Guild Renown Changes

[blerkington]

"My choice is to either be part of a large community, working towards a common goal, and enjoying the benefits of that community, or to forge off ahead, and form my own community, but I choose to limit myself by only playing by myself in my guild, or with 2 friends, and we are not getting enough of an easy road, and I hate you all for making me make the choice between being part of a community and being in my small elite group, and me by myself or me and my 1 friend should be able to be able to be level 100 too, or it's just not fair!!!!!!!!"

That's what I got out of that. You guys are way too wordy.

Hi,

Eris, I haven't spent anywhere near as much time posting in this thread as you have.

My main problem with your posts is your stated dislike of small guilds, your tendency to exaggerate, and your attempts to support your arguments by inaccurately rephrasing what other people have said. Again, none of this enhances your credibility at all.

I do not choose to limit myself. The system is doing that for me. I am willing to accept some limitations, but I feel that limitations are being applied very unevenly now. As they were before, but now to a different group.

I am very much a part of the game community. Arguably more so than someone who spends their time mainly running in guild. I am a member of a great channel on Khyber, and at the moment I spend more time pugging than soloing. I do what I can to help new players, which includes giving advice (if requested) and assistance by way of items and plat. The rest of how you present my attitude is just too ridiculous to deserve a response, obvious trolling.

I don't imagine myself to be part of an elite. For example, I don't belong to a large, wealthy in-game organisation whose members provide ship amenities to me, pass me raid loot, teach me about the game, or any of the other nice benefits available there. All of my progress has been solo or in PUGs, through my own merit.

So while, once again, I will say I have nothing against people who like large guilds or want to be in one, it's not for me. I would appreciate it you would devote your energies to something other than keeping me and people like me down.

Thanks.

[UurlockYgmeov]

I believe this system will return us to a system where guild leaders will be thinking about 'who is worth more than who' in a renown sense, and that it is totally backwards to what the devs have in mind.

To me, instead of all this programming that's required for this complex plan, we should just switch to:

Decay size based on active members/3 (round down)-min:2/max:10

OMgoodness!!! You are so blind (IMO) and your large guild favoritism is showing even more. Completely unmasked by your own words.

The proposal completely removes all favoritism from the decay system. Period. It is fair to all players and all guilds. It also removes all reason for guilds to even think about booting a player because of play style.

The fact you completely ignore this means you are purposefully doing a three blind mice and trying to hide the truth by meaningless posts attacking me and trying to bury the concept with meaningless drivel.

You seem blissfully ignorant that what you are suggesting requires about the same amount of code changes as my proposal - to the exact same static variables. The only real difference is that what you are proposing just heightens the slant toward large guilds and cripples all other guilds even more while giving large guilds an even bigger , unjustified break on decay.

Kindly, well, am almost speechless.

[eris2323]

Hi,

Eris, I haven't spent anywhere near as much time posting in this thread as you have.

My main problem with your posts is your stated dislike of small guilds, your tendency to exaggerate, and your attempts to support your arguments by inaccurately rephrasing what other people have said. Again, none of this enhances your credibility at all.

I do not choose to limit myself. The system is doing that for me. I am willing to accept some limitations, but I feel that limitations are being applied very unevenly now. As they were before to, but now to a different group.

I am very much a part of the game community. Arguably more so than someone who spends their time mainly running in guild. I am a member of a great channel on Khyber, and at the moment I spend more time pugging than soloing. I do what I can to help new players, which includes giving advice (if requested) and assistance by way of items and plat.

I don't imagine myself to be part of an elite. For example, I don't belong to a large, wealthy in-game organisation whose members provide ship amenities to me, pass me raid loot, teach me about the game, or any of the other nice benefits available there. All of my progress has been solo or in PUGs, through my own merit.

So while, once again, I will say I have nothing against people who like large guilds or want to be in one, it's not for me. I would appreciate it you would devote your energies to something other than keeping me and people like me down.

Thanks.

Oh, you don't choose to limit yourself?

What do you call soloing a guild?

If you're not choosing that, why not invite some friends that you meet in game, and you will no longer be a solo guild...

Oh right. Because you wanted to limit yourself by being a solo guild

[eris2323]

OMgoodness!!! You are so blind (IMO) and your large guild favoritism is showing even more. Completely unmasked by your own words.

The proposal completely removes all favoritism from the decay system. Period. It is fair to all players and all guilds. It also removes all reason for guilds to even think about booting a player because of play style.

The fact you completely ignore this means you are purposefully doing a three blind mice and trying to hide the truth by meaningless posts attacking me and trying to bury the concept with meaningless drivel.

You seem blissfully ignorant that what you are suggesting requires about the same amount of code changes as my proposal - to the exact same static variables. The only real difference is that what you are proposing just heightens the slant toward large guilds and cripples all other guilds even more while giving large guilds an even bigger , unjustified break on decay.

Kindly, well, am almost speechless.

I wish you were speechless You use a lot of words, and make a lot of assumptions.

[UurlockYgmeov]

Hi,

Eris, I haven't spent anywhere near as much time posting in this thread as you have.

My main problem with your posts is your stated dislike of small guilds, your tendency to exaggerate, and your attempts to support your arguments by inaccurately rephrasing what other people have said. Again, none of this enhances your credibility at all.

I do not choose to limit myself. The system is doing that for me. I am willing to accept some limitations, but I feel that limitations are being applied very unevenly now. As they were before, but now to a different group.

I am very much a part of the game community. Arguably more so than someone who spends their time mainly running in guild. I am a member of a great channel on Khyber, and at the moment I spend more time pugging than soloing. I do what I can to help new players, which includes giving advice (if requested) and assistance by way of items and plat. The rest of how you present my attitude is just too ridiculous to deserve a response, obvious trolling.

I don't imagine myself to be part of an elite. For example, I don't belong to a large, wealthy in-game organisation whose members provide ship amenities to me, pass me raid loot, teach me about the game, or any of the other nice benefits available there. All of my progress has been solo or in PUGs, through my own merit.

So while, once again, I will say I have nothing against people who like large guilds or want to be in one, it's not for me. I would appreciate it you would devote your energies to something other than keeping me and people like me down.

Thanks.

+1 well said!

[Tshober]

And you enforce the large membership bias by removing the only thing that allows small guilds to fight against the bias.

The old system was rejected because it divided the player-base into desirable players who earn more renown than they cost in decay and undesirable players who earn less renown than they cost in decay. That encourages and rewards guilds for shunning/kicking undesirable players for no other reason than the amount of time they can spend farming renown. Any system that allows players to earn less renown than they cost in decay will have that same problem to one degree or another. The only way to completely fix that is to design the system so that no account can ever lose more renown for the guild than that same account earns. In other words, ensure that no player can earn less net renown per day than zero. That can be done very easily. The current system already has that feature for all but the smallest guilds. That could easily be extended to smaller guilds.

What you refer to as "bias" is simply the design that encourages inclusiveness and discourages exclusiveness. I don't view that as bias, I view it as good sense.

[UurlockYgmeov]

The problem is, from the perspective of a lot of those casual players, that joining a large level 0 guild allows them to reap the real benefits-access to other people to play with who they can trust to play cooperatively. The old system took that away from many of them by making them a drag on the more active members advancement.

Personally I would rather see the whole system removed than go back to one that separates the active players who play it from the casual players who just want someone to play with.

The proposed system will actually promote all types of guild play, and make it so inviting someone is less of a risk.

Sadly to say there are those who purposefully go around joining guilds just to entertain themselves, or to raid the guilds coffers or just create havoc.

I want a system that doesn't promote any one style - rather just promotes the guild system in general for all styles of guilds and styles of play.

My idea is the closest thing yet - and only fixes the favoritism already present in the existing system that was carried over from the last system.

It isn't popular with some because they don't take the time to think about and study the proposal.

There will always be those that exploit the system - but thankfully those are in the minority (I hope) - all we can do is try to make the system as fair and unbiased as possible and trust in people being kind and respectful.

[Lowz]

Hi,

Eris, I haven't spent anywhere near as much time posting in this thread as you have.

My main problem with your posts is your stated dislike of small guilds, your tendency to exaggerate, and your attempts to support your arguments by inaccurately rephrasing what other people have said. Again, none of this enhances your credibility at all.

I do not choose to limit myself. The system is doing that for me. I am willing to accept some limitations, but I feel that limitations are being applied very unevenly now. As they were before, but now to a different group.

I am very much a part of the game community. Arguably more so than someone who spends their time mainly running in guild. I am a member of a great channel on Khyber, and at the moment I spend more time pugging than soloing. I do what I can to help new players, which includes giving advice (if requested) and assistance by way of items and plat. The rest of how you present my attitude is just too ridiculous to deserve a response, obvious trolling.

I don't imagine myself to be part of an elite. For example, I don't belong to a large, wealthy in-game organisation whose members provide ship amenities to me, pass me raid loot, teach me about the game, or any of the other nice benefits available there. All of my progress has been solo or in PUGs, through my own merit.

So while, once again, I will say I have nothing against people who like large guilds or want to be in one, it's not for me. I would appreciate it you would devote your energies to something other than keeping me and people like me down.

Thanks.

Yep!

[Gremmlynn]

actually you would be cause now all guilds would have a smaller number (min 2 max 10) down from 20.

And you enforce the large membership bias by removing the only thing that allows small guilds to fight against the bias.

That's before the +10 static modifier that we have always had. I'd be open to treating that modifier in the same way or even removing it and just increasing the max to 20.

What are they using to fight against this supposed bias that is being taken away?

[Tychagara]

Sorry it took so long - so many trying to bury it. Thanks for the support!

I have rewritten the proposal in a more easy to understand format – separating the proposal from additional ideas that have been generated in this forum that might deserve consideration.

Yes, this proposal does mean a tiny more decay for most guilds (all sizes, and levels) - and does affect even the level 1 through 25 guilds; yet the changes are fair and easily handled without any difficulty, especially since it eliminates the effect of casual players on decay unless they earn renown.

In pink as requested in another post.

SO here is the updated and revised proposal - prioritized easiest to implement first to the most difficult last.

Eliminate Decay Altogether

but if Turbine says no, then:

1. Modify temporary system by making simple and easy changes that take away 99% of the pressure away to boot. Is fair for all guilds of all sizes of all styles of play. Booting will still occur - but not because of the system. Easy to accomplish because mostly only modifying existing code by changing static variables.
   
   1. member is not counted toward modified guild size until generates renown. (for mail checkers and purely social log ins)
   2. instead of 30 days until considered inactive for guild purposes, change to one day (changed to account for daily dice);
   3. remove the +10 to the modified guild size in the formula, with a modified minimum guild size becoming one - no cap/limit.
   4. adjust decay to affect all guilds of all levels.
   5. Significantly lower decay for higher level guilds by up to 93% (the level multiplier drops from up to 4.5 down to 2.5).
      
      1. Modified formula would be something like: modified_guild_size[i](1 being the minimum) x (guild_level x 2.5 (two point five)). [i]This change alone reduces decay for high level guilds by up to 93%)
      2. Keep It Simple - keep it transparent and easy to explain, understand, and compute.
   6. Ransack set to start at 500K per day or at 2nd level - whichever is easier to implement. Ransack doesn't start to kick in until (500K) or (2nd level) is reached.
2. Implement (aka ADD a)simple Provisional (two-week) guild invite - invitee does not affect guild renown. So doesn't earn renown, and isn't counted toward modified guild size. Allows guild and prospect to try each other out and see if the fit is right. changed term to provisional - Thanks Fearmaker!

The following is a short compilation of additional suggestions that will benefit guilds and has been generated in this discussion thread. These are not needed to implement the proposal, but are highly recommended as they address issues that affect the current topic and enhance the guild experience.

1. VIP's should get +10% renown - this is now in line with what Fernando stated about new benefits starting with +10% xp for VIPs that begin next patch(s.i.c. below).
2. there needs to be a new form of Global Friends List - one that acts like facebook in most basic essence. You ask someone to be on your friends list (or offer) - and can select to be public, private; to show online status - last log, show all or just one characters in account; and an easier way to talk with them in game without having to be in a guild. Once a player is on your Global Friends List - you can see any of their characters from any of their characters (can still flag yourself as "invisible" or "do not disturb" to make a character not show up in global list). This lets us do global ignore as well, for those who would use it. Selecting (or hovering over with tool tip) a Global Friend in your list and it shows you the last (visible) character they logged in as, the server, and how long ago they logged off, if they aren't online. thanks to Artos_Fabril for the improvements!
3. Guild Information Kiosk: There needs to be a better way for guilds to communicate information in-game about their guilds to the general public - including membership rules, play times and styles, recruitment status - and a way to ask for an invitation. Current methods are all out of game (compendium) and private web-sites (guildportal.com for example) both require programming knowledge (wiki style and web layout). Just have a guild information kiosk in the upper harbor and or in Korthos where players could talk to the NPC to find out more about guilds (general), guilds (specific guilds), search for a guild, message guild leader (inquiry), and apply for membership to a guild. The alternative is to add another page to the social panel that does this as well.
4. Need a replacement to fill in the void caused by the demise of guild-slotted equipment. Not a total replacement, rather something that fills the greatest void. Two new ship amenities - each with different level for different level guilds. Same buff as available from guild augment crystals - so does not stack with itself.(Again thank you to Fearmaker and Alyonna for the suggestion)
   
   • Tiny: no ship available so not applicable
   • Small: Minimum Guild Level 25
     
     • Hit Point Shrine:+10 stacking maximum HP
     • Spell Point Shrine: +40 stacking maximum SP (+80 to Sorcerers and Favored Souls)
   • Medium: Minimum Guild Level 45
     
     • Hit Point Shrine: +15 stacking maximum HP
     • Spell Point Shrine: +60 stacking maximum SP (+80 to Sorcerers and Favored Souls)
   • Large: Minimum Guild Level 70
     
     • Hit Point Shrine: +30 stacking maximum HP
     • Spell Point Shrine: +80 stacking maximum SP (+160 to Sorcerers and Favored Souls)

Kindly review the proposal - since it does address these concerns completely. In the proposal - that player only affects renown decay for one day, and the decay under this proposal is at most 250 for a level 100 guild; so if that player belonged to a level 50 guild - the actual amount would be 125 (guild level * 2.5) netting the guild a positive amount of net renown. You also did not include the other trophies dropped by mobs, and I understand that because most people don't think it adds up - but over the course of 3 quests in the course of an hour or so this will add up to several hundred renown as well.

So to update your hypothetical scenario to reflect the math in the proposal:

A casual player might log in and play for an hour or so midweek lets say. They belong to a level 50 guild. They run 3 quests for a total of 6 chests they pull 500 renown. (4 heroic deeds, 2 tales of valor) plus an additional ~200 from mobs and bosses. Since they logged in and earned renown during the guilds 24 hour decay windowthey are counted in the guilds decay They are counted towards decay just for that day and their affect on the guilds decay is 125, so after all is said and done, they have had a positive net impact on the guilds renown of at least ~357-500+. They helped the guild and will be showered in riches.

(ok maybe not showered in riches) They also log in twice that week to play the daily dice, check mail, post auctions and chat with guildies. Since they haven't earned renown they are not counted at all towards modified guild size and therefore do not affect the guild's decay, even if they log in.

Just for clarity:
Definition of Decay Window: time of assigning of decay to 1 second prior to assigning decay 24 hours later. e.g. so if the guild is assigned decay at 11:00 and 00 seconds (a.m.) the decay window is from 11:00 and 00 seconds to 10:59 and 59 seconds (a.m.) the following day.

So if casual players would be booted, it probably would be because the guild has grown too big and has hit its member cap; and that is an hidden problem this current temporary change has added due to its bias. Now since never before in recent history (say the last 6 updates) has there been a guild with that many players on at once, this could be (and probably) is adding to some of the crushing lag. (Speculative and Off topic)

This makes total sense - the only those who log in and earn renown count toward decay, and only for the day. Math is solid.

I don't agree with the new shrine - but maybe just make it a bonus to being in a guild? that way guilds without a ship could participate?

[UurlockYgmeov]

Oh, you don't choose to limit yourself?

What do you call soloing a guild?

If you're not choosing that, why not invite some friends that you meet in game, and you will no longer be a solo guild...

Oh right. Because you wanted to limit yourself by being a solo guild

You are unjustly judging a person by their play style - exactly what you say you want eliminated from the game.

What makes the game great and allows it to endure the test of time and cross cultural and language barriers is the ability to choose - and the many choices out there.

Respect others and they will respect you.

Just because it is a one person, or 100 person, or 1000 person guild doesn't make it any less valid.

[UurlockYgmeov]

[QUOTE=Tychagara;4946557]

Sorry it took so long - so many trying to bury it. Thanks for the support!

I have rewritten the proposal in a more easy to understand format – separating the proposal from additional ideas that have been generated in this forum that might deserve consideration.

Yes, this proposal does mean a tiny more decay for most guilds (all sizes, and levels) - and does affect even the level 1 through 25 guilds; yet the changes are fair and easily handled without any difficulty, especially since it eliminates the effect of casual players on decay unless they earn renown.

In pink as requested in another post.

SO here is the updated and revised proposal - prioritized easiest to implement first to the most difficult last.

Eliminate Decay Altogether

but if Turbine says no, then:

1. Modify temporary system by making simple and easy changes that take away 99% of the pressure away to boot. Is fair for all guilds of all sizes of all styles of play. Booting will still occur - but not because of the system. Easy to accomplish because mostly only modifying existing code by changing static variables.
   
   1. member is not counted toward modified guild size until generates renown. (for mail checkers and purely social log ins)
   2. instead of 30 days until considered inactive for guild purposes, change to one day (changed to account for daily dice);
   3. remove the +10 to the modified guild size in the formula, with a modified minimum guild size becoming one - no cap/limit.
   4. adjust decay to affect all guilds of all levels.
   5. Significantly lower decay for higher level guilds by up to 93% (the level multiplier drops from up to 4.5 down to 2.5).
      
      1. Modified formula would be something like: modified_guild_size[i](1 being the minimum) x (guild_level x 2.5 (two point five)). [i]This change alone reduces decay for high level guilds by up to 93%)
      2. Keep It Simple - keep it transparent and easy to explain, understand, and compute.
   6. Ransack set to start at 500K per day or at 2nd level - whichever is easier to implement. Ransack doesn't start to kick in until (500K) or (2nd level) is reached.
2. Implement (aka ADD a)simple Provisional (two-week) guild invite - invitee does not affect guild renown. So doesn't earn renown, and isn't counted toward modified guild size. Allows guild and prospect to try each other out and see if the fit is right. changed term to provisional - Thanks Fearmaker!

The following is a short compilation of additional suggestions that will benefit guilds and has been generated in this discussion thread. These are not needed to implement the proposal, but are highly recommended as they address issues that affect the current topic and enhance the guild experience.

1. VIP's should get +10% renown - this is now in line with what Fernando stated about new benefits starting with +10% xp for VIPs that begin next patch(s.i.c. below).
2. there needs to be a new form of Global Friends List - one that acts like facebook in most basic essence. You ask someone to be on your friends list (or offer) - and can select to be public, private; to show online status - last log, show all or just one characters in account; and an easier way to talk with them in game without having to be in a guild. Once a player is on your Global Friends List - you can see any of their characters from any of their characters (can still flag yourself as "invisible" or "do not disturb" to make a character not show up in global list). This lets us do global ignore as well, for those who would use it. Selecting (or hovering over with tool tip) a Global Friend in your list and it shows you the last (visible) character they logged in as, the server, and how long ago they logged off, if they aren't online. thanks to Artos_Fabril for the improvements!
3. Guild Information Kiosk: There needs to be a better way for guilds to communicate information in-game about their guilds to the general public - including membership rules, play times and styles, recruitment status - and a way to ask for an invitation. Current methods are all out of game (compendium) and private web-sites (guildportal.com for example) both require programming knowledge (wiki style and web layout). Just have a guild information kiosk in the upper harbor and or in Korthos where players could talk to the NPC to find out more about guilds (general), guilds (specific guilds), search for a guild, message guild leader (inquiry), and apply for membership to a guild. The alternative is to add another page to the social panel that does this as well.
4. Need a replacement to fill in the void caused by the demise of guild-slotted equipment. Not a total replacement, rather something that fills the greatest void. Two new ship amenities - each with different level for different level guilds. Same buff as available from guild augment crystals - so does not stack with itself.(Again thank you to Fearmaker and Alyonna for the suggestion)
   
   • Tiny: no ship available so not applicable
   • Small: Minimum Guild Level 25
     
     • Hit Point Shrine:+10 stacking maximum HP
     • Spell Point Shrine: +40 stacking maximum SP (+80 to Sorcerers and Favored Souls)
   • Medium: Minimum Guild Level 45
     
     • Hit Point Shrine: +15 stacking maximum HP
     • Spell Point Shrine: +60 stacking maximum SP (+80 to Sorcerers and Favored Souls)
   • Large: Minimum Guild Level 70
     
     • Hit Point Shrine: +30 stacking maximum HP
     • Spell Point Shrine: +80 stacking maximum SP (+160 to Sorcerers and Favored Souls)

QUOTE]



This makes total sense - the only those who log in and earn renown count toward decay, and only for the day. Math is solid.

I don't agree with the new shrine - but maybe just make it a bonus to being in a guild? that way guilds without a ship could participate?

Thank you.

Interesting. Like it - and will mull it over and probably include it in the next version.

[eris2323]

You are unjustly judging a person by their play style - exactly what you say you want eliminated from the game.

What makes the game great and allows it to endure the test of time and cross cultural and language barriers is the ability to choose - and the many choices out there.

Respect others and they will respect you.

Just because it is a one person, or 100 person, or 1000 person guild doesn't make it any less valid.

No, I'm simply pointing out that he chose to limit himself by playing solo. He said he did not choose to limit himself.

[Tshober]

OMgoodness!!! You are so blind (IMO) and your large guild favoritism is showing even more. Completely unmasked by your own words.

LOL. Pot, meet Kettle.

[UurlockYgmeov]

That's before the +10 static modifier that we have always had. I'd be open to treating that modifier in the same way or even removing it and just increasing the max to 20.

What are they using to fight against this supposed bias that is being taken away?

well the proposal fights it in several ways:

removes the +10 and sets the minimum to 1 - I do see the point of 2, but really not much difference so probably should just take it all the way down to 2.

Secondly - reducing the decay of all guilds by replacing the level modifier (that went up to 4.5) with a static number of 2.5, which will reduce the overall decay by up to 93%.

Third - it changes the inactive status from a month to a day.

Fourth - it sets the decay at a level that is easily achieved in an hour or so of play.

Fifth - Removes the size bias by including the size in the math - but only those members who earn renown are counted toward decay - and only for that day do they count. Each day is a fresh start. So if only 1/3 of the members of a guild log in and only 1/4 (of the total) of the members of a guild earn renown - those are the only ones who can affect the decay.

Sixth - all levels of guilds now are affected by decay. since decay is 2.5 times level of the guild times the number of members who earned renown in the 24 hours this is a small amount for guilds under level 26, but still there.

For most guilds that are currently affected by decay - their decay will stay basically the same - might go up or down by 10% from what it is now - but generally stay the same. Just will remove the size slant to the system.

Thank you for the question - please keep asking and I will try to keep explaining.

[Gremmlynn]

No - you believe the changes would remove the bias completely and make the system fair for all guilds and that you fear would hurt your guild.

Uurlock - would you please repost the idea so we can go through item by item? Thank you!

Or maybe that it would cause many guilds to go back to jettisoning any player they feel might be holding them back. I'm sure that many of Turbines competitors would like to see something like his proposal happen as many of those players being jettisoned would be amongst those with the least ties to this game.

[eris2323]

So let's play math.

You think it is somehow fair for a level 100 guild to have:

for a 1 person guild, 250 decay per day. (and receive the small guild bonus as well!)

for a 100 person guild, 25,000 decay per day. (with no bonus)

That doesn't seem fair to me, it seems like it's totally pampering solo guilds, in fact, maybe so much that people will yet again start to fragment off into 8 bazillion little solo guilds, and I guess at that point, all of us who do enjoy large guilds can just go away - because it will just be that easy for everyone to maintain level 100, in a solo guild, that an afternoon of playing will keep you set for a week? solo?

Too easy.

[eris2323]

I guess on the other hand, guilds can power rocket to level 100, then drop off all their players, and a solo king can then just worry about 250 renown per day!

That is EVIL.

Wow. I never thought of that.

DOUBLY AGAINST THIS PLAN.

[UurlockYgmeov]

LOL. Pot, meet Kettle.

Except I do see what he is saying and understand that point of view. I also see the small guilds point of view.

What I see is someone giving large guilds a bad rep because they want to keep an advantage that is caused by in inherent slant and bias to the system. The same bias that was there when large guilds where being massacred by decay; but now that the bias has shifted and given them an advantage - well, his blinders go on.

IMHO What makes it worse is that he does understand and does choose to keep pretending.

[eris2323]

Except I do see what he is saying and understand that point of view. I also see the small guilds point of view.

What I see is someone giving large guilds a bad rep because they want to keep an advantage that is caused by in inherent slant and bias to the system. The same bias that was there when large guilds where being massacred by decay; but now that the bias has shifted and given them an advantage - well, his blinders go on.

IMHO What makes it worse is that he does understand and does choose to keep pretending.

Attacking my character doesn't make you any more 'right'. and doesn't make your plan better.