Guilds Redux

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

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby Terron » Fri Sep 14, 2018 7:08 pm

use housing as your guild(team)

aside from that u should have a divinity guild, although there doesnt need to be a hall other than a small area to chill at. can always turn this divchat off and ignore idiots also. this system allows you to add events, pvp, extra content based on div anytime u want.
"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
NiteHawk
Site Admin
Posts: 3120
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 7:33 am

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby NiteHawk » Fri Sep 14, 2018 7:25 pm

Boon wrote:Maybe we should only allow one staff player or an equal amount of staff in each guild for example say guild X has 2 builders then guild Y would have 2 builders as well, please don't think I am accusing anyone of anything but if each guild had the exact same amount of staff then there would be nothing to complain about.


Staff are for people who want to make a impact on the game. It's not run by guild politics, to do so would be really dumb, and cause drama even in staff. That and build/events have generally been open to people who aren't terrible in game.

That also requires actual people applying. The builders we have now aren't because I'm picking and chosing, I care 0% about guild drama when it comes to staffer and I expect staffers to work together. Theres also other reasons why the staffers are as they are now and I'm not going to bother explaining that part of it.

Of actual active staffers:
4 Empire: Acker, Kruell, Mario, Tonk just came back.
3 Sil: Lat, Tiv, Soma

Eld inactive and doesn't use his staffer nor logged build anyways. Elvis is inactive. Styx is inactive (said he'd come back soon though?), Gator is inactive. Philosopher quit due to irl issues but I think he was in his own guild. Honestly, this really isn't a staff issue anyways. But I've always been open to people applying. That's what the image in the sidebar has been about. Long as most people aren't terrible IG they often get a chance. Not many apply because they get constantly attacked and it hasn't been worth their time though.

User avatar
NiteHawk
Site Admin
Posts: 3120
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 7:33 am

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby NiteHawk » Fri Sep 14, 2018 7:32 pm

Boon wrote: I also think that 5 or 10 accounts is extremely to small and it would cause all the people that can be on at anytime to join one guild and they would dominate against the guild that wanted to accept the more casual players. It would also leave no room for the casual players or the players that can't be on all the time, don't forget that in Ember you have to farm keys as well as do the OAD. You could also make guilds less consequential by causing OADS to become separate instances that each guild could gain entry to once per day. I don't know what your vision for the future of Ember is so I can't say the best option, I can say that being forced out of a guild with my online friends and fam is not going to make me enjoy the game anymore than I do now.


OADs/etc can change, but I feel like saying that all oads should change to separate instances is OK, but then you start killing off PVP more and more too that way. It is an OPTION though but it doesn't exactly fix everything. Surely you see the issue with a guild who has lets say 90% of the players, regardless if wanna play with your friends or not. What if you were the other 10%? Surely if you played for awhile now you have been. What did most of the people around you do/etc?

It doesn't fix any PVP that is in game either. Control Crystals for example, more numbers win because large groups exist. While there is NEVER a 100% solution for this, it doesn't help when everyones together in one group either. All games have this issue, but not to th extent that EO has it.

I'm not saying it has to be forced, but force is an option too. But again if we're going to be not adjusting anything because everyone wants it to be the same, we might as well nix guilds as you guys have global chat anyways. Guilds do nothing at the point except potentially make people leave who don't make the big guild cut when one guild is 90%+, etc.

User avatar
Lateralus
Posts: 932
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 2:21 pm

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby Lateralus » Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:00 pm

if some bosses were instances that could be ran once per account (per day or per week) I really think that would take the guild factor out of that part. I can see a lfg auto join up with whoever is in the queue working (dungeon finder on wow style). Imagine this log on join the dungeon queue and get matched up with players across all guilds!

However like hawk said I woudlnt want all the bosses like that and the ones that were changed to that style would have to be completely revamped to offer more rewards per class type thing. Also the rewards would have to be bind on pickup (only people doing the instance could get the items etc) auto go into inventory after roll pretty much copy wows instance system.

Its a bit off topic but something like that would make guilds matter quite a bit less and give solo people a great chance to get into groups as well as casual players. right now unless its a solo type thing the biggest guild has the advantage atm.

-------------------------

As for changing guilds I can see 10 person max working but I dont really like that because if its full noobs dont get help. Yea they could get tossed into a noob guild but what help is a noob guild if its all noobs who dont know how to play. So I am not sure id wanna see guilds capped. I go back to true new players having the chance to just pick a guild and join i know that creates spies etc but thats why recruit status is a thing.

I dont know the answer but i dont think breaking up guilds is a great option I think incentives for smaller guilds or activites where guilds dont matter is the way to go. also friend list would be nice if we are limiting guilds

User avatar
Metzger
Posts: 43
Joined: Sun Aug 07, 2016 10:30 pm

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby Metzger » Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:06 pm

Disclaimer: This is coming from someone who doesn't really play the game anymore. I just tavern sit all day, and chat. My insights may be skewed as a result.

---

My opinion is to do 10 accounts max per guild. This gives enough room to ensure people have enough players to run an OAD, and to participate full force in events.

If you have an issue not getting enough players on time for an OAD run, boot someone from your guild, and replace that person.

Staff, especially builders, should refrain from running any new OAD until it has been 100% completed by any guild that they are apart of, and should never give hints on how to complete it, etc...

10 accounts max also promotes the necessity for guild alliances, where you could go to another guild for help with an OAD run if you're low on players. But in certain events(moshes), it might have to be said that Guild Alliances will not be tolerated.

Start promoting more Guild Wars style events/world events/game mechanics, to break apart those alliances and create havoc within the guild system.

Also, instancing anything in a PVP GMUD type game like this is a horrible idea. Don't do that.

As for noobs not getting into an established guild? What's that problem with that? In what game have you ever played that you instantly get invited to the best guild in the game or any guild really. It never happens. You have to make a name for yourself and get invited, or start your own guild.

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

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby Kruell » Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:08 pm

This is a tricky issue and something that has been studied for two decades by researches who have been trying to figure out the why, how, and best practices of guild dynamics in MUDs and MMORPGs. Simply put, since Everquest went to guild usage and World of Warcraft came out, guilds have been the biggest seller and most consistent feature of online games. Guild dynamics can make or break a game. There a dozens of scholarly articles out there which talk about the psychology. There are just as many that talk about the economic impact even viability of a game based upon guild dynamics within the game.

Guild issues is a double edged sword. While some of it can be laid at the feet of the player base, the very game design and area structure of this game has created the current guild situation we see today. Nighthawk creates the structure of the game. The builders create the world the players explore. The players create the society within the world. If something is broken, at what part of the chain of development does the burden lie to fix it?

I am against option 1. Removing guilds from game would likely further stifle the game and I doubt any amount of advertisement would bring in enough new players to keep the game viable. In my opinion, this decision would only have to be reversed within 6 months and we would be worse off than where we are right now.

Option 2, limiting guilds to 5-10 people, isn't a great idea. While I do see the benefit of reducing the membership of guilds, cutting it down to one or two parties per guild (if everyone is online) is a disaster. Casual players and those who can only play during certain time frames would find themselves either guildless or in guilds with others whose time constraints makes it difficult to even form a party. Our population is too low right now as it is and doing this would probably drive away the casual players.

Another thing we have to consider is that people join guilds for one of three reasons; social interaction, game mechanics (power gaming), or shared resources. For power gamers, they will either bounce around guilds always searching for the one to give them the biggest advantage, or they will create a guild and try to attract other power gamers just as they do now. Those who play via game theory of shared strength will be fine with a reduced guild size as they would adapt but this would shift the dynaics of power to the "power players" who have the most to offer other players. Those who find social reasons to be within a guild will be crushed by the reduction of guild size or the elimination of guilds, they will most likely leave the game if they feel too restricted.

Forced guilds as in option 3 are hard to guess at. There are two or three people who play this game I want nothing to do with. If I were forced into being in a guild with them I don't know what I would do as it would depend upon the influence a guild has overall to gameplay after the change. If guilds are based on divinity, does that mean you can only have one divinity per account? If it is per character then you will have people who make different divinity characters just to troll those they don't like. You will also have people who don't play certain divinities due to the people who are in those divinity based guilds. I believe it would take a major overhaul to the game to make a shift to divinity based guilds but it is workable. This option would have to be thoroughly mapped out ahead of time and tested though because if it is done poorly it could have the same effect as option 1. Imagine new players creating characters and immediately getting introduced to the 2 or 3 most caustic people in game simply due to choosing the wrong divnity. Does anyone remember the pit in RoK where people would take new players and trap them? Do we really want to dump new players into a situation where they are suddenly part of a group the average player can't stand speaking with?

Option 4, set guilds, is a workable idea but it needs a LOT of prep work. Consider World of Warcraft, there are two main factions (for our purposes guilds) and then several sub-factions beneath them. If guilds were set up as factions then that changes the way the game is played. While I think this idea is worth exploring, let's not kid ourselves... this is a major overhaul to the game.

IMO guild dynamics and pvp are being mixed quite a bit. Theoretically, guilds should not matter when it comes to pvp. The reality though is that it does matter. When I was guildless, every guild picked on me. Even now, I see players running around PKing who won't attack unless they catch someone solo or will only PK in large groups. I remember the discussions of how PVP was neccessary for this game but right now I believe it is a distraction. People would rather run away than fight. Most people in this game who claim to love PVP will only attack if they think they can round their opponent and will run away if their target fights back or backup arrives. This isn't a guild issue, this is strictly a player issue. I believe people are using this "but I was about to die so I had to run away" as an excuse to claim X guild is bigger than them and it's not fair. It was the same with when Silh was the uber guild as it is now with Empire. Oddly enough, its some of the same people complaining.

If the main issue is PVP, then make PVP better. Make it so as long as the PVP flag is on you can be attacked in town (not temples/banks) to prevent people from running. Put a combat timer on heals so players can't temple heal for a minute after their pvp flag was triggered. Make the rooms between temples in Linwood non-attackable so idiots don't backstab and then run into a temple to hide/heal (yes, this is a thing). Get radical, limit the number of players in a room to 10 (remove for event rooms) so only two parties can be in a square fighting. I've seen some good and some very bad PVP action in this game. The very bad PVPers claim to be great but are the ones who complain the loudest when they run away due to a second person appearing against them. Nobody likes to be gang jumped, but the way certain people play this game you would think you lose your character if it dies.

There are dozens of games out there with good systems in place for guilds and pvp. We don't have to mimic any of them but it is worth it to see what they've got going for them and look at how it can be addapted to Ember.

What is the main issue with guilds right now? Is it the PVP aspect? Is it one guild dominating OaDs? Is it lopsided player distribution, and why? Pinpoint the primary issue and then the solution becomes easier. I see one issue but I'm curious as to what others think the main problem is.
If you look like prey you will be eaten

User avatar
NiteHawk
Site Admin
Posts: 3120
Joined: Wed Apr 20, 2016 7:33 am

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby NiteHawk » Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:19 pm

What is the main issue with guilds right now? Is it the PVP aspect? Is it one guild dominating OaDs? Is it lopsided player distribution, and why? Pinpoint the primary issue and then the solution becomes easier. I see one issue but I'm curious as to what others think the main problem is.


It's mostly domination. Alot of guilds and players leave due to being dominated. It's not fun when you're the side of 15vs3 generally. I would think that is the biggest issue among them. This also relates to doing OAD keys and getting stomped, running events and getting stomped, etc.

Boon
Posts: 34
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2018 12:39 pm

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby Boon » Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:42 pm

NiteHawk wrote:
Boon wrote:Maybe we should only allow one staff player or an equal amount of staff in each guild for example say guild X has 2 builders then guild Y would have 2 builders as well, please don't think I am accusing anyone of anything but if each guild had the exact same amount of staff then there would be nothing to complain about.


Staff are for people who want to make a impact on the game. It's not run by guild politics, to do so would be really dumb, and cause drama even in staff. That and build/events have generally been open to people who aren't terrible in game.

That also requires actual people applying. The builders we have now aren't because I'm picking and chosing, I care 0% about guild drama when it comes to staffer and I expect staffers to work together. Theres also other reasons why the staffers are as they are now and I'm not going to bother explaining that part of it.

Of actual active staffers:
4 Empire: Acker, Kruell, Mario, Tonk just came back.
3 Sil: Lat, Tiv, Soma

Eld inactive and doesn't use his staffer nor logged build anyways. Elvis is inactive. Styx is inactive (said he'd come back soon though?), Gator is inactive. Philosopher quit due to irl issues but I think he was in his own guild. Honestly, this really isn't a staff issue anyways. But I've always been open to people applying. That's what the image in the sidebar has been about. Long as most people aren't terrible IG they often get a chance. Not many apply because they get constantly attacked and it hasn't been worth their time though.


I was not trying to infer anything I was simply trying to say that if you have one guild with all the staff in then the other guild is going to feel cheated even if there is not cheating going on, and no amount of transparency can will stop that. I also understand trying to keep guild politics out of staff but be forcing more smaller guilds there will be more politics that pop up over time. I also absolutely see the problem with one Super guild and I don't have a solution of the top of my head, I think forcing guilds to a 5-10 account max will cause serious problems and in the end might not have any effect as the smaller guilds will just all alli to create the same thing we have right now just in a different style.

Causing folks to join a guild based on their div I don't see how that can work, I have one character of each div and will just switch to whatever div was decided to use to run the OAD.

I don't have a good solution but I have also never really devoted much time into a solution to this type of problem before, I will see what I can come up with over the next few days and if I come up with any decent ideas I will not hesitate to share them. :)

User avatar
Mort
Posts: 23
Joined: Wed May 24, 2017 8:36 am

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby Mort » Fri Sep 14, 2018 8:53 pm

I like option 2. Yes people will still ally up, but the sharks eat the minnows till the pond is empty then what? . As far as noobs go I am sure some people here would be more then happy to keep the newbs busy till they can stand on their own or join a more established guild or create one.

S0mveraa
Posts: 10
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2018 4:45 pm

Re: Guilds Redux

Postby S0mveraa » Fri Sep 14, 2018 9:36 pm

I'm a fan of limiting the maximum number of guilds, but I don't think limiting to 5 would be ok....that'd be you'd need EVERYONE on at one time to get anything done OAD wise <alot of them atleast>. That's just too few IMO. Maybe like allow 10 active players, but figure out a way to allow some people to be flagged as "inactive" or something ? I dunno for real.

I see the problem ...but tbh it fluctuates so much It's not too big as issue. Sure i'll spend a few weeks being horribly out numbered, but a few weeks later it's often the exact opposite ....it's a sticky situation. One I will be the first to admit I am not even really qualified to comment on.

But no guilds would be chaos, and class/div linked guilds would seem too niche for me.. i mean the nox guild just always smacks the earth guild down, that'd be no fun at all.

To be honest I like being out numbered, nothing like winning a fight/atleast doing well when you're out numbered.

All that said, I'm down for what ever NH decides to do...


Return to “Archive Chat”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests

cron