Musing changes to guild recruitment restrictions

A place for Genesis Wizards to share their latest projects and updates.
Forum rules
- Use common sense and be respectful towards each other at all times, even when disagreeing.
- Do not reveal sensitive game information. Guild secrets, player seconds are examples of things not allowed.
User avatar
Arman
Wizard
Posts: 619
Joined: 22 Sep 2014 13:15

Re: Musing changes to guild recruitment restrictions

Post by Arman » 03 Mar 2020 04:49

nils wrote:
03 Mar 2020 01:02
I gotta wonder Arman, do you purposefully lie to try and alter the truth to suit some agena of yours?

If the guild was free to join, why do I sit here and read my own application to the Army of Angmar as an adventurer in the late nineties? If the guild was ever free to join it must have been before I took my first steps in '97. I remember this vividly because at the time I hadn't written a single text voluntarily, particularly an english one, in my life. I hated every bit of it, but I'm a better man for it. Are you saying I remember a milestone in my life wrong?
My memory was no join restrictions. I never wrote any application when i joined in the early 90s. I just had to find the guild and promise the npc guards out the front that i was entering the guildhall to join. The Army of Angmar was closed in mid-98, so if there was a joining requirement introduced it was in its twilight and I don't remember it.

Why would I need to alter the truth or lie? If I had some tinfoil-hat agenda I felt strongly about I wouldn't be putting up proposed changes for discussion here.

But if you have any doubts about what my thoughts are about guild joining restrictions, I am pro-opening the doors and removing the barriers. I don't think the hoops players need to jump through necessarily improves roleplay - if anything it promotes vanilla stereotyping and limits creativity. And there are other ways to protect guild secrets or abilities through member management. I think the pros outweigh the cons.

I think the introduction of the AA join restrictions was dumb, and I personally don't like the new AA ranking system... that is likely because I liked the chaos of such a guild when i was a part of it. It was a great dynamic with strong and sometimes conflicting personalities. Now it just feels like the club-wielding version of the Dragonarmies. So my dislike is historic thematic reasons largely... and everyone has their own views on guild thematics.

Calians are a guild that needs teaming. If any guild needs a decent player base it is them. Opening recruitment completely (not the restricted seeker system, full join) just makes sense to me.

Neidar are a niche race-specific guild... which will always be challenged for membership just due to the racial restrictions.

Knights seem to go through cycles of activity... is inactive or active leadership the key driver for these cycles? Would opening recruitment help with it? Or is it more complicated, driven by the fact that they have a hostile enemy guild that drives new players away from it? In my view the knights joining and progression process could be made more streamlined... but it wouldn't be a silver bullet.

That's my personal views. And they align with my most recent creations (SoHM, WoHS, OotS). But I don't feel terribly strongly about these views to warrant wholesale changes to existing guilds unless there is broader common consensus.

User avatar
Arman
Wizard
Posts: 619
Joined: 22 Sep 2014 13:15

Re: Musing changes to guild recruitment restrictions

Post by Arman » 03 Mar 2020 05:24

Mersereau wrote:
03 Mar 2020 01:20
Is there a valid reason any layman guild should have a lengthy application process?

Furthermore, given the list of guilds you mentioned, what's to stop someone from joining the DA, looting the racks, leaving, then joining Calia?
The only valid reason is the creator's thematic preference. Personally I don't think it is a good one, but it is valid.

Anyone can join the DAs right now without requiring a guild member or guild leader to sign them up. They walk up to the guild npc recruiter and join. However if they do so without a vouching from a high officer they are signed up with access restrictions to things like the racks, guild 'who' lists, and boards.

So until those restrictions get removed from the new member by a high officer they wouldn't be able to loot the racks, leave, and join Calia :)

Targun
Adventurer
Posts: 89
Joined: 21 Oct 2010 01:31

Re: Musing changes to guild recruitment restrictions

Post by Targun » 03 Mar 2020 17:14

Regarding joining: I think it's good option to have a system similar to Dragon Armies for more guilds. Character progression should _not_ be gated by the fact that someone else is not playing the game. Whether skills are limited (and perhaps could be further unlocked with enough time, experience, donations to guild racks) or available from the get go is a subject to debate. Of course with the restrictions to racks, board, certain rooms.

On inactive councils: What if election automatically started when guild leader/ council-member is inactive? And by inactive I don't mean pops up once a month to idle for a few hours, but actually does not perform their role. Perhaps it could be determined by some sort of point system which would set minimum requirement for the leader e.g.:
  1. Drop certain amount of eq. in the racks,
  2. Kill number of mobs(perhaps alignment or type of mobs relevant to the guild-theme)
  3. Act on pending applications --> Formalize application process: create a template for an official "recruitment npc" (e.g. recruitment officer for Calia, or Priest / Inquisitor for PoT, or dean in some school of magic, etc.) where characters formally apply to a guild and can leave their application with.
    • Such application would then need to be "accepted" or "rejected" by council-member(s) in set period of time (say 2 weeks).Accepted appliaction would then get a "trial status" and a character would need to be either admitted in the ranks or application rejected completely within say 2 months.

If a guild-leader fails to score minimum no. of points during a month period, or does not act on an application for 2 weeks twice in 3 month period, then the election would automatically start and a former guild-leader could not participate in it.

Of course it would've been even better if it was thematically relevant. For some guilds perhaps Krynn Warfare system could be utilized, but I tried to come up with smth, that hopefully wouldn't require much coding, and could be easily replicated through number of guilds. Naturally, except for application part, it's fairly technical, but would hopefully at least mitigate the problem of characters staying in the role just for prestige, while not actually playing the game.

It would also protect characters from retaliation if they needed to impeach current leadership by other methods.

Greneth
Wizard
Posts: 196
Joined: 30 Aug 2017 19:55

Re: Musing changes to guild recruitment restrictions

Post by Greneth » 07 Mar 2020 17:04

The Knights and Calians have low numbers because Myths don't want restrictions nor do they want to deal with a rampaging BDA Cassius. Or whatever BDA/RDA/PoT bully is around for the month.

Knights are constant war guild with random small players that try to bring them back, they can't ever get any allies because no one wants to PvP anymore, they constantly get beaten over and over again the moment they try to RP anything but an abused dog. Doesn't matter whether you make them totally free to join and someone can obtain full Knight instantly.

Calians everyone loves until they cant team, we've made this game so soloable that there isnt a need for people to team. So there isnt any reason for people to go out of their way to contact others so they can try and grind difficult areas.

There are more reasons than just people don't like these guilds as to why their numbers are low. And I dont think making everything free to join would change anything really. Mabe a few curious people to start out with but the same problems would arise and it would go right back to where it was. Also I think some guilds like PoT/MM/SU who have historically had worse numbers/even more difficulty joining due to inactive leadership should be added to the list as well.

Amberlee
Myth
Posts: 1467
Joined: 08 Mar 2010 19:50
Location: Kristiansund, Norway

Re: Musing changes to guild recruitment restrictions

Post by Amberlee » 07 Mar 2020 19:18

To correct Greneth.
Reason knights can't get allies is because of arrogant previous leaders (Faryan and Olyver not counted though Ody counted thrice).
Though you can't blame the alliance thing on the knights alone since other guilds have also contributed a LOT to the impossibility of alliances(Irk and Logg for example).

Now I will do something uncharacteristic.
Speaking up for Cassius.
Since his return he has not overstepped much and only attacked and killed people who have been directly antagonistic to him like Calians who has him as an enemy or Quantum that aided Calians against him. And in this he has even given the Calians a way out of being hunted. Simply remove him from the enemy list. Their choice.

As for changing guild recruitment thing.
Making things free to join for certain guild would be a bad idea.
Especially for knights.
It would flat out remove the entire theme of the guild.
As for AA I can't really speak but if the AA leadership is active(Which they are), why even entertain the idea?
Change for the reason of change?

If any guild needs a change like that it may be Calians.
The inactivity is strong there..
The views posted by me on this forum is not the views of the character Amberlee in-game.
If you ask for my opinion here, you will get MY opinion, not that of my character.

TripleM
Greenhorne
Posts: 8
Joined: 19 Sep 2018 13:53

Re: Musing changes to guild recruitment restrictions

Post by TripleM » 08 Mar 2020 18:34

Well, I guess I fit the description of rather inactive guild-leadership of Calia.
I personally would be open to discuss to change the way our guild works when it comes to joining. I will add though that some other in-guild mechanics should be altered. Feel free to contact me, if you want to discuss Arman.

I will predict that it might cause some mild influx from 'newer' people that would like to try and enjoy the realms as a Calian. I also predict that the effect would be temporary. A lot of the players that enjoy walking the Donut, have had at a certain point an incarnation that was a Calian. I think people know the advantages and disadvantages of being Calian.

Like I said, I'm open to ease up joining if some other stuff in the guild's structure is altered. Will it solve the matter? I dont think it will in the long run. Why not? I think due to game-mechanics, the amount of easier options, and the size of the playerbase we will be dealing with simular problems. I also want to add that if you look at the 'state of the Donut statistics', Calians werent doing too badly the 2 years before last year. I fully agree we, by definition, would benefit from more activity.

As for Cassius' rampage , his justification for that, and whatever 'solution' there might be, that is another debate. If Calians were to cease to exist, I'm certain somebody else would be targetted to quench his thirst for pfighting.

Greneth
Wizard
Posts: 196
Joined: 30 Aug 2017 19:55

Re: Musing changes to guild recruitment restrictions

Post by Greneth » 09 Mar 2020 21:14

Amberlee wrote:
07 Mar 2020 19:18
To correct Greneth.
Reason knights can't get allies is because of arrogant previous leaders (Faryan and Olyver not counted though Ody counted thrice).
Though you can't blame the alliance thing on the knights alone since other guilds have also contributed a LOT to the impossibility of alliances(Irk and Logg for example).

Now I will do something uncharacteristic.
Speaking up for Cassius.
Since his return he has not overstepped much and only attacked and killed people who have been directly antagonistic to him like Calians who has him as an enemy or Quantum that aided Calians against him. And in this he has even given the Calians a way out of being hunted. Simply remove him from the enemy list. Their choice.

As for changing guild recruitment thing.
Making things free to join for certain guild would be a bad idea.
Especially for knights.
It would flat out remove the entire theme of the guild.
As for AA I can't really speak but if the AA leadership is active(Which they are), why even entertain the idea?
Change for the reason of change?

If any guild needs a change like that it may be Calians.
The inactivity is strong there..
No need to correct. You dont have to like the guy but he did more and brought more activity to the Knights since Eagledraco was actually active. He has been the only Grandmaster to get a treaty with more than just the Neidars since it was broken, he was the only one who wasn't an Alt there just for shits and giggles I could list a lot more but theres no real need to bring up that drama of those after him. Needless to say, the guild died once again after he left and has stayed dead.

Cassius is just an example, he is just a random name in a long list of those who have had the same attitude and behavior over the years as him. There have been those worse and those more annoying in other ways. And I don't blame him either, I would want off the list. Its rather simple to do and means nothing in the long run, so they are choosing to do it to themselves at this point. But it doesn't change the fact that there is a correlation between the two.

Personally I think we have way bigger fish to fry than to worry about guilds at the moment. The activity comes and goes, but until you fix the foundation the same issues will come up eventually. Races, Stats, Oversized Players who solo the entire game, etc etc.

User avatar
nils
Rising Hero
Posts: 324
Joined: 22 Jul 2016 17:13

Re: Musing changes to guild recruitment restrictions

Post by nils » 10 Mar 2020 17:54

This idea is the equivalent of a band-aid on a cancer-ridden nutsack. The problem isn’t solely guild design, as we see other guilds flourishing that have join restrictions. I will assume you will leave both the Army of Angmar and the Dragonarmies well out of these draconian future plans that serve nothing else than diminish my motivation to stay in this world of ours, there is a real one outside. Or so I’ve heard.

I think there are other forces at play, and that they all play some role in what we’re seeing.


Alignment
I’ve said many times that the way alignment works in Genesis is inherently flawed. It basically allows evil to kill whatever and goodies to kill only evil mobs. In the beginning this is fine. In whatever we call the “end game” the game itself is too small to not be able to kill both.

A better solution would be that alignment is chosen at character creation, but can be changed upon death (like race, desc etc today). It would remove the limits set on Knights, Calians etc, making them more feasible in the end game, at least until admin green-lights a lot more grinders for myths and above. Some would say it’s bad roleplaying for a knight to kill kids in Drakmere, but it’s equally bad roleplay for any soldier in the Dragonarmy to kill dragonarmy guards, or angmarrims killing orcs. I think bad roleplay is preferred over game mechanical STOP-signs.

It’s also possible to concoct some way of blocking evils of killing good mobs and vice versa on a character-level, echoing something like: “You don’t want to kill your friends, do you?” but I’d argue that one would ruin a lot when it comes to other aspects of the game part from grinding alone.


Races
We all know the goblin is the superior fighter-race in Genesis. If you want to min-max, you go goblin. Period. In the same way the ogre is technically neutral, it’s viewed as inherently evil, the goblin is inherently evil and subsequently not a natural choice for a good character.

Now people would scream “SO NERF THE GOBLIN!”, but that wouldn’t sit well with the goblins now would it? Nerfing is always bad, but upgrading usually welcomed. I think the good side is missing a goblin-type fighter option, and I think the dwarf qualifies. Like the goblin, the dwarf is ugly and has social limitations. The problem is, and always has been, the horrible penalty to dexterity and it’s “wasted” bonus on the dump-stat discipline.

I have a hard time believing anyone would protest the dwarf getting, like the goblin, human-like dexterity (no penalty, no bonus). That change alone turns the dwarf into a natural good aligned fighter and the game is more balanced for it.
I’ve also suggested making human more customizable, dividing it into three types: “Normal”, “Warrior” and “Mage” with logical stat distribution accordingly.

This change would make dwarves excellent Calian and Knights, and for the roleplayers, the “Fighter-human” is a bit toned down but still eligible choice, for all guilds I might add.

Player size, differences thereof
I’ve also advocated an adjustment to how the growth curve can change. The quick version is making it easier to grow to myth, but equal time to reach “super-myth”. Quicker progression early on, slower in the end. No “super-myth” would protest this, as long as it takes just as long in total to end up on “the Best” on the rankings. The game needs new players the same way Calians and Knights need new members. The gap between the new and the really big could benefit from some shrinkage. It’s not the only solution, but definitely part of it.

Calians
Part from the issues above, another problem with the Calians specifically is their dependency on others in order to function properly. If the guild is dormant/poorly populated they’re their own undoing by nature of its design. A way around this is enabling another class of Calians with a special attack, but obviously not nearly as heavy-hitting as the swarm. The hows’ and the whats’ in how one can step in and out of this class I leave up to those in charge of designing it, but I definitely think that’s a good alternative route to simply opening it up, thereby removing some of the “magic”.

Greneth pointed out there’s no use for teaming in a game where everything can be done solo, hence there’s no need to team. I completely disagree – Even though I can solo most of the game already, it’s MUCH MORE profitable doing it in teams. I can make one progress level in 20 minutes on a team, and the same progress level takes 50 minutes solo. Anyone basing their growth on solo play will find it taking more than twice as long as if they teamed up.

The problem with CAID on special attacks that still hasn’t been solved.
Now I can’t be bothered to find the thread regarding this issue, but in short it’s true that special attacks do a lot more damage than they’re supposed to and because of it we live in a “special attack is king”-world. Correcting this would make “soloing the world” harder, promote teaming even more, giving team-oriented guilds a boost and actually become a boost for guilds specializing in using two weapons.

Opening up guilds vs making changes to leadership.
This one is obviously more work than simply opening up a guild, but it’s been a pet-peeve of mine for as long as I can remember. Some people are able to sit the throne on a guild for decades, or a crew of friends keeping a guild hostage (see Rangers, Calians, and previously the Neidars) and it’s detrimental to not only the guild itself, but the game as a whole. There should always be more than one way for guild power to transfer to other players. Some guilds have it, some don’t. Some are half-assed and easily gamed. Attempting to make it game-proof might end up a futile mission, but a combination of ways for power to be lost (and subsequently claimed by others) should always exist, in all guilds.


A side note,
PvP
Gawd, I’m so bored of people pointing fingers yelling “bloodlust” and putting other silly labels on people who enjoy PvP. Come on people. It’s a game where PvP is enabled. You act like an ass, you get killed. You steal, you get killed. You refuse to acquiesce when someone able to murder your entire guild make a simple demand, you get killed. You pick a side, you get killed by the other. Deal with it. I certainly wouldn’t play this game with PvP disabled.
Lesser guilds deserve their suffering, you feel unjustly nerfed and want to be restored to your rightful glory... huh. I guess you're Genesis Hitler then. It feels so sweet to say this.. Fuck you, Hitler.
-Drazson, 21.07.2019

Amberlee
Myth
Posts: 1467
Joined: 08 Mar 2010 19:50
Location: Kristiansund, Norway

Re: Musing changes to guild recruitment restrictions

Post by Amberlee » 10 Mar 2020 19:00

Greneth wrote:
09 Mar 2020 21:14
Amberlee wrote:
07 Mar 2020 19:18
To correct Greneth.
Reason knights can't get allies is because of arrogant previous leaders (Faryan and Olyver not counted though Ody counted thrice).
Though you can't blame the alliance thing on the knights alone since other guilds have also contributed a LOT to the impossibility of alliances(Irk and Logg for example).

Now I will do something uncharacteristic.
Speaking up for Cassius.
Since his return he has not overstepped much and only attacked and killed people who have been directly antagonistic to him like Calians who has him as an enemy or Quantum that aided Calians against him. And in this he has even given the Calians a way out of being hunted. Simply remove him from the enemy list. Their choice.

As for changing guild recruitment thing.
Making things free to join for certain guild would be a bad idea.
Especially for knights.
It would flat out remove the entire theme of the guild.
As for AA I can't really speak but if the AA leadership is active(Which they are), why even entertain the idea?
Change for the reason of change?

If any guild needs a change like that it may be Calians.
The inactivity is strong there..
To correct you again.
Eagledraco did fuck all for treaties.
Those were old treaties made way back in the day before you had even set foot in Genesis, hells before I had set foot in Genesis even.

No need to correct. You dont have to like the guy but he did more and brought more activity to the Knights since Eagledraco was actually active. He has been the only Grandmaster to get a treaty with more than just the Neidars since it was broken, he was the only one who wasn't an Alt there just for shits and giggles I could list a lot more but theres no real need to bring up that drama of those after him. Needless to say, the guild died once again after he left and has stayed dead.

Cassius is just an example, he is just a random name in a long list of those who have had the same attitude and behavior over the years as him. There have been those worse and those more annoying in other ways. And I don't blame him either, I would want off the list. Its rather simple to do and means nothing in the long run, so they are choosing to do it to themselves at this point. But it doesn't change the fact that there is a correlation between the two.

Personally I think we have way bigger fish to fry than to worry about guilds at the moment. The activity comes and goes, but until you fix the foundation the same issues will come up eventually. Races, Stats, Oversized Players who solo the entire game, etc etc.
The views posted by me on this forum is not the views of the character Amberlee in-game.
If you ask for my opinion here, you will get MY opinion, not that of my character.

Greneth
Wizard
Posts: 196
Joined: 30 Aug 2017 19:55

Re: Musing changes to guild recruitment restrictions

Post by Greneth » 11 Mar 2020 01:35

Amberlee wrote:
10 Mar 2020 19:00

To correct you again.
Eagledraco did fuck all for treaties.
Those were old treaties made way back in the day before you had even set foot in Genesis, hells before I had set foot in Genesis even.
We can play the correct game all day long in discord. Getting a bit off topic here. Needless to say that's not what I wrote.

Post Reply
http://tworzymyatmosfere.pl/przescieradla-jedwabne-z-gumka/