PlaneShift
Gameplay => General Discussion => Topic started by: Hatchnet on August 20, 2005, 07:56:48 am
-
I am not complaining that it was done. I am complaining about the way it was done.
#1 If any guildes were wiped THEY SHOULD ALL HAVE BEEN WIPED.
#2 If any must pay the creation fee THEN ALL SHOULD PAY THE CREATION FEE.
#3 Since it was chosen to be done this way. FAR MORE THAN FIVE MINUITS SHOULD HAVE BEEN GIVEN.
My guild was still only four members four two reasons.
#1 I was being very careful about who was recruited into the guild. There were infact several who were turned down for membership.
#2 We were still trying to contact all the old members of both The Darschis and the Judgement Knights to get them to join the new guild.
The guild wipe happened so soon after the big wipe that not everyone has yet returened to the game. And most of those here are who were not already in a guild were either not roleplayers or were of evil character. Both of those were not wanted in my guild so you can see why we were still small.
In all honesty though I understand the reasons for this (some of which were grave) I must take offence at the way it was carried out; not only for myself but for a great many people.
-
I think two threads about this are enough right now, especially with a leading developer replying in one :)
ALL guilds were wiped, AFAIK.
-
all I\'m gonna say is get over it, whats done is done, all guilds will have to pay if the dev\'s decide to do that second wipe
-
Personally I don\'t think that\'s a very good idea, Dem. If a guild has already paid, it should not have to pay again unless some cost adjustment is made. It will be very frustrating to have to amass 20k over and over.
-
Originally posted by Karyuu
I think two threads about this are enough right now, especially with a leading developer replying in one :)
ALL guilds were wiped, AFAIK.
I have read both threads. Neither addresed the the issue at hand as I have posted. Furthermore if you had read either thread you would have seen that all guilds were not wiped.
-
I apologize then, I did not know that not everyone was made to pay the fee. However, as Demarthl pointed out, they will all have to eventually. I still believe that either of the two threads before this one would have been perfect to add your points to, but this is simply because I do not like multiple threads on the same topic. A personal bias.
*edit* You miss my point. Though I tire of discussing the efficiency of a thread instead of its contents, to me it is readily apparent that you could have evolved the other threads with your input. If every topic needs to be broken down into separate pieces, this place would be very confusing.
-
Originally posted by Karyuu
I apologize then, I did not know that not everyone was made to pay the fee. However, as Demarthl pointed out, they will all have to eventually. I still believe that either of the two threads before this one would have been perfect to add your points to, but this is simply because I do not like multiple threads on the same topic. A personal bias.
Reread my post and you will see that though related this is a different topic.
And no niether one of the others would have done as they were about why it happened not a complaint over how it happened.
-
If a guild can\'t keep 5 members then imo it shouldn\'t be a guild. Deal with it. 20,000 tria is a very small amount. That\'s 4,000 tria for each member? I would have much higher restrictions in the future anyway. (10 members, more like 100,000 tria.) This is just to get some kind of system in so that we don\'t have 1000\'s of guilds running around and no guilds with dumb names.
Also see:
http://www.planeshift3d.com/wbboard/thread.php?threadid=18676&boardid=33&styleid=4
-
Originally posted by Xordan
If a guild can\'t keep 5 members then imo it shouldn\'t be a guild.
http://www.planeshift3d.com/wbboard/thread.php?threadid=18676&boardid=33&styleid=4
What about an elitist guild hmm?
A guild with only members they find fit to be in a guild .
Your disbanding old guilds and keeping newbie mass recruiting guilds with 200 members online . So we\'re all obliged to join the noobie guild now ?
-
I want guilds in PS to be guilds, not clans. If a guild can\'t keep 5 members in then they shouldn\'t exist. May as well just group up every time they want to do something. We won\'t cater the guild system around the 4 or less groups of people who want to have their own \'elitist\' guild. To me, being a old guild means nothing. If nobody wants to join, or the guild can\'t find anybody \'worthy\' of joining it, then tough luck. And we don\'t require people to join newbie mass recruiting guilds with 200 members. We want people to have good, well structured guilds with more than 4 members.
-
A requirement of 10 members would be pushing it, however...
Out of curiousity, what would happen if a guild had the required number of members then kicked someone out of the guild?
-
From what I heard a guild that has less than 5 members for 5 minutes disappears.
-
Ok Xordan you really have to sit back, relaxe and understand that darschis knights is or never was an elitest guild. We resurected this guild maybe 5 days ago. I have been trying to contact my former judgment knights this week. That is something like 45 members. We just want to keep this guild to those who wish to RP and not the PLers. Me myself have no problem with the guild wipe except that it should be done to everyone not just the startup guilds or resurected guilds who have to contact former member (yeah I mean us).
Hatch I should have at least ten grand of that soon. I would have most of it but I donated to another guild to help them get started back up. Either way talk to you all later.
Aranis
-
One way to get around the rule about a minimum of five members would be having alts whose sole purpose is to be a guild member.
And 20,000 tria seems excessive.
-
That would be what one might call cheating. That might be okay for some dark mage guild, but most of us can\'t justify that in the spirit of RP...
-
The idea is, it\'s easy to do and therefore promotes cheating and RP violations.
Even if the good Rpers don\'t do it, someone will.
-
Yeah. That\'s exactly it. Although I will never say that restrictions on guild is a bad idea, this particular combination is way over the top...
-
20k tria is not so bad. KO you have to have 1mill. Cheating is not the way to go either. If that was the case I could just start the guild again today and have a character from the three account I have had over time (if I could remember the account info) and have five members in no time. That is not my style though. 20K is less then I would have set it at though. Darschis knight will be restarted soon but not through cheating. Period.
Aranis
-
And the VanGuard will take a little longer, but we will not be thrown down by a simple cost... Granted it might take some time, but I\'m too stuborn to let my dreams die, even under these circumstances. The VanGuard will be ready if Ganga and Remvak ever return to the realm of Yliakum.
-
This isn\'t the final plan for guild creation. Nothing like it at all really. It\'s only reason for existing is because we\'ll have 1000\'s of guilds in the db after a while, and because there are lots of people having stupid guild names. This adds some kind of control to that. I don\'t care if you use fake characters to get around it, although a future system will prevent that. The system is to stop newbies from making their own guild called \"OMFG leet ninjazorz!!!!\" as soon as they start the game, and to get rid of \'perma-group\' guilds, not to stop people from making proper guilds. Restrictions will rise over time I guess as we introduce something proper. I should point out that in games like WoW, guilds of ~60 members have been disbanded because they are too small. Atm, a guild of 5 seems a good lower limit. In the future as our player base and world increases in size I guess 5 will seem a pathetic amount of members to have in a \'guild\'. :)
-
Originally posted by Xordan
...In the future as our player base and world increases in size I guess 5 will seem a pathetic amount of members to have in a \'guild\'. :)
My how I look forward to those days, when the truly powerful guilds are truly powerful
/me wonders how long it would take to build a time machine to go into the future to this glorious time in Yliakum.
-
I should point out that in games like WoW, guilds of ~60 members have been disbanded because they are too small.
Well, I didnt know that the project was trying to emulate WoW, thats news to me.
I agree with this move in principal, except its rather bemusing the way they\'ve done it- A wipe of characters is announced 4? months before it happened leaving everyone in suspense for that entire time, and discouraging people form being in game, and yet a Guild wipe and major change of the rules governing them isnt even given any advanced warning... obscure.
-
Originally posted by ramlambmoo
Well, I didnt know that the project was trying to emulate WoW, thats news to me.
Who said that? I was just pointing out what happens in games which have a much larger player base.
and yet a Guild wipe and major change of the rules governing them isnt even given any advanced warning... obscure.
Not really. Considering that we knew the wipe was going to occur months before it did, and that we only knew these guild changes were going to take place a day or so before they happened.
-
Quite understandable. However, why wasn\'t the player base given a few days, at least, as a warning? This is a pretty large change, and many problems could have been avoided had people been given a bit more time to organize their five or more guildmembers to be present at the same time before creation.
I don\'t think waiting a few days before implementing this rule would have hurt development. Something we\'re missing? :>
-
Who said that? I was just pointing out what happens in games which have a much larger player base.
If you\'re using an example from another game then I can rightfully say that that game has an influence on the desicion making here, else you wouldnt need to give that example to justify it. Certaintly if the mechanics of another game is used as justification for the mechanics here, and you say you were \"just pointing out what happens in games which have a much larger player base\",- you just gave the example, which left it open to interpretation. Gah, enough technicalities. I was just suprised you chose an example from a game such as WoW to justify your point.
Not really. Considering that we knew the wipe was going to occur months before it did, and that we only knew these guild changes were going to take place a day or so before they happened.
Wait. How could you only know a few days before? Are you telling me the dev team didnt know they were going to wipe the guilds, and it just happened via some third party unseen force? Or that there was something forcing you to do it on that particular date? You could have made the desicion, Announced it on the forums and waited a few days. As Karyuu, there must be something we\'re missing here?...
-
The server needed to be updated to fix some bugs when it did. It was chance that the guild changes got committed just before the server was updated. I myself see no reason to give advance warning every time we make a change like this, because it will happen often at this stage in development. If we wait a few days every time we make a change then we\'ll lose lots of time. The damage done to players is almost 0, and people are just making a fuss. If this wasn\'t alpha then ok, maybe it would actually matter in the long term, but it really doesn\'t.
This is why I\'m in rules and not PR. :P
btw; we didn\'t wipe the guilds at all afaik. Every guild that had 5 members or more were untouched. The code change just automatically deleted the guilds after 5 min once the server was started. If you look at when the code was committed, that was pretty much the notice we had.
-
There obviously issues with this, but overall it is an OK thing to do. Yes, I, too, was surprised by the sudden-ness of it, and also by the very low timer for reformation. 5 minutes are not a lot. However, one can reasonably argue that a guild should have more than 5 members so that the condition of actually only having the minimum number would be the exception, not the permanent state, which makes sense, considering that a guild usually has a lot of members.
As for the 20kT: this seems really low to me. When I look at the auction channel, I see a great and quite disturbing difference to what it was before the wipe: now one tria is worth almost nothing. Items are generally being sold for several thousands of tria, and they aren\'t even rare items as mugs used to be. The value of a tria has dwindled by > 90% since the wipe! IRL, this would be a catastrophically high rate of inflation that would plunge the entire country into poverty!
Also, as has been stated, this would make a mere 4kT per member if you plan on having only the minimal number, which isn\'t a good idea. Even I will have that much within a short time, even though I spend only about 1% of my ingame time killing.
This is a problem only if the way to create a guild is the one commonly used now: One person thinks: \"Hey! I have this cool name, I\'ll make a guild from this!\", then proceeds to the \"create guild\" menu and *bang* the guild is there. Only then they might start recruiting or thinking about a background and all that is associated with it.
The IMO proper way to create a guild is radically different, however, and more like what mikewsnc seems to intend to do (which is really natural by the system now in place): at first, a would-be guild leader will seek would-be members, to both fill the minimum number and also ease the monetary \"burden\". This has the added benefit that there can\'t be invite spamming anymore, and also that people will instead of clicking \"accept\" on an anonymous popup have to actually talk, thus, chances of RP increase. Also, they are more likely to ask what the guild is about and this will speed up the creation of proper goals and background, which alkso is good. Furthermore, this preparation time is also a test for the would-be members, to see if they are actually dedicated enough, and AFAICS will further bonds within the guild a lot better.
Summarising, this new system is a good thing, just, as has been stated and acknowledged already, the anouncement and timing was not the best.
I agree that every guild should have to pay that fee. However, the established guilds will probably have this in no time.
Edit: Xordan posted while I was typing. What he said about the timing of the changes seems logical to me.
-
The server needed to be updated to fix some bugs when it did. It was chance that the guild changes got committed just before the server was updated. I myself see no reason to give advance warning every time we make a change like this, because it will happen often at this stage in development. If we wait a few days every time we make a change then we\'ll lose lots of time. The damage done to players is almost 0, and people are just making a fuss. If this wasn\'t alpha then ok, maybe it would actually matter in the long term, but it really doesn\'t.
Well that makes more sense..
-
@ ramlambmoo: The fact that other games are used as example doesn\'t necessarily invalidate the point. After all, in every game there are things that are good. Thus, it would not make sense to avoid something just because it is in WoW. Obviously one needs to be careful with that so that only the really good things get used, but this case is pretty much a logical consequence, so even TGTSNBN would have been an acceptable example AFAICS (if it has such a system).
-
@ ramlambmoo: The fact that other games are used as example doesn\'t necessarily invalidate the point. After all, in every game there are things that are good. Thus, it would not make sense to avoid something just because it is in WoW.
I know it doesnt invalidate it, that wasnt my point. My point was that I was suprised that Xordan looked to a game like WoW to justify the mechanics of the Guild system, as if I were to justify a system, WoW would possibly be one of the last games I would use as evidence that my system is correct. But thats just me, I suppose.
-
Hmm, it is surprising only up-front. After all, one can look at what others do to find the good things more easily, and also to see what everyone has and thus can avoid accidently duplicating it if it is nothing essential.
In this particular case, the more I think about it, the WoW example reinforces it: if even a game like WoW sees the need for such a limit, while they obviously usually would not care from the RP aspect, and marketroids would suggest having no limits, then there likely are other, actually important reasons to do so. I.e., everything that, in a commercial game, works against what marketroids would suggest, must have real reasons that are likely to appear in PS as well.
Anyway, Xordan has already stated that the system is only a preliminary kludge to have some system, and that it will be replaced by something better and more adapted to PS eventually, like the dwarven model for the waybread. :D
Edit: speaking of models... I need to delete one of the weapon models to see people wield dwarves! ;)
-
What\'s done is done. Just get your recruitment threads up and recruiting and start saving Tria like there\'s no tommorow. Sure this was badly timed, poorly executed, and if there is another wipe coming soon, utterly pointless, but we can\'t change that now. In order to recreate everything that was lost in the wipe, the information would take so long to resurect on the server that it would push back more important things. You try to figure that out. Coherency has never been my strongpoint, but what have you? The only thing left to do is to get on with our lives, fight monsters and mine ore, ect. and make the cash we need.
-
Um, I wasn\'t pointing out that a game like WoW uses such a system... I was pointing out that a game like WoW that has a large player base generally has much larger guilds. I could have used any big MMORPG as an example.
and if there is another wipe coming soon, utterly pointless
Not really, because the aim wasn\'t to wipe the guilds, it was to stop lots from being created. Most of the guilds being deleted was just a side-effect. The code needed to be added before we do any later wipe, so why not now? :)
-
If I am not mistaken, doesnt Mirth only have 3 members? Unless there site is not updated.. IMHO the guild req for members should be two.. What definition says that it needs to be a certain number anyway.. and I understand we dont want everyone making a guild for just themselves.. its just lame anyway. But for rp purposes why would it matter? Well, I guess anyone who does not have 5 members should just make alts to fill in the other positions. And the 20k is a good idea... it will make people get in game.. atleast until they get the 20k.
-
[/Quote]
Not really, because the aim wasn\'t to wipe the guilds, it was to stop lots from being created. Most of the guilds being deleted was just a side-effect. The code needed to be added before we do any later wipe, so why not now?
A side effect? You said in an earlier post that you had as much warning as everyone else. So why wasn\'t thiss code better tested before you put it in game? Seeing as for all you knew it could have wiped the whole server.
-
hmm.. alts eh? maybe ill do that..
anyways.. i have been pretty silent on this issue up until now..
my guild was deleted. i had 4 members. the guild had 20+ members at one point and has expanded and shrunk off and on for the seven months that we have been a guild.. we were fairly well-known for a while and people (generally, very very generally) respected us. anyway.. after the wipe and such we lost a good chunk of members, and since we have at least a vague form of guild policies for recruiting, recruiting was slow. (note: guilds should have a policy for recruiting in my eyes.. i mean, you need to know if the person will fit in. and our policy is certainly not strict.)
so.. when i learned that i needed 20k to restart our guild, i thought.. \"man.. if only i spawn camped those mercs like everyone else did.. then i could create my guild 10 times over\". but since i hadn\'t done that, i had to spawn camp a few tefusang in order to earn my money.. (not too mention i reluctantly accepted donations from my best of friends who sympathized with me)
basically, i understand the point of the wipe. i know we fell through the cracks and it happened to come at the worst possible time for us. i will not complain about the guild wipe.. i simply wish that it did not indirectly reward those guilds who do mass recruit.
i think guilds should be deleted based on activity. if it is inactive for a period of time, then it is automatically deleted.. i think number of members is less significant than activity.
anywho.. i appreciate everything else you guys are doing.. and please please please wipe all stats soon.
-Easton Ghent
-
I wasn\'t saying that I didn\'t think that it was a good idea. I love the idea of guild restrictions... i\'ve seen some pretty... pathetic guild names to say the least. I was just saying that y\'all caused yourselves a lot more trouble than was strictly neccessary...
-
Originally posted by Hatchnet
Not really, because the aim wasn\'t to wipe the guilds, it was to stop lots from being created. Most of the guilds being deleted was just a side-effect. The code needed to be added before we do any later wipe, so why not now?
A side effect? You said in an earlier post that you had as much warning as everyone else. So why wasn\'t thiss code better tested before you put it in game? Seeing as for all you knew it could have wiped the whole server.
You mis-understand. We knew perfectly well that guilds with <4 members would be deleted; it was coded that way. Xordan means it was a side-effect in that the purpose of this was NOT to wipe guilds, it was to implement some new guild rules. Guilds with <4 members could not exist with these rules in place, making the deletions a side-effect.
Geddit? :)
The timing was actually pretty good. If you want to recreate your small guilds, just find one randomly generated item, sell it, and bingo, you have 20k tria. If you think that\'s more effort than your guild is worth, I don\'t see why your guild should even exist.
In response to \"what about guilds of 2-3 members\", that\'s not a guild. That\'s a group of friends. You don\'t need a fancy name for that, and /group will suffice for whenever you go adventuring together.
Anyway, everything\'s been answered now, between this and the other 2 threads discussing the same topic. Your choice now drops by 1 as this is about to be closed.
Any time now...
...
Aaaaalllmost...
...
It\'s closed! Ack! Ruuuun! *flees*