never happens). It's a stupid gamble and a decision guilds shouldn't have to make.

exactly what happened in our guild we had hundreds of inactives ..after i shut off recruiting i thought letting actives go inactive would reduce our rn debt enough to start growing again ...

i was wrong we had way to many inactives going back into active status but not earning the months worth of rn loss they generated

so is started reducing the amount of inactives ...which is why i know that regardless of how long a toon is inactive the penalty applies

[Tshober]

There is no point in kicking them at that point, They do not contribute to decay.

If there were no cap on guild size, then you would be correct. But there is a hard cap and it is based on characters and inactive characters count toward that cap. So when large guilds keep inactives forever, they eventually hit that cap and when they do they can no longer invite anyone at all into their guild ever again. They have no choice but to start kicking the members that have been inactive a long time so they can invite new players who are here in the game right now and want to join.

This has been explained several times already in the thread.

[Tshober]

Here's an idea, when a toon goes into "archived" status, the toon is automatically dropped from the guild rolls. When the player logs back on a message will appear stating "would you like to return to your guild?" If the returning player clicks yes, then a message is sent to the guild leader. The guild leader then can accept or deny the player without penalty.

I assume you mean they are "automatically dropped from the guild rolls" with no penalty. What happens when the guild is full when they return?

[theslimshady]

just a follow up --- to the new system ------ and what it is doing for my guild
For Loot And Glory level 73 modified account size 205
we have not lost any levels
we have not gained any levels
our renown total is around 20 million still mostly due to mabar
my guild has enjoyed being able to play in mabar without having to watch guild decay out
so thank you again
dd- o

[Thayion516]

This already exists.

When kicking out an inactive member, you receive:

Full Penalty: Member was inactive for less than 30 days.
Reduced Penalty: Member was inactive for 30 days or more, but less than 180 days.
No Penalty: Member was inactive for 180 days or more.

Dear Eladrin, I respectfully disagree that this is working, or it is vague as to what we are seeing/expecting. We kicked, some at the 3 month mark, and instantly lost renown.

Is it based off of Character or Account activity/time?

[Ague]

6 months inactive is plenty of time for a deployed/injured/etc. player to log-in and say hi.

Just wanted to comment and say that on my last deployment, I was in a remote part of Afghanistan where we did not have internet access for personal laptops. It wasn't for nearly 10 months before I was able to get my personal laptop connected to any kind of internet connection. And that connection was being shared by hundreds of other people at the same time.

So, no, 6 months is not enough time for deployed Soldiers/Sailors/Marines/Airmen to log in and say hi, in some cases...

[Hendrik]

Just wanted to comment and say that on my last deployment, I was in a remote part of Afghanistan where we did not have internet access for personal laptops. It wasn't for nearly 10 months before I was able to get my personal laptop connected to any kind of internet connection. And that connection was being shared by hundreds of other people at the same time.

So, no, 6 months is not enough time for deployed Soldiers/Sailors/Marines/Airmen to log in and say hi, in some cases...

We have a policy;

When a member knows he/she will be away for an extended period of time, let leadership know. They will not be removed. Does not matter if moving, divorce, town taken over my aliens, or deployment.

Simple communication ahead of time is key.

[Bronko]

This already exists.

When kicking out an inactive member, you receive:

Full Penalty: Member was inactive for less than 30 days.
Reduced Penalty: Member was inactive for 30 days or more, but less than 180 days.
No Penalty: Member was inactive for 180 days or more.

This is not quite correct. Although it may be that removing a player who has been absent for a significant period of time would not produce a penalty effect (or a reduced effect) the fact was that the change to the Modified Guild Size created a de facto penalty in terms of extra decay. With the current change that is no longer the case, by it was certainly a factor before. Why else would I keep people on the roster for so long instead if booting them?

And even if, as you state, that players who have been inactive for over 180 days did not produce a lump-sum hit to renown when they are removed from the guild there certainly isn't any way for us to know that. The secrecy of the renown system meant we only had play testing, Wiki sources, and beat guesses to tell us what is actually going on with the renown/decay mechanics.

[smatt]

We have a policy;

When a member knows he/she will be away for an extended period of time, let leadership know. They will not be removed. Does not matter if moving, divorce, town taken over my aliens, or deployment.

Simple communication ahead of time is key.

Indeed, you see I don't understand this hubbub over removing people who hae been gone for whatever reason. All someone has to do IF they come back is contact someone in the guild they were in.... Blamo.. Re-invite..... It's not rocket science....... There is no disrespect for those that are sick, serving their respective country, family, or anything else.


After a person hasn't logged in after 3 months there should be NO PENALTY whatsoever for removing them from the guild.,3 months is plenty of leeway....

[Virella]

my guild leader recently purged several accounts that had been inactive between 4 months to a year, we had no renown loss for all the accounts that were over 6 months inactive, from looking at what has been posted on here i would take i checks to see if that account has logged in to any server when checking to see if the renown is going to be deducted from the guild after the 180 days.

[Tshober]

Indeed, you see I don't understand this hubbub over removing people who hae been gone for whatever reason. All someone has to do IF they come back is contact someone in the guild they were in.... Blamo.. Re-invite..... It's not rocket science....... There is no disrespect for those that are sick, serving their respective country, family, or anything else.


After a person hasn't logged in after 3 months there should be NO PENALTY whatsoever for removing them from the guild.,3 months is plenty of leeway....

I fully agree with this. That is exactly what I tell anyone who will be gone for awhile but they can't say how long it will be. Just friend the guild leader and a few officers and when you get back send them a tell for a re-invite. No problems, no disrespct, no worries.

And three months is a long time to wait on someone who may or may not return. No reason to penalize a guild after having waited that long.

[guardianx2009]

If it is true that an account is still counted as active if a toon is inactive but the account isn't. (ie: player has abandoned the toon and plays on a diff server/toon.) Then this partially explains why large casual guilds have renown problems: they get stuck with far more active accounts then actual participating members.

It would help if the guild roster shows highlights toons on inactive accounts a different color.

[THAC0]

Yes, sorry for being confusing - the penalty part that I referred to was them taking a percentage of their earned renown with them. They'll still count as a recently removed member.

Could you folks (you or Tolero or Cordovan) recap all of this into one new concise post addressing all these changes please? All of these scattered replies is a mess to sift through.

Thanks.

[slarden]

We have a policy;

When a member knows he/she will be away for an extended period of time, let leadership know. They will not be removed. Does not matter if moving, divorce, town taken over my aliens, or deployment.

Simple communication ahead of time is key.

Is town taken over by aliens a common one?

[Hendrik]

Is town taken over by aliens a common one?

Far more then we all know!


KEEP WATCHING THE SKIES!

[Hendrik]

Indeed, you see I don't understand this hubbub over removing people who hae been gone for whatever reason. All someone has to do IF they come back is contact someone in the guild they were in.... Blamo.. Re-invite..... It's not rocket science....... There is no disrespect for those that are sick, serving their respective country, family, or anything else.


After a person hasn't logged in after 3 months there should be NO PENALTY whatsoever for removing them from the guild.,3 months is plenty of leeway....

I can see both sides as I have been to both.

We have had members leave due to whatever reason - all we ask is to let leadership know ahead of time and we will not remove them. It is a win/win for all involved.

But also we have had members leave, again for whatever reason, and not let anyone know only later to have them contact us and immediate re-invite. No hard feelings - life happens.

On the gripping hand*, we hate to have a roster populated with inactives - looks messy and a little disheartening so we try to do periodic cleanings. Those removed are still welcome of course, after all only house cleaning...

I still generally like the renown system and with this great discussion with the DEVs on it, I like it more and look forward to more positive changes for all guilds of all sizes and activity levels.



* I will give 1k Motes to the first person on SARLONA that can identify the reference!!

[slarden]

Well here is a summary of what I would like to see modified in the new guild renown/decay model. This is obviously from the perspective of a small guild, but I am also trying to ensure nothing is negatively impacted for large guilds in my suggestions. I am assuming that developers would prefer to use the new proposed guild system as their future model and tweak it rather than start from scratch. So I am offering a few minor changes that would go a long way.

1) My understanding is that the decay in the new system is fixed based on 20 (the old minimum decay of 10 accounts + 10). Change this to 10 total instead of 20 so that small guilds get a break and large guilds get their decay reduced a bit more as a side benefit. It still heavily favors large guilds, but at least guilds with less than 20 members get something out of it. The impact won't matter much to large guilds since decay is now a non-issue for those guilds.
Alternatively, have the decay modifier equal to the # of members (minimum of 10) and cap it @ 20

2) Declare a decay holiday during festivals. Remove decay temporarily during the duration of the festival since festivals don't really have much if any guild renown opportunities.

3) Change the rules for removing inactive members so that removing an inactive character doesn't result in any renown loss after 60 days regardless of the account status. If someone wants back in later I doubt guilds will object.

4) Remove the penalty where an inactive member that was removed after 60 days is included in the total account count by being counted as a "recent departure".

5) Don't try and tweak the system to slow down the power gamers (trust me I am not a power gamer). They will always have better gear than me, higher level guilds than me, more past lifes than me. I don't think all small guilds should be penalized by a process to correct the guild level of power gamers. Let them be - their guild is 90+ because they spend a lot of time playing. They have all the cool gear because they farm all day and all night. They capped their epic destinies a week after epic destinies were released. Be happy for them.

6) Lower the minimum level requirement of guild ships and amenities. I really don't think at the end of the day this about levels. Because all levels do is let you get better ships and better stuff for your ships. I would suggest lowering everything by 15 levels and leave the 5% experience shrine in the 90s for the power gamers. They need something. Also offer a sale on astral diamonds please because everyone will want to buy new ships.

7) This doesn't benefit me, but consider doubling the small guild bonus for small guilds below level 40. Once they get to 40 they get the regular bonus, but up until that point give them double what the small guild bonus currently is. No guilds have a harder time leveling in this game than small casual guilds or guilds started by new players. A little boost will go along way in helping these new guilds get off to a good start. If ship and amenities are reduced by 15 levels they will be able to get the ship that is currently available at level 55 at level 40.

8) If you are absolutely and positively dead set on stopping the small power gamer guilds, you can drop the small guild bonus for guilds above 85. I don't think it is necessary as small guilds already have to do the most work to level anyhow, but if it is a concern that only small guilds are above 90, that is one way to stop it.

9) Soften the renown ransack penalty for gaining only 1 level and offset it by increasing the penalty for 2 and 3 level gains.

Small guilds have a place in DDO. Please support large, medium and small guilds!

[smatt]

I can see both sides as I have been to both.

We have had members leave due to whatever reason - all we ask is to let leadership know ahead of time and we will not remove them. It is a win/win for all involved.

But also we have had members leave, again for whatever reason, and not let anyone know only later to have them contact us and immediate re-invite. No hard feelings - life happens.

On the gripping hand*, we hate to have a roster populated with inactives - looks messy and a little disheartening so we try to do periodic cleanings. Those removed are still welcome of course, after all only house cleaning...

I still generally like the renown system and with this great discussion with the DEVs on it, I like it more and look forward to more positive changes for all guilds of all sizes and activity levels.



* I will give 1k Motes to the first person on SARLONA that can identify the reference!!

* I have a great grip..... LOL


Yes, we have a rather large guild, I would much prefer to have a MUCH shorter guild list.... It's annoying is all... We have something like 400 toons on the list that have been gone for over 3 months... And that's after a major house cleaning a couple months back.

But this idea that booting people who have been gone for months upon months no matter the reason they had to go.... I don't get it..... Big deal, whatever the reason they left the game, they can always come back.

[Tshober]

Well here is a summary of what I would like to see modified in the new guild renown/decay model. This is obviously from the perspective of a small guild, but I am also trying to ensure nothing is negatively impacted for large guilds in my suggestions. I am assuming that developers would prefer to use the new proposed guild system as their future model and tweak it rather than start from scratch. So I am offering a few minor changes that would go a long way.

1) My understanding is that the decay in the new system is fixed based on 20 (the old minimum decay of 10 accounts + 10). Change this to 10 total instead of 20 so that small guilds get a break and large guilds get their decay reduced a bit more as a side benefit. It still heavily favors large guilds, but at least guilds with less than 20 members get something out of it. The impact won't matter much to large guilds since decay is now a non-issue for those guilds.
Alternatively, have the decay modifier equal to the # of members (minimum of 10) and cap it @ 20

2) Declare a decay holiday during festivals. Remove decay temporarily during the duration of the festival since festivals don't really have much if any guild renown opportunities.

3) Change the rules for removing inactive members so that removing an inactive character doesn't result in any renown loss after 60 days regardless of the account status. If someone wants back in later I doubt guilds will object.

4) Remove the penalty where an inactive member that was removed after 60 days is included in the total account count by being counted as a "recent departure".

5) Don't try and tweak the system to slow down the power gamers (trust me I am not a power gamer). They will always have better gear than me, higher level guilds than me, more past lifes than me. I don't think all small guilds should be penalized by a process to correct the guild level of power gamers. Let them be - their guild is 90+ because they spend a lot of time playing. They have all the cool gear because they farm all day and all night. They capped their epic destinies a week after epic destinies were released. Be happy for them.

6) Lower the minimum level requirement of guild ships and amenities. I really don't think at the end of the day this about levels. Because all levels do is let you get better ships and better stuff for your ships. I would suggest lowering everything by 15 levels and leave the 5% experience shrine in the 90s for the power gamers. They need something. Also offer a sale on astral diamonds please because everyone will want to buy new ships.

7) This doesn't benefit me, but consider doubling the small guild bonus for small guilds below level 40. Once they get to 40 they get the regular bonus, but up until that point give them double what the small guild bonus currently is. No guilds have a harder time leveling in this game than small casual guilds or guilds started by new players. A little boost will go along way in helping these new guilds get off to a good start. If ship and amenities are reduced by 15 levels they will be able to get the ship that is currently available at level 55 at level 40.

8) If you are absolutely and positively dead set on stopping the small power gamer guilds, you can drop the small guild bonus for guilds above 85. I don't think it is necessary as small guilds already have to do the most work to level anyhow, but if it is a concern that only small guilds are above 90, that is one way to stop it.

9) Soften the renown ransack penalty for gaining only 1 level and offset it by increasing the penalty for 2 and 3 level gains.

Small guilds have a place in DDO. Please support large, medium and small guilds!

I thought you had given up!

J/K.

These all sound reasonable to me, except for dropping the small guild bonuses above 85.

I would like to see the guild levels expanded so that people in guilds that are level 100 now or are close will have something to keep working on. I would recommend that the rewards above level 100 be limited to "bragging rights" rewards, things like announcements, cosmetics, minor conveniences, etc.

[Hendrik]

* I have a great grip..... LOL


Yes, we have a rather large guild, I would much prefer to have a MUCH shorter guild list.... It's annoying is all... We have something like 400 toons on the list that have been gone for over 3 months... And that's after a major house cleaning a couple months back.

But this idea that booting people who have been gone for months upon months no matter the reason they had to go.... I don't get it..... Big deal, whatever the reason they left the game, they can always come back.

Hehe.

Hint: it's from a book and its a sci-fi book.

Your right smatt, they can always come back. Some like a clean roster and some dont mind. So long as in the end they are welcome back and no hard feelings, all is good.