Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 410111213141516 LastLast
Results 261 to 280 of 308
  1. #261
    Community Member Yehediah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    290

    Default Decay must stay in!

    Decay absolutely should REMAIN as a feature - though revamped. Without decay, all guilds get to 100 and stay there forever - long after the guild dies.

    However, I agree that more communication from Turbine is needed.
    Yehediah (Dwarf Cleric), Zeddek (Human Favored Soul)
    Mezros (Drow Bard), Fieris (Drow Wizard)
    Freibo (Halfling Rogue)

  2. #262
    The Hatchery
    2014 & 2016 DDO Players Council
    Dandonk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,440

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nestroy View Post
    Perhaps we will get heared here.

    Major Mal seems to have an ear open for the guild renown issue...
    Seven months, but at least he's actually open to hearing about it. Perhaps we will actually see some change, finally.
    <seemingly offensive Army of Darkness quote>

  3. #263
    Community Member MoonlitSilver's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yehediah View Post
    Decay absolutely should REMAIN as a feature - though revamped. Without decay, all guilds get to 100 and stay there forever - long after the guild dies.

    However, I agree that more communication from Turbine is needed.
    I don't see why that would be a problem. No one freaks out when a level-capped toon is still level-capped after being unused for a few months. Why is guild level so different?
    Furthermore, I believe that the bugs and lag must be fixed.

  4. #264
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nestroy View Post
    Perhaps we will get heared here.

    Major Mal seems to have an ear open for the guild renown issue...
    Thank you!

  5. #265
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yehediah View Post
    Decay absolutely should REMAIN as a feature - though revamped. Without decay, all guilds get to 100 and stay there forever - long after the guild dies.
    I simply don't see how this is an issue. If a guild is dead, it is effectively removed from the game anyway. So what difference if an unplayed guild is level 100 or if it decays back down to, eventually, 25?

  6. #266
    2016 DDO Players Council UurlockYgmeov's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere ...
    Posts
    5,846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nestroy View Post
    Perhaps we will get heared here.

    Major Mal seems to have an ear open for the guild renown issue...
    I too believe in ghosts...

    MajMal is Q&A - and is great at his job. MajMal also (like Squeak and Kookie) goes that extra mile to communicate (And one other dev that will remain nameless per terms of use)

    However, MajMal is not a producer nor dev. SO I don't believe that thread was anything more than a steam relief valve; however hope MajMal does continue that line every monday, and that producers and devs DO read it.

    I know my last post was quite *snap* (in response to the eTR thread) - but my (and everyone elses) frustration level at the general lack of ANYTHING to fix guilds (let alone finish the system) is more than disconcerting

    I had better hurry before the website kicks me out again....

    And from the ddovault - so far no official plans to do ANYTHING with guilds in 2013.


    *sigh*
    Last edited by UurlockYgmeov; 06-13-2013 at 01:28 PM. Reason: my kobold powered spell checker is on Union Break

  7. #267
    Community Member Nestroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Europe, and proud of it
    Posts
    3,063

    Default

    Well, at least somebody is trying to communicate. With the up-and-comming called catastrophees of the enchancement pass and the EDs on epic TR, and with the onging alienation of the guilded player base py imposing that dumb renown decay, seems the guys at QA finally awoke to check if what is going to be implemented there is anything that will not cause an immediate **** storm. And, you guessed it, the **** storm is brewing.

    Perhaps at least this sigle time they will listen to their fans telling them that their ambitious projects are doomed to fail if implemented as laid out now. By the way, I want DDO to remain DDO, not to get a buggy version of NWO meets WOW.

  8. #268
    Community Member Yehediah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    290

    Default Dead Guild

    If you take "dead guild" literally, then yes, no one sees the guild running around at 100.

    However, that's seldom the case. You usually have a very small handful of people that play VERY rarely. So, yes you would see the guild. And, to the best of my knowledge the only way a guild would "literally' die is if everyone left it.

    And, there's a big difference between a player character level and a guild level. The name is about all they have in common.

    You also see few level 100 guilds simply because of decay. Absolutely no decay and then all guilds will end up being 100 or quickly on their way to 100.
    Yehediah (Dwarf Cleric), Zeddek (Human Favored Soul)
    Mezros (Drow Bard), Fieris (Drow Wizard)
    Freibo (Halfling Rogue)

  9. #269
    Community Member Nestroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Europe, and proud of it
    Posts
    3,063

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yehediah View Post
    If you take "dead guild" literally, then yes, no one sees the guild running around at 100.

    However, that's seldom the case. You usually have a very small handful of people that play VERY rarely. So, yes you would see the guild. And, to the best of my knowledge the only way a guild would "literally' die is if everyone left it.

    And, there's a big difference between a player character level and a guild level. The name is about all they have in common.

    You also see few level 100 guilds simply because of decay. Absolutely no decay and then all guilds will end up being 100 or quickly on their way to 100.
    Just some simple math to base a strong disagreement on your statement.

    Let´s assume we have 3 startup guilds at lv. 1 that have 5, 50 and 500 active accounts each. Now we ditch guild renown decay and only have the current boni in place. Furthermore, for the thought experiement here let´s assume ceteris paribus that there are no fluctuations in renown gaining power and membership activity. For the thought experiment let´s assume every active member brings in an equivalent of an impressive trophy / day = 500 renown. Let´s assume that decay ransack for leveling up does not apply (if applying, especially in the first lwo Levels of an guild this would hamper growth to the point where these guilds would only move forward 3 levels / day and therefore would take longer to level..

    Now we have 50,000,000 renown to go to bring these guilds to level 100.

    A 5 active account guild gets 270% bonus. So we start here with a whoping 1,850 renown daily per member. his equals a renown gain of 9,250 per day. A small guild like this would need 5405 days to reach level 100 or roughly 15 years.Question mark if DDO keeps open that long.

    A guild of 50 active accounts would get no bonus any more. The gaining power already reaches 25,000 / day. It would take 2,000 days or the equivalent of 5 and a half years to reach level 100 eventually. Still all without renown decay.

    A guild of 500 does not have any bonus as well. But powerfully gains 250,000 renown a day. 200 days or a better half year are needed to level to lv. 100.

    As you can see from that simple maths, without renown decay only very active small and medium guilds will reach lv. 100 in ample time before DDO gets obsolete. Only large casual guilds have a chance at reaching lv. 100 anyway before the servers of DDO close forever.

    So back to your argument: Even without decay most (small and casual medium) guilds never will reach lv. 100 anyway, at least not before the servers of DDO grow cold and lifeless. They may in theory reach lv. 100 eventually, but the chances to attain lv. 100 in a significant time are remote.

    And the big guilds were handed the biggest release from the clutches of renown decay. I name that an unfair advantage and I name that a clear statement by the devs that they prefere large and big guilds over anything else. OK, and what again was the reason to hand the large guilds a complete marginalization of renown decay without even thinking about marginalizing renown decay for the other guilds???

    Edit: Again, I am not in favor of going back to the old system. I want to see renown decay to be done away with for good completely. Renown decay lost it´s only reason for existance (to keep in check guild growth and basing this on activity instead) when the old system was changed in autumn 2012. Now finish the change and set decay= Zero.
    Last edited by Nestroy; 06-14-2013 at 12:19 AM.

  10. #270
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    9,103

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yehediah View Post
    If you take "dead guild" literally, then yes, no one sees the guild running around at 100.

    However, that's seldom the case. You usually have a very small handful of people that play VERY rarely. So, yes you would see the guild. And, to the best of my knowledge the only way a guild would "literally' die is if everyone left it.

    And, there's a big difference between a player character level and a guild level. The name is about all they have in common.

    You also see few level 100 guilds simply because of decay. Absolutely no decay and then all guilds will end up being 100 or quickly on their way to 100.
    I still don't see the problem. So what if players that don't play often are in a nearly dead level 100 guild? They could just as well be in a very alive level 100 guild. Or does having the number 100 by one's name have some meaning I'm missing? It can't be that they are a good player as renown doesn't require one to play well, just play a lot or be in a big enough guild that a lot each playing a little suffices.

    Actually, I think every guild being able to viably reach 100 would be a good thing. Else those guilds that couldn't would likely lose a lot of their members to those guilds that can.

  11. #271
    Community Member Drevok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Not Waterworks
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Without decay, all guilds can eventually reach level 100. Yes, but many (most?) would take decades or more.

    Our guild does about roughly 30k renown average a week (some weeks much more, other weeks not...). If someone can check, but I expect most guilds do less than that. Around size of 10 (down from 18) active. Most are weekend players, some bb, some zerg, some flower sniffing, not much epics, no farming, some explorer ... in other words a regular casual guild.
    I, and hopefully the rest of the guild, do select the renown reward (valor and higher) in the end rewards (except if very special items of course). For example I pick impressive over major pots, so yes we are trying.
    The main problem is time. I wish, and I'm sure others in the guild, that we could play twice as much. We would then go about 10 x faster than we currently are to get past guild level 55! No decay means Double the renown, 1/2 the time.
    So, almost level 52. Round of to 7 million.
    To get to level 100, 27 years. With no decay.
    Level 80? About 12 years. With no decay.
    Level 65? About 4.5 years.

    If decay is kept in, I'd suggest to reduce it to 3x or lower instead of the current 20x. At that point, just the sheer amount of renown to gain becomes a major factor at higher levels. It however would bring the about a 10 level boost in a reasonable time for those reaching the point where they can't currently level due to decay.

    If removing decay, and they want to lower the small guild bonus, they could lower it by 25%, as by active accounts from 15 to 50 the difference for adding an additional person is too small after the small guild bonus is included. Or another option is to put a small bonus for guilds size 20 to 50 (or even 100) to compensate for that.

    Anyway, I really hope Turbine does make changes to help the guilds, especially those that were left behind after last fall's changes...
    Last edited by Drevok; 06-14-2013 at 08:16 AM.

  12. #272
    Community Member MacDubh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    53

    Default

    Think we need guild decay, though maybe toned down slightly, just to combat the bloat guild effect.

    Would suggest other limits put on the bloat guilds
    e.g.
    max level for guilds with over 100 members set at 70

    This level lets the bloat guilds get the most useful benefits but stops them getting everything

  13. #273
    The Hatchery
    2014 & 2016 DDO Players Council
    Dandonk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,440

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MacDubh View Post
    Think we need guild decay, though maybe toned down slightly, just to combat the bloat guild effect.

    Would suggest other limits put on the bloat guilds
    e.g.
    max level for guilds with over 100 members set at 70

    This level lets the bloat guilds get the most useful benefits but stops them getting everything
    Sorry, but I cannot agree.

    First, why do we need decay? What does it contribute to the game that we cannot implement in another way without penalizing players?

    Second, why do you want to penalize players for playing how they want to? If people like being in large guilds, let them. Just as the current system being unfair to small guilds is bad, your proposed cap on large guild levels would be bad.
    <seemingly offensive Army of Darkness quote>

  14. #274
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    278

    Default

    There was more than enough feedback in MajMal's thread to show the general dislike for decay. Do you think Turbine will act on this feedback or ignore it? They seemed to have ignored the feedback from the thread in October, but that was less clear because the thread turned into a turf battle over guild size.

    i did notice the irony that some of the same people that think it's fine for small guilds to lose their progress with decay also went nuts in the thread about the epic TR because they didn't want to lose their progress.

    Seems nobody wants to lose their own progress,but some people are ok with others losing progress as long as it doesn't impact them.

    It seems like any strategy Turbine has that involves players losing progress is a fail from the start. So maybe Turbine can start by removing guild decay and then get to work refining ED so nobody feels like they are losing progress. i have confidence in MajMal, his questions were smart, I think his solutions will be as well if management permits it.

  15. #275
    Community Member Nestroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Europe, and proud of it
    Posts
    3,063

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by unacceptable View Post
    (...)It seems like any strategy Turbine has that involves players losing progress is a fail from the start. So maybe Turbine can start by removing guild decay and then get to work refining ED so nobody feels like they are losing progress. i have confidence in MajMal, his questions were smart, I think his solutions will be as well if management permits it.
    It´s easy to be regarded as smart for MajMal - he is actually one of the few Turbine staff that are not too aloft to actually ask the players for input. If MajMal is also able to filter bad ideas from good ones, he has a very easy time to ask/talk/do the smart things. Well, after the depressing silence from Turbine fro the last 6 months, at least a small sign of life... Even if MajMal already went silent again in the own MajMal threads... Perhaps he was himself surprised by the amount of Feedback/Problems.

    Hopefully MajMal will be able to kick some gears into motion, not only in regard of guild renown, but generally speaking. But I fear that a QA reach is limited, even if MajMal would be the Managing Director QA himself. But any turn to the positive is much appreciated.

  16. #276
    Community Member Arnez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    342

    Default Fatal Blow to our cause

    So I think I see their plan to push Guild Renown to the wayside- making a (potentially) bigger problem with Epic Destiny XP.

    With Bugs, Quest Closures, incomplete Development, & the Guild Decay Problem- it seems counter-intuitive to "Fix what ain't broke."

    Will one of you DDO Fanbois help me see the light here? Convince me that Decay is a Good Thing, then give me the reasons that it's Great to loose all your ED XP. Why closing quests rather than fixing them is good time management. Or- BUGs are Our Friends.

    PLEASE.

  17. #277
    Community Member Nestroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Europe, and proud of it
    Posts
    3,063

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Arnez View Post
    So I think I see their plan to push Guild Renown to the wayside- making a (potentially) bigger problem with Epic Destiny XP.

    With Bugs, Quest Closures, incomplete Development, & the Guild Decay Problem- it seems counter-intuitive to "Fix what ain't broke."

    Will one of you DDO Fanbois help me see the light here? Convince me that Decay is a Good Thing, then give me the reasons that it's Great to loose all your ED XP. Why closing quests rather than fixing them is good time management. Or- BUGs are Our Friends.

    PLEASE.
    Perhaps in preliminary testing they found out that with epic TRing there is a bug where all the epic EDs are lost and now they simply declare this to be a feature :

  18. #278
    Community Member Yehediah's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    290

    Default Decay must stay in!

    There's a huge difference between character levels and guild levels. Characters voluntarily reset via TR (and that "decay" is to 0). But, the two are just not the same even though both are called "levels." A character is about leveling and development and the game and PnP was designed that way. Guild levels are not quiet PnP (though they have guilds with difference levels of influence, etc.). However, in the game, clearly guild level was designed - at high levels at least - to be more "status" than development. Thus the origination of decay. If you look at the top, there is very little "benefit" above 80. Just 2 things - at 85, the ship, and 93 the major XP shrine. Thus, the whole purpose is status and status is not something that everyone "keeps" - always competing for "top" slots. Thus, decay serves a good purpose - giving status that doesn't effect game-play significantly. (And there is not a huge difference between the 60's up to 80's and decay doesn't even start until 45 I think.)

    Now, I agree the system is wacked. First, in the old system, the top guilds were small ones - it was far easier to level very active small guilds and few wanted really large guilds. So, the long detailed posting is wrong in that it's not so "impossibly" long for small guilds to get up there. However, the new system - like most things in the game - is an over-reaction - from one extreme to the next. NOW, large guilds are the ones moving up as having no decay based on members made it so there is no negatives to large guilds (only positives). So, we went from large guilds being penalized, to small guilds (as the bonus isn't anywhere near the benefits of larger numbers contributing).

    If decay were dropped altogether, it really wouldn't be long for most guilds to get up to 100 (unless they are barely active) - it's decay that is keeping some dispersion of the levels.
    Yehediah (Dwarf Cleric), Zeddek (Human Favored Soul)
    Mezros (Drow Bard), Fieris (Drow Wizard)
    Freibo (Halfling Rogue)

  19. #279
    Community Member Nestroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Europe, and proud of it
    Posts
    3,063

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yehediah View Post
    If decay were dropped altogether, it really wouldn't be long for most guilds to get up to 100 (unless they are barely active) - it's decay that is keeping some dispersion of the levels.
    Yeah, then size would be everything... As it is now. Because in the current guild structure we see lots of struggling small guilds killed and choked by decay. And large guilds flying to the top. W/o decay we would see lots of small and struggling small guilds not really flying, but advancing, and still large guilds flying to the top. And no, most guilds will never grow to lv. 100, at least not fast. Because they are small and still lack activity to fly to the top in a short time. To get to lv. 100 fast still would take many active accounts (and still would prefer large guilds). And I do not know about the lifetime planning for DDO but a small guild bringing in 100k renown a week (realistically for most small guilds) without decay still would need 500 weeks or about 10 years to reach lv. 100 from lv. 1 on. Most are currently at the 3 -5 Million renown border,(perhaps lv. 50, iat least somewhat active) and this would mean they saveone year (10 % of total renown needed for lv. 100). So your argument simply is not correct.

  20. #280
    The Hatchery
    2014 & 2016 DDO Players Council
    Dandonk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,440

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yehediah View Post
    If decay were dropped altogether, it really wouldn't be long for most guilds to get up to 100 (unless they are barely active) - it's decay that is keeping some dispersion of the levels.
    Wouldn't be long? Some of the people here would take years, up to a decade, to get to 100 with their current renown gathering.
    <seemingly offensive Army of Darkness quote>

Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 410111213141516 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload