In regards to the shots fired as SC and councils in general.
Since that one seems to be a derail that stands for some reason - I will try respond from the view of someone who has been involved in guild councils since 98 (no - I am not bragging just trying to explain the perspective of the following
).
There are alot of assumptions and accusations on other guilds and players from people that to my knowledge have never bothered stepping up to the plate or who did somewhat poorly in their own dispositions as councillors.
In SC as far as I can tell from my records we have only directly rejected 2 players - both in the early days of the guild from purely roleplay reasons. I do not remember Hektor getting a mail or communication otherwise from Amberlee that she had an interest in the Elementals or Psuchae in the time the guild has existed.
If she had I am fairly certain he would have given her the same treatment he does anyone else expressing an interesting in learning.
Personally as someone handling applicants I may be opposed to a player (regardless of the character he plays) based on my experiences with this person such as:
- Are they someone who changes guilds at a whim
Do they try to ruin the community spirit of the game and waste wizard and player time with:
starting whine and nerf campaigns without proper data and information
starting said campaigns with purely politcal agendas and personal gain in mind
making snide and demeaning personal comments and spread lies only to later reject them as "acceptable in the heat of the moments" or "did I say that? oh well nevermind"
Do they actively pursue and abuse bugs (game or guild) rather than reporting them
Do they have a history of ruining guilds by joining and then not giving a hoot about the concept of the guild or handling their council positions distastefully
Do they mix their characters
Then I will have reservations. Yes. However, with all that in mind I can only think of about three players I would reject on sight. In the past two years I have given players a chance to join the guild and become full members despite I suspected at least one of them would leave when every avenue of the guild was explored and something else would be more interesting and another one who did it just to prove "I can".
Both suspecions were proven right and I put months of work in these players. It is the chance you take because people deserve a shot at it.
Handling applicants for SC is very involved work due to the way the guild is created and the theme of the guild. I enjoy it immensely and I am privileged that I get to experience these RP opportunites. Though if someone abuses this time it will affect my fun and I will feel disappointed in making that time investment in said character/player.
If all the above makes me a conservative elitist in the eyes of Genesis and the community so be it. I happen to believe it is for the better of the guilds I've been handling so far and the game as a whole. Until they day my view changes or the admin considers it illegal in which case I must either conform or die (figuratively speaking!
) it remains how I choose to handle that role.
In regards to Gorboths logic.
1. Do nothing. Allow promotion of the game to go forward with guild councils just as they are now. If promotion succeeds, and we have a huge number of new players, we will have advertised a game that offers a vast array of guilds that they do not have the option to join.
This seems relative at best. You suggest it is "a vast array" that they cannot join while at the same time saying you want to shut down between 4 and 6 guilds. Implicitly it seems then that these 4-6 out of some 15 occupational and ca 18 layman guilds should be a vast array? Hmm.
... we will have advertised a game that offers a modest number of of guild options, all of which are staffed by active and responsible guild councils, and all of which have a sense of life and visible membership...
No. Just because someone makes Council (by coercion of threat of possible guild closure or by own motivation) in a guild does not automatically make them active and certainly not responsible.
Time and time again we have seen active players who turn passive, Councillors who roleplay little and hardly know the theme of their own guild, power- and warmongers etc take seats. No matter the number of guildmembers and activity in Genesis.
Closing guilds & ressources.
Generally speaking the whole idea of this thread is something that I find very counterproductive. I agree and have been advocating that it would be a vaste of effort and ressources to invite a heap of players to a game that cannnot support it. However one of the main ressources to support these new players are old players in a good mood to help them out.
Does anyone remember being a member of or knowing members of: the mystics, the vampires/vampyrs, old angmars army, elemental walkers, shadow walkers, wizards of high sorcery, rangers of gondor, house khiraa etc when they shut down?
Does anyone remember the closure and the effect it had on those members as a time of positivism? (regardless of whether the closure was necessary or not).
How many players left due to either being a member of these guilds or because of the negativity that closure spurned?
For my part I remember distinctively applying for WoHS and they shut down.. then I was almost a member of the Elemental Walkers and they shut down.
I was not very positive and certainly did not promote the game in any way for a time period around those episodes... and I was not even a member of those guilds. Imagine the effect it has on someone being a member having invested years of interest and effort in it.
If we have learned anything from guild closures is that it always end up with drama and a large group of players feeling alienated or mistreated no matter the reason for the closure and subsequently we loose players on a drastic scale - if just for a while.
To believe we can actually promote the game by bringing in a group of new players to an environment that is even more negative that it is now? Not by a long shot. It is a complete misplacement of current ressources and accumulated player effort that we cannot afford.
Product & option.
Another issue is that we have a product that is based on options derived from the concept of character development (be it growth or roleplay). Removing an option entirely (close a guild) is reducing the value of the whole product by a far greater margin than the margin loss by this option being hard to achieve (a semi inactive hard to join guild).
Is it not possible to join these guilds at some level already, just not instant gratification? If you want to damage control then you should rather tell the customer that parts of the product are available but not in its desired form and therefore may be harder to achieve.
In other words. Let the new players know that these X Y Z 4-6 unnamed guilds are only available in limited form and that they may want to focus on something else first while the issue is being handled. In fact the new players themselves may be the answer to the problem. But remove the option entirely is from a marketing point of view extremely counter productive.
Summing up
The issue of guild councils and the variety by which they are managed is complex and it is easy to make uninformed assumptions and shouting allegations while not stepping up to the plate.
I agree these guilds have issues and the game would be better for new players if they were more available and had engaged leadership. However, shutting them down is a waste of ressources and accumulated investment that causes negativity and shortage in other areas and secondly greatly devaluates the value of our product. From an economic and marketoriented approach I believe it is not feasible at all.
Therefore I cannot and will not support Genesis in any way if we carry this out. This is not a threat to sway you. If the admin believes it is the right decision, by all means go ahead of course. Yet I will not invest my interest and ressources given that it is something I feel puts it all at jeopardy again.
In my opinion it is the single most dangerous and counter productive suggestion by the administration out there at this moment. Do the guilds have issues - yes - shutting them down is the by all accounts the worst possible solution. It causes far more problems than it solves. It is an uninformed quick fix reducing Genesis as a whole and an admittal of complete defeat to scarce ressources.
Just my 2 cc's of yap
