PDA

View Full Version : Remove Guild Renown Decay



Tshober
04-10-2012, 10:27 AM
Or at least find some better alternative way to implement the decay.

The current method or farming for guild renown and then having it decay is poorly implemented and actually alienates many potential DDO players.

I do not understand why a MMO like DDO, that is competing with other MMO's for every available player, would deliberately choose to implement a guild level decay system that, in effect, makes all casual and semi-casual players totally unwelcome in DDO's guilds. It is very alienating to be refused admittance into every well established guild because you only play on weekends or because your play schedule is intermittent. But that is exactly the situation casual players are in with DDO today. Guilds flat out don't want them and will not take them. And it is hard to blame the guild leaders, when the ultimate fault lies in the guild level decay system chosen by DDO. The guild leaders want their guild to continue to level up and the only way that can happen is if they make sure all their active accounts are really, really active - as in logged in every single day getting renown. This makes casual and light gamers feel unwelcome in DDO because they are *literally* unwlecome in every well established guild in DDO. This is a very self-defeating policy that really should be reviewed.

Not only is the renown decay policy self-defeating for DDO as a whole, it is also poorly implemented and poorly thought out. Most of the content of DDO is quests and in quests there are several opportunities to get renown. You get very small amounts of renown (5 to 15 renown) randomly from monster kills and you get much larger renown rewards (50 to 1000 renown) from looting chests and from end-rewards. That was okay when all there was in DDO was quests. But much of the newer DDO content is no longer built on quests. Events like Crystal Cove and, most recently, the Challenges system do not offer anywhere near the opportunity to earn renown that quests offer. There are no chests in this content and no end-reward option where it woud ever make sense to choose a renown reward (if one were even offered). So when you play the newer DDO content (events & challenges) the ONLY renown you generate is the random (5-15) on kills. You never get any opportunity to get the much larger renown rewards that are actually useful. So, if you insist on retaining the horribly self-defeating renown decay system we have now, at the very least stop producing renown-free DDO content so there is at least some chance at getting some decent renown when you play.

I run a large and pretty well established guild on Orien. We have been around for a little over a year. I try very hard not to give in to the pressure to kick out people who don't play almost daily but is is very hard because those who do play daily want to level the guild. Please review the guild renown decay policy, because I really do not feel that it is serving the best interests of DDO the way it works today.


Tshober

Lagin
04-10-2012, 10:28 AM
/signed.

The entire system needs to be over-hauled.

madmaxhunter
04-10-2012, 10:30 AM
As with the 100 other threads (maybe the devs will eventually get what we're screaming).

/signed

It really has to be FIXED before the expansion hits.

MartinusWyllt
04-10-2012, 10:32 AM
At the very least something like a 3-day hold on decay after reaching a new level would be nice....along with thresholds that you don't decay below...even if this was just:

at level 75 level 50 is your new minimum GL.

at level 100 level 75 is your new minimum GL.

This could reflect the idea that some groups become so legendary they won't fade from memory for decades if not longer.

Qzipoun
04-10-2012, 10:45 AM
/sigh'ned ... again

jortann
04-10-2012, 10:45 AM
Maybe we should ask MadFloyd when we get a ... 'LET'S TALK: Guild Renown' thread.


Because the system needs an overhaul.

amethystdragon
04-10-2012, 10:55 AM
The OP is very well thought out and written, there is not much anyone can add to it; other than we agree.

I understand that when renown was introduced, that decay was put in to stop very large guilds from just reaching the top and not having to work to stay there. It was also ment to stop someone from getting a guild to a high level and then just booting everyone. However, I think that it is time to review and update the system.

porq
04-10-2012, 02:15 PM
I don't know why this topic continually comes up.

I doubt the 'essential' goodies being delivered around the watermark most guilds reach just by playing the game is an accident. It's probably by design. A lot of guilds seem to plateau or grow very slowly beyond that point, but the important thing is the access to the important buffs.

Going the extra mile is getting the last ~35 levels for the convenience of having crafting altars you don't have to visit the Shroud or the Twelve for, and a +1-2% bump on the xp shrine.


Please review the guild renown decay policy, because I really do not feel that it is serving the best interests of DDO the way it works today.




I think it does. What's the end game on leveling a guild anyways, ship buffs? That's what most people are after, and reaching the mid-60s delivers on that.

Bloodyfury
04-10-2012, 02:25 PM
/signed
Anyway, if the only point of decay was from preventing large guilds from leveling too fast, this is a bit pointless... there's absolutely NOTHING worth it once you hit the levels 80 +(except boats on 80 and 85). And when I mean nothing, it's nothing...

That would also prevents us from seeing the same guild attain the level 70 on my server for like the 60-70th times since the last 6 months! lmao They seems to have reach a deadend where they have a critical numbers of members versu what is required, not enough to make it up past 70 for good and still too large so the decay brings them down as soon as they hit 70. They are kinda the running gag now...lol

Tshober
04-10-2012, 02:30 PM
I don't know why this topic continually comes up.

I doubt the 'essential' goodies being delivered around the watermark most guilds reach just by playing the game is an accident. It's probably by design. A lot of guilds seem to plateau or grow very slowly beyond that point, but the important thing is the access to the important buffs.

Going the extra mile is getting the last ~35 levels for the convenience of having crafting altars you don't have to visit the Shroud or the Twelve for, and a +1-2% bump on the xp shrine.



I think it does. What's the end game on leveling a guild anyways, ship buffs? That's what most people are after, and reaching the mid-60s delivers on that.

The problem is that in the current environment, casual players are totally unwelcome in EVERY well established guild. Has nothing to do with what's available on the ships. Has everything to do with alienating a whole set of players from DDO entirely.

Edstienkin
04-10-2012, 02:35 PM
I have a grand idea...
Lets just give everyone a permanent +2 stat buffs, +2% xp buff, and all the other buffs that a guild lvl 100 could have, and then do away with renown entirely. Why should people have to work for buffs? Just give an across the board buffing to every char in game.

/not signed

ps: "totally unwelcome in EVERY well established guild"
And what is wrong with that? Do casual players deserve to be in a high lvl guild? If someone doesn't contribute, why do you think they deserve the benefits? You can always give a ship invite to these casuals.

Thrudh
04-10-2012, 02:43 PM
How about if they start decay at level 50 or 60 guild? No decay before that.

62 is really all you need... you get a large enough ship and can get all the good buffs.

70 is nice for large guild slot items

Anything past that is very minor.

MysticElaine
04-10-2012, 02:45 PM
I agree. I have a small guild as in only 6 accounts. Some ppl have not played in a long while, while others have played every day, and it is hard for me to find ppl that want to join who play everday because not everyone in my guild does or has toons that are at same lvl as them. On the flip side, I don't want to invite ppl that don't play a lot as I don't want to increase the number of accounts and thus decay when it is so hard for us to keep up with the decay as it is. I would feel more like adding ppl who ask for a guild after running with them a few times even if they only play on the weekends if the decay wasn't so bad. Right now though, I can't accept any more casuals until I get more 24/7 ppl.


ps: "totally unwelcome in EVERY well established guild"
And what is wrong with that? Do casual players deserve to be in a high lvl guild? If someone doesn't contribute, why do you think they deserve the benefits? You can always give a ship invite to these casuals.

Not everyone likes to PUG, and therefore, not able to get ship invites. Why should casual players who like to solo not be allowed to have access to ship buffs? AND they DO contribute to the guild, maybe not as much as a person who plays everday, but they still do when they play.

Tshober
04-10-2012, 02:50 PM
I have a grand idea...

ps: "totally unwelcome in EVERY well established guild"
And what is wrong with that? Do casual players deserve to be in a high lvl guild? If someone doesn't contribute, why do you think they deserve the benefits? You can always give a ship invite to these casuals.


What's wrong with that is DDO is competing with other MMO's for those casual players. Will they come play DDO where they are unwelcome in all decent guilds? Or will they go play some other MMO where many of the guilds don't care if they are casual or not? You may not care about that choice, but Turbine definitely SHOULD care about it.

Bogenbroom
04-10-2012, 02:50 PM
I agree that the entire renown system needs to be reviewed. I have little to no problem with the decay factor, my beef is with the perks. I fall squarely into the camp that thinks ship buffs are a very, very bad idea. I believe things like the crafting alters, mailboxes and other convenience items are much more appropriate than things which give actual combat advantages.

Jay203
04-10-2012, 02:56 PM
make the buffs cost renown to use and remove decay altogether :P

Edstienkin
04-10-2012, 03:02 PM
make the buffs cost renown to use and remove decay altogether :P

Now THAT is something I could get behind.
/Totally signed to this idea.

Tshober
04-10-2012, 03:21 PM
make the buffs cost renown to use and remove decay altogether :P


If this were implemented well, I would like it as well. My additional requirement is that the cost would have to come from the buffing character's individual renown stockpile, rather than from the guild's total stockpile. If it came from the guild's stockpile, then it would have the same effect as what we have today, and casual players would still be unwelcome in all well established guilds. But if it came from each individual character's renown earned, then there would be no objection to letting in causal players.

Jay203
04-10-2012, 03:33 PM
If this were implemented well, I would like it as well. My additional requirement is that the cost would have to come from the buffing character's individual renown stockpile, rather than from the guild's total stockpile. If it came from the guild's stockpile, then it would have the same effect as what we have today, and casual players would still be unwelcome in all well established guilds. But if it came from each individual character's renown earned, then there would be no objection to letting in causal players.

guildless ppl need not ask for ship buffs :D

Tshober
04-11-2012, 10:01 AM
How about if they start decay at level 50 or 60 guild? No decay before that.

62 is really all you need... you get a large enough ship and can get all the good buffs.

70 is nice for large guild slot items

Anything past that is very minor.


All that you say here is true. But it does not address the main problem. Right now, as we are today, casual players are unwelcome in all well established guilds. Raising the level at which decay starts does nothing at all to change that. All guild leaders will still want their guild to continue to level up and so will their active guild members. The only way that can happen is if they kick out casual players and limit membership strictly to very active players. The level at which that occurs is irrelevent. If there is a higher level, human nature takes over and everyone wants it, regardless of how minor the benefit might be. My guild IS level 61 and I can assure you most emphatically that many members are not satisfied with that. As I said, I try very hard to resist the pressure to kick out casual players but is it NOT easy. DDO is not a friendly place for casual players when compared to many other MMO's, and IMO this is one of the main reasons.

madmaxhunter
04-11-2012, 10:22 AM
I really hate the glib replies to guild renown that it doesn't matter if you're level 65 or 95. This is a game... and being a game, I'm going to work to improve all aspects of my experience in DDO.

I had a guildie come back after a six month break. He went directly to the Wayward Lobster. I summarily booted him from the guild. Another guildie just logs on to say hello and talk about his excitement of the coming of GW2. A third player came back after probably 9 months. But only for moments every few days. I'm about to kick them.

This is wrong. I am wrong. I know it. I have to be fair to the players that are actively working toward the guild's best interest. The player I kicked hasn't logged on since. I'm sure the players I'm about to kick will never play again. Great system there Turbine.

LOOON375
04-11-2012, 10:23 AM
When I first started playing, I wanted to try to get into a large guild.

Im glad that I never did!!

Im glad that my friends and I started our own small guild.

We are a 3 account guild. We are totally unaffected by guild renown decay. I have monitored the numbers over the course of the night and compared to see if we got hit. We have never been knocked backwards one fricken bit.

We are hitting level 59 today sometime. And granted, I personally have earned a little over half of our total renown.

The larger the guild, the larger the amount of decay. And if you have a giant monster guild with tons of accounts, you are going to have decay.

Everyday on Argo it seems I see a guild name I have never seen before. I have played with tons of people that have left large guilds to create their own small guild.

DocBenway
04-11-2012, 10:30 AM
... I have a small guild as in only 6 accounts....On the flip side, I don't want to invite ppl that don't play a lot as I don't want to increase the number of accounts and thus decay when it is so hard for us to keep up with the decay as it is. ...

The way the decay formula is currently broken, the minimum Modified Guild Size used in the decay calcultions is 10. You could kick 5 or add 4 and not see any difference in daily decay, since the smallest guild size according to decay is 10.

I'd rather not lose renown as double the actual size of my guild, but my harping on it in http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=362736 went with only other testimony of similar findings and no official response.

MysticElaine
04-11-2012, 10:33 AM
When I first started playing, I wanted to try to get into a large guild.

Im glad that I never did!!

Im glad that my friends and I started our own small guild.

We are a 3 account guild. We are totally unaffected by guild renown decay. I have monitored the numbers over the course of the night and compared to see if we got hit. We have never been knocked backwards one fricken bit.

We are hitting level 59 today sometime. And granted, I personally have earned a little over half of our total renown.

The larger the guild, the larger the amount of decay. And if you have a giant monster guild with tons of accounts, you are going to have decay.

Everyday on Argo it seems I see a guild name I have never seen before. I have played with tons of people that have left large guilds to create their own small guild.

I have a 6 account (still considered small) guild and we get decay. We are lvl 57 almost 58. How are you not getting decay?

***EDIT*** Posted this at same time as DocBenway did apparantly in response to decay hitting as if you are at least a 10 account guild.

LOOON375
04-11-2012, 10:38 AM
I have a 6 account (still considered small) guild and we get decay. We are lvl 57 almost 58. How are you not getting decay?Personally I have no clue. A couple of times I have written down the renown number before going to bed and compared it to the number in the morning. Both times there was no change in the number.

Now granted, my play time is more than most can put into this game. I play practically every day.

Ill check again tonight to see if anything has changed.

ladypummel
04-16-2012, 01:48 PM
As A leader of a large guild of 245 modified accounts at level 74 -75 i agree the decay system needs to be adjusted. The age old argument about not deserving and so on and so on is extremely unfair i mean we have been well established before and after guild ships and one of the first guilds on the orien server. Our daily decay currently is about 200k so in a week we see 1.4 million renown decay this kinda of number is insane i mean imagine if this was like exp and you worked hard and it kept getting taken away everyday. i mean at this pace we would lose 50 plus million renown in a year

MartinusWyllt
04-16-2012, 02:44 PM
i mean at this pace we would lose 50 plus million renown in a year

Also, eventually you could have members that have accumulated enough renown that they could decimate your guild level by leaving since individual contribution numbers don't decay yet the sum does. I don't how how long it would take but, someday, a single player will probably be able to drop you down to 25 if not lower.

Maybe there's protection against that, I have no idea.

MasterHephaestus
04-16-2012, 03:40 PM
Personally I would kick the whiners who are pushing me to kick the casual players. You don't NEED the ship or the buffs or the extra perks to get to end game. They're just that: perks. In my opinion, a PERK should never drive how you play your game.

You want better gear? Go get it.
You want more experience? Run more quests.
You want better buffs? Run with people that will buff you or get tomes or re-roll.

I understand that the renown system is broken and needs fixing but, jebus people!, don't let it drive how you interact with others. It's not just the game mechanics that drive away other players....

McFlay
04-16-2012, 04:06 PM
The problem is that in the current environment, casual players are totally unwelcome in EVERY well established guild. Has nothing to do with what's available on the ships. Has everything to do with alienating a whole set of players from DDO entirely.

It has everythign to do with wanting a ship full of buffs and perks of being in an established guild.

If it had nothing to do with that, then all the casual players would just create/join casual guilds and guild level wouldn't matter to them.

SardaofChaos
04-16-2012, 04:16 PM
Personally I would kick the whiners who are pushing me to kick the casual players. You don't NEED the ship or the buffs or the extra perks to get to end game. They're just that: perks. In my opinion, a PERK should never drive how you play your game.

You want better gear? Go get it.
You want more experience? Run more quests.
You want better buffs? Run with people that will buff you or get tomes or re-roll.

I understand that the renown system is broken and needs fixing but, jebus people!, don't let it drive how you interact with others. It's not just the game mechanics that drive away other players....

On the other hand, if the majority of the population do let it get to them, and continue acting as they are now, the system is far more likely to get fixed :/ Speaking as the leader of a guild that until a couple days ago contained only my father and I.

That bit about minimum modified guild size being 10 is helpful, now I know I haven't screwed myself by letting in a couple friends who decided to try out DDO.

MasterHephaestus
04-16-2012, 04:23 PM
On the other hand, if the majority of the population do let it get to them, and continue acting as they are now, the system is far more likely to get fixed :/ Speaking as the leader of a guild that until a couple days ago contained only my father and I.

That bit about minimum modified guild size being 10 is helpful, now I know I haven't screwed myself by letting in a couple friends who decided to try out DDO.

I hear you, Sarda, as my guild only contains my wife and I. :)

I try to bite my tongue but everyone once in a while it escapes me and I remember why I live like a hermit five miles from my nearest neighbor.

Tshober
04-17-2012, 11:49 AM
It has everythign to do with wanting a ship full of buffs and perks of being in an established guild.

If it had nothing to do with that, then all the casual players would just create/join casual guilds and guild level wouldn't matter to them.

Alright, that's true. I should not have said "nothing". But, as others have pointed out, the additional perks above level 62 are pretty weak. It's just that human nature makes people want to keep leveling up their guild, regardless of how minor the additional perks may be. Very few, if any, casual guilds will ever see level 62 though, with the current decay setup.

Despite your correction, I still beleive the renown decay is the root cause for caual players being unwelcome in well established DDO guilds, and that in turn makes them at least feel unwelcome in DDO generally. To them it appears that DDO is only suitable for power gamers or lifers that are always online.

McFlay
04-17-2012, 07:37 PM
Alright, that's true. I should not have said "nothing". But, as others have pointed out, the additional perks above level 62 are pretty weak. It's just that human nature makes people want to keep leveling up their guild, regardless of how minor the additional perks may be. Very few, if any, casual guilds will ever see level 62 though, with the current decay setup.

Despite your correction, I still beleive the renown decay is the root cause for caual players being unwelcome in well established DDO guilds, and that in turn makes them at least feel unwelcome in DDO generally. To them it appears that DDO is only suitable for power gamers or lifers that are always online.

Did you ever stop and think for a second what a new, casual player has to offer to an established guild of active players? With decay, they are just a little thorn in the side of the guild with nothing to offer. Without it, they aren't a little thorn in the side of the guild anymore, but they still have literally nothing to offer that guild. There are plenty of good players willing to help noobs, but I don't see where a noob is at all entitled entrance into a high level established guild right from the begining.

I see guilds recruiting every day I log on...why not join a new guild with other new players rather then expecting to jump into a established guild of veterans and have them spoon feed you everything.

Face it, some guilds are always going to have requirements. Some expect a certain level of game knowledge, some expect a certain level of activity, and some expect you just to be a fun player. With or without decay...guilds are still goign to have requirements and expectations of their players. Maybe people should be more concerned about finding a guild with people they enjoy playing with who have a similiar mindset about the game as them instead of jumping right into an "established DDO guild."

Ungood
04-17-2012, 09:07 PM
Or at least find some better alternative way to implement the decay.

The current method or farming for guild renown and then having it decay is poorly implemented and actually alienates many potential DDO players.

I have been against Guild renown Decay since it was first implemented, it is nothing but grind for the sake of grind, with no other point of purpose behind it, and while sadly such a mechanic is needed in MMO's curtail the power gamers, it eventually hurts the game as a whole overall.

I proposed an alternate suggestion a while back on how to deal with guilds and buffs, in a way that would boost player interaction. With Guild Alliances (http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=365715).

Anyway.

I signed all the other ones, I'll /Sign this one too.

Falco_Easts
04-17-2012, 09:49 PM
I do not understand why a MMO like DDO, that is competing with other MMO's for every available player, would deliberately choose to implement a guild level decay system that, in effect, makes all casual and semi-casual players totally unwelcome in DDO's guilds.

They are not unwelcome in all guilds, just the ones that treat guild level as the be all and end all. Nothing is stopping guilds from forming two guilds and sharing a chat channel.
Legends - Elite
Legends - Casual
All of the benefits of playing with your mates, none of the downside of their casual playstyle.

I would personally prefer they remove all buffs along with renown. That failed update changed what guilds were about and not in a good way.

Beethoven
04-17-2012, 09:58 PM
Did you ever stop and think for a second what a new, casual player has to offer to an established guild of active players?

Let me throw the question back at you, did you ever stop to think there could be more to a human being than the amount of time they spend playing a computer game?

Used to be guilds that were open to new players simply for the chance of meeting new and interesting personalities. Also, new players could be RL friends of existing guild members. Casual players could be RL spouses of existing guild members. It's not about entitlement, but about getting penalized for letting them in the guild.

Sadly, that's the effect - say I have me and my nine friends have an own guild and are fairly active. Now I let a casual player in the guild who can only play twice a week, help him/her learn the game and get penalized by additional decay (11 accounts vs 10). Lets assume they each have a spouse who also can only devote one or two days a week and our decay is going exponentially so far that not only their contributions get eliminated but also some of ours (the highly active members).

You could, of course, argue if my wife does not have the time to contribute enough I should not allow my spouse in my guild ... but seriously? You could also argue guild level shouldn't affect people and can largely be ignored. Then again, what good is a system that should be ignored by a good amount of the players? You could even argue the system is front loaded. However, stagnation is not fun. You can also tell the dude who just completed his sixty-fifth EV6 and still did not pull a SoS shard that an epic SoS is not all that important and how his dps is decent enough. It's not going to make him feel less frustrated.

I do understand (and even applaud) were Turbine wanted to go with it, giving the hardcore something were they can set themselves apart from casual players. However, it is flawed and I feel they underestimated how much it contributes to make veteran players seem unwelcoming to new players and how it needless frustrates casual players.

So, /signed.

The far better solution would have been to use guild size to calculate the amount of renown needed to reach the next level (instead of used for decay). So, in other words a guild with 50 accounts would need twice the Renown to reach, say, level 25 than a guild with 25 accounts. It'd have worked as well in slowing large guilds down (as the more accounts they have the more Renown they need for the next level) and it might even worked better to level the playing fields between small and large guilds.

The second part were I feel they went wrong is making the system cap at level 100. They should have left it open ended with some (minor) rewards for, say, each 50 level beyond 100. This way hardcore guilds could have continued to compete instead of getting stuck at level 100 with the only chance to beat another hardcore guild being hoping the other competitors will loose members (or have individual members become inactive enough) to loose a level again.

McFlay
04-17-2012, 10:25 PM
But it is about entitlement. If your purpose in a guild is just to enjoy the personalities of various people, then you wouldn't care at all about your guild level, would you?

Furthermore, what's stopping you from grouping with non-guildies? You can still chat with them, quest with them, and invite them to your ship for buffs, and you can even make a private chat channel and invite them all to it.

I think I'd have to agree with Falco-Easts on this one. If they get rid of decay, please just get rid of guild buffs at the same time.

kclark1980
04-17-2012, 10:38 PM
I think I'd have to agree with Falco-Easts on this one. If they get rid of decay, please just get rid of guild buffs at the same time.

I have to agree with this also. I can't stand the decay process but it's a balance. If one goes then the other would need to also. I did like the idea of having the guild renown being used to get the buffs but something does need to change.

Rhysem
04-17-2012, 10:54 PM
I support anything that reduces pointless grind in game. Guild renown, the current crafting implementation, farming your brains out for super rare drops or 20-raids-till-a-good-reward-list (in theory) or whatever. Grind sucks in a game. If I wanted to grind, I'd go cook something (nothing better than cooking with freshly ground spices).

Qzipoun
04-17-2012, 11:50 PM
I have to be fair to the players that are actively working toward the guild's best interest. The player I kicked hasn't logged on since. I'm sure the players I'm about to kick will never play again. Great system there Turbine.

Very true, everyone is shafted by the current system. Turbine most of all because the system is detrimental to those trying to help newbies or returning players

MysticElaine
04-18-2012, 11:45 AM
As a casual player, I started a guild along with my mom and another friend. We accepted another and his son into our guild and they played non-stop. They in turn recruited another to help (who had most of his toons in another lg guild). Our friend stopped playing because he hates PUGs and we aren't on at the same time to really play together. The father and son team just abruptly left DDO, and so the one they recruited who they played with a lot is also now not on a whole lot.

Now, I can't boot them because I will drop from 58 to who knows what level, but it doesn't look good to others who might want to join to see 30 toons last logged on over a month + ago. As much as I miss the interaction between people in a guild (was part of a larger guild on a different server), I don't want to risk blind inviting people, have them try it out and then quit, and most long standing players are wanting large guilds. Yes, the buffs are great. But the decay stinks as I am getting penalized for only wanting to play casually, and I don't think our hard work should go nowhere and not get the nice buffs. So now, I work hard everyday for 2-3 hours (my mother might get to play an hour every day) to get the renown I am just going to lose, and I can barely stay at level 58. I also hate to think how much renown we are going to lose with Crystal Cove coming back (as I grind that since it is only around a short while).


So why should I not be allowed the nice perks just because I have to work, have a life, and can only play a few hours each day?

Monkey-Boy
04-18-2012, 12:02 PM
So why should I not be allowed the nice perks just because I have to work, have a life, and can only play a few hours each day?

Only Turbine can explain why they designed the renown system to benefit reclusive sociopaths.

Sarcasm aside, the numbers need to be tweaked.

Hafeal
04-18-2012, 12:11 PM
/signed (as with many other a request to modify the system)

I was going to add that the 'perks' are the culprit but Falco summed it up (+1):



I would personally prefer they remove all buffs along with renown. That failed update changed what guilds were about and not in a good way.

I am getting old and my memory isn't what it used to be, but I do not recall the 'perks' ever being much of the discussion around guild ships. I think the devs had the right instinct and intent - but no good deed goes unpunished and the result has been the continuing progression of schisms between players.

To me, this system is emblamatic of what holds DDO back from becoming the predominant MMO out there. For every step forward they seemingly take 2 back. :(

JOTMON
04-18-2012, 01:04 PM
The guild decay mechanic still needs a lot of work.

Individual contribution to renown needs some work.

There is no mechanic to track individual contribution to the guild. How do you know each guild member is contributing their fair share to offset decay. How does each player know if they have earned enough.

Currently guidlies who leave the guild cost the guild some renown which makes sense the guild should suffer when someone leaves the guild. If that person rejoins the same guild at some point down the road they rejoin with nothing they are clean slated. If a person leaves a guild to join another guild they bring no renown with them, they start with 0 renown.

Take a situation where two guilds want to merge one of those guilds loses everything while the other guild gets new members starting with no renown irregarddless of months of active renown collecting in place of taking end rewards and selling them for plat.

There should be a portion of renown that carries with an individual, I can see losing 50% everytime you leave a guild. Leave a guild where you contributed 1million renown and you leave with 500,000 to bring to a new guild. Quit that guild and you drop to 250,000 and so on. This would allow guild mergers and reforms to be less painfull but still be a deterrent to guild jumpers. Guildess players could accumulate renown. Guilds still take a hit when someone leaves as they should that persons contribution to the overall guild renown is gone.

Inactive players should decay at a much lower rate when inactive and have this reduced rate apply within 2 days of being offline. This would allow casual players to not be penalized during their inactive times as greatly as their active times. There would still be decay since this is not a free ride there still needs to be renown earned to offset decay, just the decay to be maintained is more in line with their activity.

These changes would make great strides towards a more balanced decay system for Guilds.

MysticElaine
04-18-2012, 01:20 PM
There is no mechanic to track individual contribution to the guild. How do you know each guild member is contributing their fair share to offset decay. How does each player know if they have earned enough.

You can see how much renown you have given to your guild, so technically, you can see how much you yourself have given each day by looking at your renown contribution before and after questing for the day.

JOTMON
04-18-2012, 01:58 PM
You can see how much renown you have given to your guild, so technically, you can see how much you yourself have given each day by looking at your renown contribution before and after questing for the day.

That renown number while giving the appearances of being interesting since it grows everyday is a completely useless number.

This number is your total gross earned renown while in the guild, it is not adjusted for decay or show decay allocated to you.
It does not show how much you contributed vs the decay or towards guild growth.
it does not show how much you should have earned that day to stave off the decay based on all the guildies that played that day as compared to the total decay the guild will be hit with.

There is no easy way for you to see if you are contributing your daily share to meet the guild requirement.

chrichton
04-18-2012, 02:21 PM
. . . it is so hard for us to keep up with the decay as it is. . . .

!?!?

I too am in a 6-account guild (very small) and I don't think we even have decay yet - or it is so small it is pretty much not noticeable.
We are lvl 34.

chrichton
04-18-2012, 02:22 PM
I agree that the entire renown system needs to be reviewed. I have little to no problem with the decay factor, my beef is with the perks. I fall squarely into the camp that thinks ship buffs are a very, very bad idea. I believe things like the crafting alters, mailboxes and other convenience items are much more appropriate than things which give actual combat advantages.

I strongly agree wit this sentiment. I think this game has changed fundamentally since ship buffs came into existence.

chrichton
04-18-2012, 02:26 PM
If this were implemented well, I would like it as well. My additional requirement is that the cost would have to come from the buffing character's individual renown stockpile, rather than from the guild's total stockpile. If it came from the guild's stockpile, then it would have the same effect as what we have today, and casual players would still be unwelcome in all well established guilds. But if it came from each individual character's renown earned, then there would be no objection to letting in causal players.
Casual players would not spend enough game time to affect the renown that much - this could still work.

Excellent idea - but the cost for the buffs should not be negligible.

SardaofChaos
04-18-2012, 02:40 PM
Another option might be to do as TF2 did a year or so ago with their item drop system: they made getting items a bit more likely, but capped the amount of playtime per week that contributes to getting items. I believe the cap was 10 hours a day, more than the majority likely play but also not so much that only those who play all the time have a shot at getting things.

Cap the total amount of renown an account(maybe even character, to promote sticking with one guild - not sure anymore if we want people to have all their chars in the same guild or not) can pull in per week, and also lower the decay to compensate. The specific place the cap would be placed at would have to be considered carefully, somewhere that most would achieve by playing a couple hours daily(on average).

Just noticed that this idea would penalize small guilds heavily - to compensate for that, the cap would be adjusted based on the modified guild size, just as the renown bonus and decay are currently.

MysticElaine
04-18-2012, 03:12 PM
I too am in a 6-account guild (very small) and I don't think we even have decay yet - or it is so small it is pretty much not noticeable. We are lvl 34.


It is still small decay for you, and if you quest a lot, you probably won't notice it. http://ddowiki.com/page/Guild_Renown (http://ddowiki.com/page/Guild_Renown)



That renown number while giving the appearances of being interesting since it grows everyday is a completely useless number.

This number is your total gross earned renown while in the guild, it is not adjusted for decay or show decay allocated to you.
It does not show how much you contributed vs the decay or towards guild growth.
it does not show how much you should have earned that day to stave off the decay based on all the guildies that played that day as compared to the total decay the guild will be hit with.

There is no easy way for you to see if you are contributing your daily share to meet the guild requirement.


First off, yes it states the total renown earned per character for the guild. If I log on today and see that my toon right now has earned 5k renown for the guild, at the end of the day I see that it has now earned 7k, I know that today I contributed 2k to the guild.

Decay is based on modified account size. Assuming no recent departures, for a guild size of 10 accounts at level 58, the guild would lose around 4100xp a day. 4100xp/10accounts equals 410xp needed to be gained by each account to not lose/gain progress.

JOTMON
04-18-2012, 04:03 PM
First off, yes it states the total renown earned per character for the guild. If I log on today and see that my toon right now has earned 5k renown for the guild, at the end of the day I see that it has now earned 7k, I know that today I contributed 2k to the guild.

Decay is based on modified account size. Assuming no recent departures, for a guild size of 10 accounts at level 58, the guild would lose around 4100xp a day. 4100xp/10accounts equals 410xp needed to be gained by each account to not lose/gain progress.


For a 10 account guild that may be easy to track, for a 100 account guild(900+members) at guild level 80, it is not so easy, we also have to factor in renown for casual members and inactive members not yet gone long enough to be considered inactive and any turnover of incoming and outgoing players. There is no system to track these variables reliably to ensure we are not losing ground other than the occasional popup indicating that we have lost or gained a guild level. The decay loss seems to be a moving target.

MysticElaine
04-18-2012, 04:41 PM
For a 10 account guild that may be easy to track, for a 100 account guild(900+members) at guild level 80, it is not so easy, we also have to factor in renown for casual members and inactive members not yet gone long enough to be considered inactive and any turnover of incoming and outgoing players. There is no system to track these variables reliably to ensure we are not losing ground other than the occasional popup indicating that we have lost or gained a guild level. The decay loss seems to be a moving target.

You just have to have someone dedicated to keeping track, and it really isn't that hard. I do speak from experience as I was in a very large guild on Cannith where the leader wanted to get the maximum number of ppl possible, blind invited everyone, and I was in charge of dealing with decay. Look at your mod account size, figure out how much you are going to lose, and divide that by the number of accounts to know how much renown each account must make. Know when your account size is going to change by knowing when the inactives actually count as inactive on your mod account size, and keep track of when you boot someone so you know when they will no longer count as a recent departure. If you boot someone, just realize that you lose 25% of the renown they gave (this is the only amount you do not personally know) so decide if it is really worth booting them or not.

I'm saying it is rather easy to determine how much renown each account needs to contribute to keep the guild from losing/gaining progress. Yes, it is harder with more casual players not contributing the amount they need to contribute everyday. But if you know who these casual players are, then hopefully you can roughly know how many accounts you need to pick up the slack for. So, if half your guild is casual and half plays everyday, then you can say instead each account needs to contribute twice as much so that the guild will either stay the same or increase (which, unfortunately, means more work for the everyday players, but is the price you pay for having casual players)

yawumpus
04-18-2012, 05:25 PM
All that you say here is true. But it does not address the main problem. Right now, as we are today, casual players are unwelcome in all well established guilds. Raising the level at which decay starts does nothing at all to change that. All guild leaders will still want their guild to continue to level up and so will their active guild members. The only way that can happen is if they kick out casual players and limit membership strictly to very active players. The level at which that occurs is irrelevent. If there is a higher level, human nature takes over and everyone wants it, regardless of how minor the benefit might be. My guild IS level 61 and I can assure you most emphatically that many members are not satisfied with that. As I said, I try very hard to resist the pressure to kick out casual players but is it NOT easy. DDO is not a friendly place for casual players when compared to many other MMO's, and IMO this is one of the main reasons.

First: if guilds are not meant to be exclusive, you should name them something else. Medieval and Renaissance guilds existed to limit access to their craft and gain monopoly pricing.

Second: Turbine has made it very clear that they have no intention of handing out guild level 100 to casual guilds. I have yet to see a dev look for ways to make it even easier for megaguilds to rocket to 100. While Turbine has been busy greasing the skids to 20 (at least for VIPs and those who bought the expansion), I doubt they will make the trip to 25 just as trivial. Players have a habit of leaving after reaching their goals.

Some clarifications: The issue of reknown decay only hits large guilds at high levels. And it only really becomes an issue [well only stops leveling dead] with large guilds with plenty of casual players. Small guilds with casual players simply never get to a high level.

I am in Black Sun of Orien. We have a modified guild size of 9 and a few of those are family of guildies. Don't expect them to be pulling quite the same as a true DDO addict (I suspect our supreme leader is glad his sons have interests outside of DDO). This means that we got our level 50 airship sometime in March, and probably won't hit 55 until the expansion. Quite frankly, while we will grind for guild shinies, we aren't about to change membership requirements over it. Our guild might be crazy enough to force family to show up in DDO to meet us, but at least we will meet you if you show up! The point of all this is that removing guild decay does nothing for the penalties for smaller guilds (less than 50 modified accounts) for having casual players. Judging by the numbers I see over players in Stormreach, the number of players in small guilds widely outnumber the players in large guilds.

More anecdotes (if not data):


They are not unwelcome in all guilds, just the ones that treat guild level as the be all and end all. Nothing is stopping guilds from forming two guilds and sharing a chat channel.
Legends - Elite
Legends - Casual
All of the benefits of playing with your mates, none of the downside of their casual playstyle.

It might help to hear the story from someone involved, but I believe in Orien the Forever Knights split off of The Fallen Knights for roughly this reason (I'm assuming the less reknown obsessed players kept the guild level). I think I still see Forever Knights above toon's heads, but can't remember the last time I saw a Fallen Knight.

"casual players are unwelcome in all well established guilds": Then casual players should look to up and coming guilds. It should be noted that while Turbine has made it painful to accept casual guildies, they have made it even more painful to boot them. First: booting them means a huge loss of reknown (worse considering it doesn't appear to be affected by decay) and does no good unless you boot every last active alt in that account (you get all the decay, but none of the reknown from the booted alts till you get that last alt). Second: Turbine pretty much intentionally gives no means to tell how much reknown each toon gets, or who is an alt of who (both have been screamed about almost as much as decay). If you are a casual player and want a high level guild, just look for a guild with a large, growing size (but not anywhere near 1000) and join up. The guild levels will come.

"casual players are unwelcome in all well established guilds": I'm curious how this applies to new players. Obviously, new players aren't going to be able to hit their daily quota of epartycrashers (BB and xp tomes may change this). This pretty much gets in the way of any guild mentoring programs.

Ungood
04-18-2012, 09:24 PM
First: if guilds are not meant to be exclusive, you should name them something else. Medieval and Renaissance guilds existed to limit access to their craft and gain monopoly pricing.

To be fair, Guilds, in the Renaissance era were craft specific, not necessarily exclusive beyond deftness of purpose, much in the same way Unions are in the United States.

The "Guild" of MMO's is a generic "Adventures Guild" theme, in which case, anyone who is an adventurer (Which encompasses very single player in the game) may join or form a guild for adventures. There is no limiting factor beyond personal like or dislike for an individual. Which in this case, bears no resemblance to an actual Guild of the Renaissance Era, which had a deftness of purpose.

Now, if they opted to make it so we could make several kinds of Guilds, IE: Raiding Guilds, Adventure Guilds, Perma-Death Guilds, Family Guilds, and the like, that would be an idea solution, as opposed to the cookie cutter guild system they have in place now.

But as it stands, there is only "generic guild for any and every player in the game" which is where the problems start.

If they did not want casual players to make it to 100, they should make a "Casual Guild" style so that casual players are not pressured with a number over their heads, or perhaps give them the option to opt out of the whole leveling thing in it's entirety.

In the end of things, the integral issue is that Turbine is trying to force every player into a single guild mold, and it is not going over well. They really need to revisit their methodology in this regard.

Tshober
04-19-2012, 01:30 AM
Face it, some guilds are always going to have requirements. Some expect a certain level of game knowledge, some expect a certain level of activity, and some expect you just to be a fun player. With or without decay...guilds are still goign to have requirements and expectations of their players.

Of course they will! And they have every right to choose to enforce any requirements they like. I absolutely support that. But what renown decay does, is it takes away a guild leader's choice. If he/she wants the guild to level, then the ONLY choice is to kick out the casuals. I am arguing that guild leaders should not be FORCED into kicking casuals. That certainly does not mean that they can't do so if they want to.

Tshober
04-19-2012, 01:44 AM
!?!?

I too am in a 6-account guild (very small) and I don't think we even have decay yet - or it is so small it is pretty much not noticeable.
We are lvl 34.

Even in very large guilds like mine, renown decay does not really become much of a factor until level 45 or so. But it becomes huge for large guilds by level 60.

Fensen
04-22-2012, 07:36 PM
/signed....again

The easiest solution I can come up with is that guild levels when earned are simply locked in. Once the guild achieves a level, that level can never be lost. Decay still would affect getting to the next level, but at least what has been earned will not go away. So what that a level 100 guild does not have to do anything under such a system to maintain its level? They earned it and I doubt they would then start inviting the entire server to join their guild. People who have put in that much effort are probably not going to be in a hurry to give others an easy button.

Xynot2
04-24-2012, 10:10 AM
While I understand the mechanics of decay, those same mechanics penalize large guilds just for being large.

http://ddowiki.com/page/Guild_Renown (for those who haven't seen it)

I do think that penalizing the guild just for being big is totally wrong. If the idea was to keep guild size down, why not implement a size limit? (account not toon).

JOTMON
04-24-2012, 10:33 AM
While I understand the mechanics of decay, those same mechanics penalize large guilds just for being large.

http://ddowiki.com/page/Guild_Renown (for those who haven't seen it)

I do think that penalizing the guild just for being big is totally wrong. If the idea was to keep guild size down, why not implement a size limit? (account not toon).

That doesnt make any sense either.
That would be penalizing a large guild for having too many members...
Another bonus to having a small guild..



/signed....again

The easiest solution I can come up with is that guild levels when earned are simply locked in. Once the guild achieves a level, that level can never be lost. Decay still would affect getting to the next level, but at least what has been earned will not go away. So what that a level 100 guild does not have to do anything under such a system to maintain its level? They earned it and I doubt they would then start inviting the entire server to join their guild. People who have put in that much effort are probably not going to be in a hurry to give others an easy button.


I am in a large guild (900+ members/142 accounts-50 inactive members) we lose aboout 175k a day in decay.
Dont have exact numbers but I am sure Vanshilar has all the data logged.
I look at my personal contribution and I am about 2 Million Renown (across account, main toon has over 1 million).
Many others in the guild have contributed similar amounts (give or take).
Currently our guild renown on the boards after decay is 26million.
Over the course of a year we have lost 64million(approx) to decay.

Having lock-in points based on Gross guild renown earned may work with a mechanic to lose the locking point when a major guild contributor leaves the guild.
That way if the core people who got the guild level to where it is leave then the guild should lose lock-in point levels unless new guild members are offsetting that gross renown earned amount.

madmaxhunter
04-24-2012, 11:05 AM
I will repeat my idea that will easily fix guild renown decay, and keep casual/new/returning players, and not torque-off small guilds:

Make a new rank, associate. An associate has access to guild chat, guild ship/amenities, basically everything that current members have. The exception is that they don't contribute renown to the guild, or decay.

So a guild could have a leader, 2 officers, 3 members, and 100 associates. The guild is considered small.

Is that fair? Sure! With only the most active members affecting the guild's size, the others can rest assured that they aren't a burden on the guild. Actual small guilds can stay at the same pace as the mega guild. It keeps the playing field even.

They can leave the renown decay the way it is. A very active member who needs to take a break doesn't have to worry about being ousted from the guild.

Xynot2
04-24-2012, 11:13 AM
That doesnt make any sense either.
That would be penalizing a large guild for having too many members...
Another bonus to having a small guild..


There already IS a penalty for having a lot of members- I was advocating removing it.
Also stating that if the idea was to prevent massive guilds, to put an account limit on it like- 100 accounts. (which is where the renown decay REALLY starts to slap you)

As it sits according to the link I posted, 50 accounts is optimum. After that, with the way it's currently structured, renown decay hit grows exponentially. (intentional or otherwise) I know people in larger guilds and they pretty much have given up on gaining any more levels because in order to counter the decay, they would have to have everyone running nothing but renown rich quests continuously.

Note that I said 100 accounts- That's 400 toons on average.

SlyMagi
08-05-2012, 12:43 AM
I have money, I stopped playing DDO regularly. Read and learn. I don't want to work a second job. I want to have fun killing monsters.

I am now a casual player with no real reason to play. (And I own all the content and was a regular pay to play as well.) If this doesn't speak loud enough.... there are other games.

Tshober
08-05-2012, 07:40 AM
There already IS a penalty for having a lot of members- I was advocating removing it.
Also stating that if the idea was to prevent massive guilds, to put an account limit on it like- 100 accounts. (which is where the renown decay REALLY starts to slap you)

As it sits according to the link I posted, 50 accounts is optimum. After that, with the way it's currently structured, renown decay hit grows exponentially. (intentional or otherwise) I know people in larger guilds and they pretty much have given up on gaining any more levels because in order to counter the decay, they would have to have everyone running nothing but renown rich quests continuously.

Note that I said 100 accounts- That's 400 toons on average.

I see no reason to limit the number of accounts in a guild to 100. There is already a guild size cap at 1000 characters. What needs to be done is punish those who abuse the system, not guild leaders who have built a popular guild. My guild has far more than 100 active accounts and we are a very stable and popular guild. Our leadership has not changed since the guild started, more than 2 years ago. Our members say they love our guild. Many of them have been in the guild for more than 2 years as well.

How does a very large guild hurt DDO? Yes, guild leaders who abuse new users by inviting them to level up the guild and later kicking most of them should be punished. But please don't punish a guild just for being popular.

GentlemanAndAScholar
08-05-2012, 09:32 AM
Or at least find some better alternative way to implement the decay.



Very much agreed. The current system was wrong-headed since it was first released. I often wonder what they were thinking. One the one hand, they want to increase the social aspect of the game, on the other hand they give guilds every single incentive to stay very small. Although not related to renown, on one hand they want more pugs, yet they implement XP penalties (e.g. -10% deaths for the whole party) and Dungeon scaling that adversely affects a party and that discourages most party leads to take on any one who they don't already know.

So I think a more important question to Turbine is: do you want the game to be more newbie friendly or social in general or do you want the game that encourages cliques, guild-only, channel-only groups leaving newbies to their own device? Because game mechanics very much are in conflict with your stated purpose.

porq
08-05-2012, 09:36 AM
I have money, I stopped playing DDO regularly. Read and learn. I don't want to work a second job. I want to have fun killing monsters.

I am now a casual player with no real reason to play. (And I own all the content and was a regular pay to play as well.) If this doesn't speak loud enough.... there are other games.

4 month thread necro. Bravo sir.

dodger72
08-05-2012, 11:01 AM
/sigh'ned ... again

^this

goodoldxelos
08-05-2012, 06:55 PM
/signed agree