Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 26
  1. #1
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    85

    Default /Signed if you agree and /Not Signed if u disagree. Topic-Guild Decay discussion

    The topic of discussion is regarding guild renown decay. I think the name should be changed to guild experience and the guild renown decay should be taken out altogether. I don't mind if the experience needed to lvl up a guild is increased as long as the experience doesn't decay. The main reason is because when i take a break from DDO and try out other games with my friends, the level starts dropping. It will help both small and big guilds. It will also encourage players to buy more guild pots as there is a bigger incentive now that the exp you farm don'r get drained away. Therefore, its a win-win situation for both the company and the players.

    I am curious to know how the rest of the community stands on this issue.

  2. #2
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    128

    Default

    Not signed (yet).
    The whole guild system needs an overhaul. Or, actually, a complete restart from scratch before this should ever be addressed.

    Besides, Turbine will never completely remove decay, I suppose, because the effect would be that all guilds are lvl 100 eventually. When that happens, why buy guild xp pots anymore?

    I venture to say once the enhancement overhaul is done, this will be the next long term project.

  3. #3
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DunkleNymphe View Post
    Not signed (yet).
    The whole guild system needs an overhaul. Or, actually, a complete restart from scratch before this should ever be addressed.

    Besides, Turbine will never completely remove decay, I suppose, because the effect would be that all guilds are lvl 100 eventually. When that happens, why buy guild xp pots anymore?

    I venture to say once the enhancement overhaul is done, this will be the next long term project.
    Well like everything else, they could increase the max level of the guild, bigger airship boats and more features.
    Last edited by MrRoboto; 07-14-2013 at 05:45 AM.

  4. #4
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,643

    Default

    Perhaps with the permanent removal of renown decay, there will be more guilds, since more people will be willing/wanting to have a guild with a special name of their choosing.
    http://myaccount.turbine.com

    Je ne suis pas
    DDO Alpha Tester

  5. #5
    Community Member TheLegendOfAra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    TARTARUS
    Posts
    1,510

    Default

    /Not signed

    Having been in a small(10 people or less) guild, and now in a guild of about 30 people I have yet to see a problem with the renown system.
    Obviously it's not ideal, but the decay is not the issue. The decay rate is.

    The fact that the system favors large guilds currently because of the decay rate is a problem that should be addressed, and in my opinion it should be done by renown lost per month, instead of per day. And each guild, no matter the size should take a static percentage renown hit.
    Say 2% 5%? 10%? The numbers would have to be run by someone who's actually done the research on these things before.

    This is simply an idea off the top of my head, but it seems like the simplest solution to the problem at hand, and would take the least amount of work/time to implement.

    I think in the long run Decay is a good thing from a lore perspective, and since once you hit level 85 it really doesn't affect you in any way unless you let it, it's not that big of a deal. There is no need currently to hit level 100, or maintain it, and that is I feel the bigger problem at hand. There are no incentives to actually work on renown past level 85, except to say "Hey, I did it.".

    I will say though that just to be fair on lower level guilds, either reducing the decay they get, or just taking out all decay until a guild hits level 35 would possibly work.

    Just a couple of half baked, sleep deprived thoughts.
    Araphina Skycrow - 15Paladin/3Ranger/2Fighter (Life 8/25) 5xRanger, 3xPaladin
    Araphell - Arasin - Arathaes - Arawyn - Aravein
    Guild: Fors Fortis;Guild of Won, & VENOM @ Argo
    "And we learn, as we age; We've learned nothing! And my body still aches."

  6. #6
    Community Member Qhualor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    10,020

    Default

    /not signed

    decay should be scaled according to active members. how much scaling, I don't know. I do think after the last change, it seemed to work better. having decay gives a guild something to strive for. with no decay, its just a matter of time until a guild makes 100 and than what? how much money does Turbine make from a level 100 guild? the penalty for inactive members should be decreased because not everyone tells their guild they have left the game, taking an extended break or some are inconsistent within 30 days and it puts guild leaders in a bind as to what to do with them.

  7. #7

    Default

    Decay has already been turned off.. Sure, Turbine claims its only until the update.. but If I was a betting man, I'd bet that it wasnt coming back in its old form. Perhaps not at all.

    there is no benefit to decay at all.
    °º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸,ø¤°º¤ø,¸ ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸A R C H A N G E L S °º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸,ø¤°º¤ø,¸ ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸
    Thelanis

    Alandael ~ Allendale ~ iForged ~ Roba ~ Sylon ~ Pokah ~ Keyanu ~ Wreckoning
    Quote Originally Posted by Severlin View Post
    We don't envision starting players with Starter Gear and zero knowledge playing on Hard or Elite.
    Sev~

  8. #8
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    162

    Default

    /not signed

    And I would even venture to say that mentioning playing other games as one of the reasons why your against decay doesn't help your argument much.

  9. #9
    The Hatchery
    2014 DDO Players Council
    Dandonk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    5,277

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Impaqt View Post
    Decay has already been turned off.. Sure, Turbine claims its only until the update.. but If I was a betting man, I'd bet that it wasnt coming back in its old form. Perhaps not at all.

    there is no benefit to decay at all.
    I agree completely.
    It's definitely an N-word.

  10. #10
    Community Member Nestroy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Europe, and proud of it
    Posts
    2,829

    Default

    /signed

    Turbine did the decent right thing with turning renown decay off.

    of course we can talk about anything - if we talk about a complete overhaul. But the system before turning off decay alltogether was borked to death for small and medium guilds and only benefiting larger guilds. Not renown earned per player, aka activity, mattered, but size alone. Now we have a non-system decay-wise. This is OK. Even better would be an overhaul of the system and a rework of renown levels and benefits. And a clearly communicated and implemented strategy where players could build on it. And more tools for administration of a guild. And... And.... And...

    The current system (decay = off) I can live with. Therefore signed. Is it perfect? No.

  11. #11
    Community Member African-Grey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    111

    Default

    /signed

    Though I think that whatever changes are going to be made* have already been decided on.

    I really dislike the guild experience loss system. There's no defensible reason for it, and it overly penalizes the casual players/guilds.

    As a casual player myself, I have no problem with the fact that guilds with more active players will advance more quickly than mine. That is as it should be. The problem is that at a certain point the decay system can negate any progress you've made. I don't mind that it will take me a long, long time for my extremely small, extremely casual guild to get a big ship with the nice buffs. Heck, my guild predates the "renown" system (in quotes because, really, it can only be viewed as such if you dim the lights, squint, and drink heavily) and we're only at level 25. Again, I'm okay with that! Knowing that investments we make toward guild experience will be greatly reduced or, more likely since we don't get to play very often, completely negated? That definitely needs to change.

    We shall see what the future holds.




    * If any; like Impaqt, I'm deducing that the system is changing.

  12. #12
    Founder
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    4,607

    Default

    I agree that decay is, at least, too high.

    But overall I think the renown "controls" are not beneficial. For example we have a very small guild where one character being removed can really set us back when we lose that renown. But the character that was removed was for one member who has his own "single player" guild and was switching one character to his personal guild and one character from that to our guild. And he still had other characters in our guild.

    Maybe in addition to changing/removing decay they should consider changing renown to being assigned to the player rather than the character. That would give more freedom to change / exchange characters while still protecting players from getting kicked from guilds after contributing a lot of renown.

  13. #13
    Community Member Zibowskij's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    204

    Default

    /not signed

  14. #14
    Community Member Hendrik's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Bell's Brewery, MI.
    Posts
    10,991

    Default

    /not signed.

    Quote Originally Posted by hsinclair
    I heard the devs hate all wizards, bards, clerics, fighters, and fuzzy bunnies and only want us to play halfling barbarian/paladin shuriken specialists!

    It's totally true, I have a reliable source. You better reroll now.
    Adventurer, Bug Reporter, Mournlander.

  15. #15
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    5,378

    Default

    /signed

    I don't think it's possible to get the formula right with decay done on a daily basis. If they change the decay mechanic so it's not possible for a guild to move backwards I would be fine with it.
    CC Casting Druid: https://www.ddo.com/forums/showthrea...C-Summer-Build
    Shiradi Wiz Plan for 1st Lifers: https://www.ddo.com/forums/showthrea...r-First-Lifers
    U25 Patch 1 Dex Halfling Assassin Build: https://www.ddo.com/forums/showthrea...x-Assassin-1-0
    Warlock DC Caster: https://www.ddo.com/forums/showthrea...ld-Blast-Build

    Several characters on Sarlona all starting with "Rand" in the Guild "Guardians of House Cannith". My main four characters are Randowl (18 rogue 2 artificer mechanic - hope to go back to DC casting some day), Randslar (Bard 14 / Fighter 4 / Rogue 2 Swashbuckler), Randek (Druid CC Caster 17/Fvs 3) and Randomall (Rogue 20 assassin).

  16. #16
    Community Member Uidolon's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    104

    Default

    started to read but then thought better of it. this has no relevance to me at all dont care either way so didnt read the OP all the way trough.

  17. #17
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    85

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Qhualor View Post
    /not signed

    decay should be scaled according to active members. how much scaling, I don't know. I do think after the last change, it seemed to work better. having decay gives a guild something to strive for. with no decay, its just a matter of time until a guild makes 100 and than what? how much money does Turbine make from a level 100 guild? the penalty for inactive members should be decreased because not everyone tells their guild they have left the game, taking an extended break or some are inconsistent within 30 days and it puts guild leaders in a bind as to what to do with them.
    I agree with some points but disagree with others.

    Agreement

    1) Guilds having something to strive for, be it a small or big guild.

    2) Penalty for increased member should be reduced. I think it should be gone altogether.

    Disagreement

    1) I dont think guild decay is something any guild want to strive for. Infact its the opposite. All guilds ought to be able to reach level 100 after an amount of time of exp farming. As for me, i really dont mind if Turbine increases the exp needed to reach level 100, as long as the exp i have earned stays and does not waste away.

    2) Turbine wont make much money from lv 100 guilds but that is assuming that the max guild level will stay at 100 indefinitely. My bet would be that the max guild level will be increased and more features would be introduced.

    3) With regards to Turbine maximizing profits with guilds, are you more likely to buy a guild pot or a character exp pot from the cash shop. I prefer spending cash on character exp pots because what i earn from it stays and my effort does not waste away with time.

    Moreover, it gives an incentive for players to start making their own guilds, with their own unique playstyles. After all, the main essence of what makes DDO unique is its customization. Yes this means plenty of new guilds which also means more profit for Turbine. Players will always come and go, which means there will always be a new guild where Turbine can make some cash of.

  18. #18
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    8,255

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Impaqt View Post
    Decay has already been turned off.. Sure, Turbine claims its only until the update.. but If I was a betting man, I'd bet that it wasnt coming back in its old form. Perhaps not at all.

    there is no benefit to decay at all.
    I wouldn't say no benefit, but no net benefit I would wholeheartedly agree with. It simply creates more issues than it resolves IMO.

  19. #19
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    16

    Default

    /signed

    I think the lack of response in this thread is since the devs already have all the information about people's opinion on decay right here:

    https://www.ddo.com/forums/showthrea...with-Major-Mal

  20. #20
    Community Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    276

    Default

    /signed

    This guild summer break has been really good for our guild. We had one person return to the game because of this change and everyone seems to be playing more since we have a chance to make progress. If they keep decay it should occur at the time you receive renown (as a percentage that increases with levels). Or they could just increase the amount of renown required at the higher levels and add another 50 levels which are just for bragging rights.

    I know there is some sort of quick way to get renown in fall of truth. I don't care what it is I just want the people in our guild to play how they want to play and not worry about generating renown. Decay is not a fun mechanic and I fail to see anything good it brings to the game.

Page 1 of 2 12 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