Guild Renown Changes

[Gremmlynn]

1) My guild has 9 members, the character count on my ddo isn't accurate. I don't know what the actual character count is but i did confirm myddo was wrong on that the last time I checked. It has our leader with the wrong level and class the last time I checked.
2) My guild is advancing. We were stalled a bit over the summer but then shortly after I started posting on this thread I received some tips from a high level small guild about how he was able to advance. Namely, solo, zerg, don't post lfms, dual box strategically. Since taking this advice my guild renown output is significantly higher and the guild is once again moving forward at a very good pace. I am glad my guildies don't have to worry about not progressing at the moment.

Not to put to fine a point on it, but if you're having to do that just to advance with the bonus you get, it doesn't seem like your guildies are worrying about it to much either way.

[Artos_Fabril]

Decay/people in guild = each person's decay tax.

If a person can't cover the tax they are losing the guild renown every day. It has nothing to do the with guild bonus, it has to do with how fast they run content due to the timed decay mechanism.

This was only true under the old system, and only for guilds with more than 10 accounts.

As to your assertion that it has nothing to do with the bonus, I can't imagine how you're coming to that conclusion. The only time it is beneficial, under the new system, to remove a player from a guild, is when their (multiplied) renown gain is less than the difference between the total renown gain of all other members, and what that gain would be with one fewer person in the guild.

This is relatively unlikely under the new system unless the rest of the guild is extremely highly active, or the player in question is barely active at all, and only possible at all in guilds of fewer than 50 accounts. However were the small guild bonus to be increased, this category would expand to include more and more people. That fact is the sole source of the argument that increasing the small guild bonus would promote exclusiveness rather than inclusiveness.

On the other hand, you go into detail about small guilds that want to remain small, which seems strange to me since 40 or so pages ago you stated that you invite people to your guild when you think they will be a good fit, and specifically denied managing your guild size to maximize the bonus. It would be much more natural, and much more beneficial from virtually every angle, to invite people to your guild because you want to associate with them, focusing on keeping your guild tight-knit, rather than just small.

[Blue100000005]

I have been tracking my guild for the past monthish. I will pst when i get home.

I was waiting for someone to respond first before i put in the time to transcribe it.

Some is daily, some is weekly, but either way you can deduce numbers.

[Dandonk]

This was only true under the old system, and only for guilds with more than 10 accounts.

The only way to get renown is for a player to pull it. So decay per player is the only way to view it.

The larger the guild the lower the decay per player.

[Gremmlynn]

The only way to get renown is for a player to pull it. So decay per player is the only way to view it.

The larger the guild the lower the decay per player.

No, the more people who actually log on, the more there are to cover it. If I'm the only one to log on, I either cover it all or we back slide, so that would make it all my share that day I guess.

Personally I don't worry about it at all. We will either cover it with what we pull or we wont.

[Sdrg-Khyber]

This whole guild renown decay thing is rl stressful......... I would say some people here actually have real life stuff to do ( yes applies to 'guild leaders' also)

Imagine after all the 'hard work'..... and to come back and see it 'disappear'..............

Y cant we 'keep' the renown? After all it stems from hardwork and opportunity cost ( ie.... not picking up that nice item/ pot from the end reward)

[Dandonk]

No, the more people who actually log on, the more there are to cover it. If I'm the only one to log on, I either cover it all or we back slide, so that would make it all my share that day I guess.

Personally I don't worry about it at all. We will either cover it with what we pull or we wont.

This is true, but with a large guild the chances of more people logging on are greater. Maybe not a 1-1 correspondence between size and log-ins, but still.

[slarden]

How much would you learn standing around Khorthos waiting for someone to hit your LFM and when someone finally does they just run in and solo zerg the quest? Because that's what you can expect from a random puger. At least with me in the group with a new guildie, I would let them make decisions and set the pace as not doing so keeps them from becoming an asset to the guild.


Though personally I learned the game by soloing as I'm not one to publicly embarrass myself with my newbness if there is a choice. But some people seem deathly afraid to fail, even in private.

I keep an eye on the lfms when I am questing. There is no problem with lfms in korthos or the harbor. That is there many of the free to play players are. If anything it's harder for the vips to find people to play with once they advance past the free to play quests.

As a new player I enjoyed questing with new players. Although you make that out to be some kind of a problem I feel it is quite natural to group with people at your own level just as people do in golf, sports leagues and just about any other kind of activity where there is a disparity.

Again that is great that you are helping your guild mates. Pretty much everyone does that. Why not help some random pugs in the harbor if you feel it is so important. I do not feel it is important because there are more players there than just about anywhere else in the game and there are usually alot of groups up.

When I TR I run level 1 through 10 in a day or less so I really don't have much time I can spend there. All my other toons are higher levels. But if you feel it is important please spend some time there with some folks not in your guild.

[slarden]

This whole guild renown decay thing is rl stressful......... I would say some people here actually have real life stuff to do ( yes applies to 'guild leaders' also)

Imagine after all the 'hard work'..... and to come back and see it 'disappear'..............

Y cant we 'keep' the renown? After all it stems from hardwork and opportunity cost ( ie.... not picking up that nice item/ pot from the end reward)

+1 thank you for sharing your thoughts.

[slarden]

This was only true under the old system, and only for guilds with more than 10 accounts.

As to your assertion that it has nothing to do with the bonus, I can't imagine how you're coming to that conclusion. The only time it is beneficial, under the new system, to remove a player from a guild, is when their (multiplied) renown gain is less than the difference between the total renown gain of all other members, and what that gain would be with one fewer person in the guild.

This is relatively unlikely under the new system unless the rest of the guild is extremely highly active, or the player in question is barely active at all, and only possible at all in guilds of fewer than 50 accounts. However were the small guild bonus to be increased, this category would expand to include more and more people. That fact is the sole source of the argument that increasing the small guild bonus would promote exclusiveness rather than inclusiveness.

On the other hand, you go into detail about small guilds that want to remain small, which seems strange to me since 40 or so pages ago you stated that you invite people to your guild when you think they will be a good fit, and specifically denied managing your guild size to maximize the bonus. It would be much more natural, and much more beneficial from virtually every angle, to invite people to your guild because you want to associate with them, focusing on keeping your guild tight-knit, rather than just small.

The bottom line is that decay is still an individual responsibility and best computed by taking total decay and dividing by the # of people. If a person doesn't run content fast enough they are costing the guild renown.

I am primarily running end game content and when I TR every so often I am back to 25 in 4-5 days. My last few TRs I soloed 90%+ because if I formed pugs I knew from past experience our guild would move backwards because we need to run content very fast at our level to keep up with decay.

I've ignored it the last few times you made these type of comments about exclusiveness, but quite frankly it's laughuable coming from a person that takes on new players and then dumps them, keeping 75% of their renown, if they don't meet whatever standards your guild has. My guild has only removed players that were inactive a long time.

We never turned anyone away that wanted to join our guild. I am sure made over 100 invites since we started our guild. Our guild is simply playing the game and trying to enjoy it. We are doing nothing wrong.

[Hendrik]

1) My guild has 9 members, the character count on my ddo isn't accurate. I don't know what the actual character count is but i did confirm myddo was wrong on that the last time I checked. It has our leader with the wrong level and class the last time I checked.
2) My guild is advancing. We were stalled a bit over the summer but then shortly after I started posting on this thread I received some tips from a high level small guild about how he was able to advance. Namely, solo, zerg, don't post lfms, dual box strategically. Since taking this advice my guild renown output is significantly higher and the guild is once again moving forward at a very good pace. I am glad my guildies don't have to worry about not progressing at the moment.

Oh, so you are advancing and not stalled out like you previously said you were. Since you are advancing, problem solved. How far you advance is now up to you and your Guild members.

[Hendrik]

Try a level 49 guild with, last I looked, 98 members. How we advance? Mostly through the odd heroic deed someone performs (best I could pull tonight lol). Generally though decay is about covered by my running a single epic and everything everyone else does is profit, as well as everything else I run. 2kish decay is cake even without a size bonus.

When the guild hits the level he is at, I will likely need a bit of help to cover the decay though as even spending a full hour running, say the first eveningstar chain, (yeah, I'm slow) only get's us 4-5k with no bonus to help. As we generally have 10+ on per night, we should gain more than we lose even at that level.

So, basically, the more guild members you have online, the more renown you get. The more Quests you run the more renown you get. The more renown you get the faster you can advance.

Getting your guild active (re: running quests) the better the guild is at overcoming decay.

Activity = renown.

System works.

[Dandonk]

System is, according to Turbine even, unfair. But nice try.

[Hendrik]

The bottom line is that decay is still an individual responsibility and best computed by taking total decay and dividing by the # of people. If a person doesn't run content fast enough they are costing the guild renown.

I am primarily running end game content and when I TR every so often I am back to 25 in 4-5 days. My last few TRs I soloed 90%+ because if I formed pugs I knew from past experience our guild would move backwards because we need to run content very fast at our level to keep up with decay.

I've ignored it the last few times you made these type of comments about exclusiveness, but quite frankly it's laughuable coming from a person that takes on new players and then dumps them, keeping 75% of their renown, if they don't meet whatever standards your guild has. My guild has only removed players that were inactive a long time.

We never turned anyone away that wanted to join our guild. I am sure made over 100 invites since we started our guild. Our guild is simply playing the game and trying to enjoy it. We are doing nothing wrong.

Decay is a GUILD responsability, not just one person. You have stated that you have taken on that take alone while the rest of your Guild is off doing whatever. You solo zerg content so they don't have to.

You would do far better to get 5 of your Guild to play content with you. 6 pulls on a chest for renown with your +240% bonus is far better then you doing it alone.

[smatt]

*Sigh

What I see is a slightly biased system to small guilds, one that WAS heavily biased towards them for a very long period of time. And a bunch of small guild people feeling entitled, refusing to look upon themselves as their very own problem.

There are advantages and disadvantages to any size guild. You CHOOSE to be the size guild you are, you CHOOSE to play the way you play. Guild ships and what comes with them are EARNED, they are not given. From day one the guilds that advanced were the ones that wanted to, the ones that went out of their way to advance. The ones that didn't were the ons sitting on thier arse, or doing other things other than having at least a semi-focus on leveling/improving their guild.

[Dandonk]

*Sigh

What I see is a slightly biased system to small guilds, one that WAS heavily biased towards them for a very long period of time. And a bunch of small guild people feeling entitled, refusing to look upon themselves as their very own problem.

There are advantages and disadvantages to any size guild. You CHOOSE to be the size guild you are, you CHOOSE to play the way you play. Guild ships and what comes with them are EARNED, they are not given. From day one the guilds that advanced were the ones that wanted to, the ones that went out of their way to advance. The ones that didn't were the ons sitting on thier arse, or doing other things other than having at least a semi-focus on leveling/improving their guild.

What I see is a hugely unfair system to small guilds. That it was unfair has been conceded by Turbine.

Sure, we choose to be what we are. We just want a fair system not to penalize us for a social choice. Like large guilds before the change.

I do not think it is too much to ask to get a fair system.

[smatt]

What I see is a hugely unfair system to small guilds. That it was unfair has been conceded by Turbine.

Sure, we choose to be what we are. We just want a fair system not to penalize us for a social choice. Like large guilds before the change.

I do not think it is too much to ask to get a fair system.

But what you're asking for is more small guild handouts, like the FREE bonus you already get.

[Dandonk]

But what you're asking for is more small guild handouts, like the FREE bonus you already get.

Handouts? Wut?

Large guilds have it several times more easy than small guilds, and to want a fairer system than that is wanting handouts?

/confused

[smatt]

Handouts? Wut?

Large guilds have it several times more easy than small guilds, and to want a fairer system than that is wanting handouts?

/confused

You already get free bonuses, heck, why don't they just give you the ships at level 1... That way you wouldn't have to worry about actually EARNING them. They should also give you free epic levels, that way you wouldn't have to earn those either.. Since being in a small guild makes it harder to group....

[Dandonk]

You already get free bonuses, heck, why don't they just give you the ships at level 1... That way you wouldn't have to worry about actually EARNING them. They should also give you free epic levels, that way you wouldn't have to earn those either.. Since being in a small guild makes it harder to group....

Wut?

The "bonuses" are there to make sure we have a level playing field. That most guild sizes were viable - like the goal that was stated when the system rolled out.

With the new changes, it's completely unbalanced.

I understand you don't think small guilds should be allowed to have a level playing field with large ones. That's OK. But Turbine's stated goals beg to differ.