Guilds Redux

User avatar
Kruell
Posts: 254
Joined: Thu May 26, 2016 10:35 pm

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby Kruell » Sun Sep 23, 2018 12:11 pm

I saw something a few nights back and didn't want to post immediately as I didn't want to make it appear that I was calling specific people or guilds out. In Global Chat someone was complaining about getting "steamrolled" trying to capture a control crystal. Their complaint was that their 2 people didn't have a chance to win against 5 defenders. They ended their complaint with a statement "I can't wait until guilds are broken up."

SO apparently, 5 v 2 is now a guild problem. 5 people constitute a super guild and must be stopped. At what point do we just call this bullshit and tell people to grow up? I hear this often in even 2v1 fights of people complaining about a guild because they are outnumbered. Are we saying the game needs to be tuned into a 1v1 battle system? This seems like the only solution if you never want to be outnumbered. I get it when you are outnumbered it sucks. I've fought 5v1 odds before and it does suck. The difference is I was adult enough to realize that my mistake was in not gathering a group to take on the 5 before engaging them. I don't blame game mechanics for not allowing me to become a super character and fight 5 people all by myself.

An event a few nights ago was 2v1 and the solo person beat the other 2 due to strategy and luck. This game isn't always about numbers but it IS always about using your brains. If you chose to enter into a battle you know you will be outnumbered, don't complain and demand the system change when you get beat. Be smart, find friends, use strategy, and quit demanding the game change to accommodate you when you fail.

It appears there are many people who want this game stripped down to be a cakewalk where they can play it and never have to worry about every getting beaten or have their feelings hurt. I suggest one of the many facebook games such as Farville2 or Solitaire if competition and strategy are outside of your abilities. This constant demand to remove guilds will never end as long as people are coddled when they get their feelings hurt. Once guilds are gone, people will demand parties be removed. Once parties are gone, one person per square seems the next step. Do people even realize the definition of Muti-User Dungeon? I could understand the complaints if there was logic to it. What I don't understand is the "I got beat by a party of people cause I can't stand up to a group solo. Groups should be outlawed!"
If you look like prey you will be eaten

User avatar
daedroth
Posts: 1178
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 5:53 am

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby daedroth » Sun Sep 23, 2018 4:20 pm

Kruell wrote: ... blah blah blah ...

Totally agree with what you say.
It sucks when you get outnumbered and slaughtered, but meh, suck it up, it is a game, win some lose some and all that.
As for the farmville bit, I think I've said something like that when people where bitching about the pvp (pk) aspect of the game.
I now just laugh at the bitching (and keep my bitching to myself - or at least clan chat, where we cry and hug in our safe space).
Disclaimer: Any ideas I come up with may not even meet my approval. I am just posting an idea based on the topic I have just read.
I love sheep.

Terron
Posts: 802
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 11:36 pm

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby Terron » Sun Sep 23, 2018 4:39 pm

dont think the guild problems are numbers problems. its more like symantics. theres as close to 0% chance to win outnumbered as you can get in this game. its not a numbers problem because both guilds have around the same numbers. your problem(if u call it a problem) is that 90% of your full time players are in 1 guild, and 90% of your casuals are in the other and they rarely get the higher portion active at the same time. imo it should have been expected to happen. dunno how it comes as a surprise the people who hang out day in day out are in the same guild.

do you punish empire for being active? or do u punish silh for being casual? thats what this reads like.

could run some oads where the key boss(NPC) sells 1 (guildbound)key per guild(could also sell a max number of keys). then you go in and run it or fight it out evenly or whatever. or hell run every oad like this. buy in or dont. its your choice,numbers will ALWAYS be even if u actually try. this is positive reinforcement for smaller guilds as they dont have to fight 3v12, they might even poach a couple members who arent prime 5 in their current establishment.
"Once the game is over, the king and the pawn go into the same box"

this game is like sim ant
zerg the red ants with more black ants

anthriel
Posts: 223
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 7:04 am

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby anthriel » Mon Sep 24, 2018 12:53 am

Kruell wrote:I saw something a few nights back and didn't want to post immediately as I didn't want to make it appear that I was calling specific people or guilds out. In Global Chat someone was complaining about getting "steamrolled" trying to capture a control crystal. Their complaint was that their 2 people didn't have a chance to win against 5 defenders. They ended their complaint with a statement "I can't wait until guilds are broken up."

SO apparently, 5 v 2 is now a guild problem. 5 people constitute a super guild and must be stopped. At what point do we just call this bullshit and tell people to grow up? I hear this often in even 2v1 fights of people complaining about a guild because they are outnumbered. Are we saying the game needs to be tuned into a 1v1 battle system? This seems like the only solution if you never want to be outnumbered. I get it when you are outnumbered it sucks. I've fought 5v1 odds before and it does suck. The difference is I was adult enough to realize that my mistake was in not gathering a group to take on the 5 before engaging them. I don't blame game mechanics for not allowing me to become a super character and fight 5 people all by myself.

An event a few nights ago was 2v1 and the solo person beat the other 2 due to strategy and luck. This game isn't always about numbers but it IS always about using your brains. If you chose to enter into a battle you know you will be outnumbered, don't complain and demand the system change when you get beat. Be smart, find friends, use strategy, and quit demanding the game change to accommodate you when you fail.

It appears there are many people who want this game stripped down to be a cakewalk where they can play it and never have to worry about every getting beaten or have their feelings hurt. I suggest one of the many facebook games such as Farville2 or Solitaire if competition and strategy are outside of your abilities. This constant demand to remove guilds will never end as long as people are coddled when they get their feelings hurt. Once guilds are gone, people will demand parties be removed. Once parties are gone, one person per square seems the next step. Do people even realize the definition of Muti-User Dungeon? I could understand the complaints if there was logic to it. What I don't understand is the "I got beat by a party of people cause I can't stand up to a group solo. Groups should be outlawed!"


With respect, I feel that this is a mis-representation of the issue and yet another (intentional or unintentional) smokescreen to the real issues that needs addressing. The real issue isn’t that guilds are bad and should be thrown out entirely. The issue is that there is no counterbalance to the “bigger numbers are always better” dynamic which incentivises those who want to win to always try to outnumber.... and basically ppl quickly realise that “outnumbering” is THE proven strategy that wins the entire game (it let’s you exp fastest, get the best items fastest, have the most social interaction etc etc and there is absolutely no drawback.... even greed doesn’t stop a guild from adding more and more ppl cos most players quickly learn that you either put up with earning slowly within a superguild or don’t earn at all because you get crushed by the superguilds)

And because “bigger numbers” is undisputedly the easiest/most-successful way to play-to-win the game, it naturally leads to superguilds forming and that creates a divided player base that is more likely to be hostile/toxic to the other faction (because they are self sufficient within their faction or embittered that the other faction is more self sufficient than theirs) rather than a player base that has healthy competition and diplomacy/respect. Now I’m not saying that individual players don’t need to curtail their own toxic behaviour and promote respect etc but let’s not pretend the current bi-factional system doesn’t contribute a large portion towards the toxicity that has put off many players.

Basically imho a healthier guild system would incentivise people to think more about guilding with a smaller group of likeminded ppl while still engaging in healthy competition and diplomacy with the rest of the community. Yes some of the issues can be solved by build design. But until you have some way to curtail “bigger numbers is always better”, then to some degree the guild system will be boring/broken. Imagine a professional sport tournament that doesn’t have any caps on the amount of players on the roster! Eventually instead of having say 20 teams in a tournament they will start merging etc etc until I have 2 super teams with mega rosters and most players sitting disgruntled on the bench etc.... boring and uncompetitive result ensues. This is why salary caps and roster limits exist in sports. I’m not saying that we need to implement hard caps. But we do at least need some incentives etc such to counterbalance the “bigger numbers is always better” truism so that the EO guild system doesn’t remain boring/uncompetitive. Peace.

User avatar
Kruell
Posts: 254
Joined: Thu May 26, 2016 10:35 pm

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby Kruell » Tue Sep 25, 2018 1:04 am

anthriel wrote:Basically imho a healthier guild system would incentivise people to think more about guilding with a smaller group of likeminded ppl while still engaging in healthy competition and diplomacy with the rest of the community. Yes some of the issues can be solved by build design. But until you have some way to curtail “bigger numbers is always better”, then to some degree the guild system will be boring/broken. Imagine a professional sport tournament that doesn’t have any caps on the amount of players on the roster! Eventually instead of having say 20 teams in a tournament they will start merging etc etc until I have 2 super teams with mega rosters and most players sitting disgruntled on the bench etc.... boring and uncompetitive result ensues. This is why salary caps and roster limits exist in sports. I’m not saying that we need to implement hard caps. But we do at least need some incentives etc such to counterbalance the “bigger numbers is always better” truism so that the EO guild system doesn’t remain boring/uncompetitive. Peace.


Cheers.

Guild Embers... more content... different content... minigames... different pathways to top gear.... All good things. I'm just starting to get upset because it's the same 3 or 4 people who are always crying even when they have even numbers. If it isn't an argument about numbers, it's an argument about gear. I don't think there is a solution to make everyone happy because I think some people will never be happy. At Thanny tonight it was 6v7 and it still turned into drama in global chat. There always has to be someone who screams because they get beat. Maybe one of the reasons why it's hard to keep builders is because when they do work hard to put something in game players can do nothing but complain about it. I can imagine how Nitehawk feels... working his butt off and he has 20 people telling him they know how to do it better.
If you look like prey you will be eaten

Terron
Posts: 802
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 11:36 pm

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby Terron » Tue Sep 25, 2018 1:22 am

i counted 10 v 4 v 3 at thanny. but considering silh only had 3 people on entirely im going to recommend an abacus for you. these numbers arent bad regardless. the oad is just bad design. endless zombies, no way to kill healers really, boss dont even do threatening damage. truth is i shouldnt have to go into an oad with 3 people and kill 8 people and have to face those 8 people over and over and over. on a simple boss like thanny if u die u should just be done with an acct lockout.

game shouldnt ever be 80% healers everywhere either. when 9/14 players in 1 group are all healers the concept is dumb. heal decay should be changed to guild healer decay. more than 3 healers of the same guild in a general vicinity to each other u start dropping heal efficiency drastically.
"Once the game is over, the king and the pawn go into the same box"

this game is like sim ant
zerg the red ants with more black ants

User avatar
Kruell
Posts: 254
Joined: Thu May 26, 2016 10:35 pm

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby Kruell » Tue Sep 25, 2018 2:03 am

Terron wrote:i counted 10 v 4 v 3 at thanny. but considering silh only had 3 people on entirely im going to recommend an abacus for you. these numbers arent bad regardless. the oad is just bad design. endless zombies, no way to kill healers really, boss dont even do threatening damage. truth is i shouldnt have to go into an oad with 3 people and kill 8 people and have to face those 8 people over and over and over. on a simple boss like thanny if u die u should just be done with an acct lockout.

game shouldnt ever be 80% healers everywhere either. when 9/14 players in 1 group are all healers the concept is dumb. heal decay should be changed to guild healer decay. more than 3 healers of the same guild in a general vicinity to each other u start dropping heal efficiency drastically.

As to the numbers, I tried to account for people switching characters so I may have missed one. Empire only had 7 people with a couple character swaps. Everyone at guild events is accounted for. Carnage and Silh seemed to have 8 but I think 2 were just character swaps. You may have been mistaken because a few of the Carnage members were actually former Empire. Either way, it was close numbers and actually a fun fight. Thanny moved around a lot this time and the changing rooms made it interesting instead of him sticking to the same 2 or 3 squares. The drama in general after was uncalled for though. That wasn't just one clan.

Thanny I think was designed for PVP action. People running back in isn't a major issue because of sickness. On other bosses and especially at dragon it can be a pain, but sickness always catches up. There are only a few OaDs you can zombie at (excluding keys) so that isn't a huge issue. I see it as a lot like the dropstealing issue. It is something that will happen but it isn't something that can't be accounted for and countered in some way. To me, a bigger issue is people running back in towns/shops/safe squares and only jumping out to get a few swings off before running again. Different people will see different issues as more important or problematic. I feel zombies isn't a major issue because 5 deaths and you can't even make it out of town again. At 3 deaths your stats are so diminished that you are ineffective. Also... if you think the monsters in the tomb aren't a threat you haven't been hit by the murderous spirits yet.

As for the guild heal decay, it is an interesting idea. When you have so many healers, one can simply sit out healing long enough for the pvp timer to expire if he's burning his mana too much. I can't think of a fair way coding such a thing would work. It would also complicate OaDs. Imagine facing the guild heal decay if you are running a priest/guard/mini/elder/brig party. I get that we want fair competition but we don't want to make the game play so complicated that people get frustrated at having to do calculus for an optimal party. I'd love to see an effective counter for a priest other than hoping they run out of potions (or numbers). The problem is that if we weaken priests any more they won't have any role in game. Already I've seen minstrels and guardians both fill in for priests in events and oads. Also, the reason so many people take healers to Thanny is the mirror rooms. That isn't a good representation of party distribution or a good boss area to try to judge strengths or weaknesses.

Still, I think we may be getting off topic a little and also beating a dead horse. It is what it is. No matter what is done or isn't, someone won't be happy. We already have people saying parties are too much. I think some people just have to find a reason for their not always being on top.
If you look like prey you will be eaten

Terron
Posts: 802
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2017 11:36 pm

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby Terron » Tue Sep 25, 2018 2:22 am

sickness does shit to a healer, they heal 7 damage less, get hit 2.25% more. this is the integral problem to zombies. if a dpser dies he gets worse if a healer dies it doesn't.

the objective imo is to encourage pvp. currently allowing zombies at all makes attempting outnumbered pointless. were as if i being 3 v9 and sneak attack and kill 4 or 5 stragglers and they got locked out theres always a chance for success. you would see smaller groups try more often.

guild heal decay wouldnt complicate oads...u bring 4+ healers? lol the oads last 10m and are piss easy unless ur trying a 5 man oad with 3 people. ringleader is harder
"Once the game is over, the king and the pawn go into the same box"

this game is like sim ant
zerg the red ants with more black ants

User avatar
daedroth
Posts: 1178
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 5:53 am

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby daedroth » Tue Sep 25, 2018 3:44 am

Would it actually be possible for death sickness instead of affecting stats, actually have it affect the end result (skill, spell, attack). So stats don't lower but the effectiveness of what you do does. I think it would be terribly icky to implement.
As for numbers and equipment whining, while I agree with you Kruell, you seem to have a lopsided view of it, because I am presuming you don't mean Empire, try to be all inclusive, because it is not a single clan restricted phenomena.
I say this, whining about numbers or gear is kinda lame, your equipment will get better and the numbers thing fluctuates, why not just say good fight and move on eh? You can always whine in clan chat.
The people screaming drama in global is also not restricted to one clan.
The problem with shit talk is everyone's definition of it is a little different. No harm in it, as long as it is kept civil (but again the civility definition varies from person to person). Basically it looks like there will always be drama unless the people who feel they are being targetted/troll'ed just ignore, and the people who are targetting/trolling just stop. Good luck fighting human nature though.
Why can't we all just hug instead? :cry:

Another option for guilds:
I think I have said before: Good/Evil. Cliche I know but...
Complications to this... OAD's etc. Too much of a reform on this one, but quite a lot of scope. I see it like this though. Certain areas/creatures/oads are "evil"
If you are "evil", you cannot do the "evil" stuff, those creatures cannot attack you and you cannot attack them. Same with "good". "Neutral" places/creatures/oad would be a free for all. This would have worked until neutral div was introduced. I guess neutral div can choose a side and get stuck with it.
Options:
A way to change your side through quests.

Nations:
Sorta like above but a national choice. OADS/areas/places etc could be kept the same. Then control crystal domination can have even more meaning. This way you can have nation restricted events/oads etc. I guess the Kingdom of Alderarra vs rebel scum?

The problem with either idea is likely friends will join friends, and then you have the guild thing all over again anyway, except a person is actually more restricted in their choice. You don't like person X who is in clan A or person Y who is in clan B, tough luck.
Guild Vaults: I guess you buy your own vault in the guild?
Loot division/storing will be fun.
Random Ideas:
OADS/Events/creature killing against your nation/alignment gets you special points and you can spend them in guild shop?
OAD's etc could give you points instead of an item or both?
Control crystal capture for points?
Gold donations to your side for points (and then remove points from creature killing?)?
This would mean that even if you cannot participate in OADS etc you can still end up getting decent gear.


The paragon system:
Sorta my good vs evil idea. Good/evil areas/creatures/oads restricted for the appropriate alignment (basically whichever one you have most paragon points in).
Although wasn't the paragon system changed to a single points thingy?
Anyway, if you gain too much points of either good or evil you could end up becoming unable to do either. This would make you actually choose a side. As in, if you get 100 good points, you can no longer do evil oads/quests, get 100 of good and evil and you can do neither.

I am rambling now, please forgive me. Back to sheep prawn.
Disclaimer: Any ideas I come up with may not even meet my approval. I am just posting an idea based on the topic I have just read.
I love sheep.

anthriel
Posts: 223
Joined: Thu Mar 30, 2017 7:04 am

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby anthriel » Tue Sep 25, 2018 4:26 am

Kruell wrote:I'm just starting to get upset because it's the same 3 or 4 people who are always crying even when they have even numbers. If it isn't an argument about numbers, it's an argument about gear. I don't think there is a solution to make everyone happy because I think some people will never be happy.


Yep no game can keep everyone happy. But my observation is the current system keeps a lot of ppl (probably more than not) somewhat unhappy.

The irony is that your arguments are generally all ones I’ve had thrown at me before by Silh players defending their right to dominate in the past. The current incarnation of vocal criers are unhappy cos they get dominated. And most of these are newer players who joined after the era of Silh dominting the game via numbers (I’m guessing most old Silh are either now awol or won’t cry cos it would be hypocritical for them to do so after telling other ppl to essentially “man up, cupcakes” for so long while Silh were the most numerous). Now these newer players have joined the game and are experiencing (at the hands of Empire) the same domination by a more numerous more established group that many older Empire players experienced at the hands of Silh. And that’s the sad thing - the abused son has grown into an abusive father. The cycle has continued (just with a different face) and more new blood is getting chewed up and spat out by it.

But even within the dominating faction im guessing there’s probably also a whole bunch of silently crying ppl who would rather earn faster or do their own thing or avoid some annoying ppl in their superguild without leaving the rest that they do like etc.... but they know they won’t ever progress (or will even find themselves persecuted) if they try to leave and go solo/small. These are probably some of the hidden, ‘quiet-achieivng’ players you have previously mentioned.

So basically the current guild system means you have a lot of sub-happy ppl. The only people ‘happy’ are those either play for reasons other than wanting to win, or those who are ‘winning’ by being on the dominating (usually most numerous) faction and who are senior/active enough within that faction to earn well from that. I believe this group represents a minority of the potential active playerbase.

So just as I advocated to Silh when they were championing the current (broken) system, the reason for change is not to please everyone but to find ways to please more people and keep them playing. Especially changes that help retain newer players and re-engages now disinterested veterans so that the active playerbase for the game will actually grow. Peace.


Return to “Archive Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests