91 replies to this topic

[Egami]

The proposal is:

 

In addition to the current Guild rankings listed by Actual Guild XP and Locked Guild XP, a third ranking based on activity would be added.

 

This so-called "Active Guild XP" ranking would exclude Guild members’ XP contribution for those players that are “inactive” (currently defined as 30 days without a log in).

 

Once an inactive account becomes active, the player’s XP contribution would return to the overall count in the Active Guild XP ranking. There would be no “penalty”.

 

What do you think?

___________________________________

 

Behind the scenes explanation (you can skip this portion because it becomes my typical text wall):

 

I’d been thinking about this for about a year and it really came home when the big changes came to the top tier in the Guild Actual XP ratings. People seemed excited and I began to think…

 

I contemplate two possible benefits:

 

First i think that it might encourage some lower Guilds to not have to compare themselves to many of the inactive Guilds that are on the lower end of the top 250. Leveling competition has always appeared to be a major draw to FS. It might even serve to revive the creation of Guilds.

 

Second, it might create some excitement up top as well. For example, the ranking could shift as inactives return or active players go on vacation.

 

Egami’s ulterior motive:

 

In the second case listed above, I’d hope that it might serve to get some players back into the game. A lot has changed and there are newer game aspects to get into. I’d hope this might serve as an excuse to get them readdicted.

 

I’d also hope that the timing coinciding with the “supposed” double XP event would multiply the “return effect”.

 

In the worst-case scenario, players would at least log on once a month. I don’t really find players logging in every six months for the double XP events, but I suppose it happens. I think having them pop in 12 times a year couldn’t really hurt anybody, lol.

 

Prosperous smacking everybody! (o0

Edited by Egami, 02 December 2015 - 00:18.

[yotwehc]

Although I like the idea, I was hoping it would be the measure of real activity. Like time logged on or messages in guild chat. Many guilds have players who take the scenic route to leveling and they are just as active (if not more) then the high xp folks.

What I don't like about using xp to rank guilds is because of how it almost works exponentially giving those with higher levels much more guild xp. I did the naughty thing and went guild hopping. I returned and somehow I have the most contributed xp despite not being in the guild the longest.

Sorry to sort of trail off topic but it is related and would be more motivation for the smaller but active guilds IMHO combined with your original suggestion

[Egami]

@Yot... definitely this is for the leveling game aspect. 

 

I definitely should have placed that in the topic itself as well as the question... another one for the E noob book. 

 

Hey, I got the "poll" part right though. Everything else is TOM's fault, lmao. 

 

Seriously, thanks for taking the time to respond. I hope to advertise this poll a bit. In the meantime, please let anyone and everyone know. With everybody's two cents, I could be a millionaire, hehe (o0

 

Edit: I added XP into topic title and question.

Edited by Egami, 02 December 2015 - 00:20.

[tharzill]

While I do agree that an inactive players xp should not count towards guild xp until that player logs back in, I don't think a third list is needed. Just apply the inactive xp "fix"  to the lists already in place. Glad to see someone is doing more than day dreaming though! 

[Egami]

@tharzill... I actually thought about that a lot. 

 

But I thought this would be less disruptive. 

 

The conclusion I came to was that there is a certain "legacy" aspect to FS that probably deserves some respect. I don't think people should have to choose between throwing out brown dots or being the so-called "best" or whatever.

 

You can kind of see that difference with the Actual Guild XP and the Locked Guild XP... to an extent. 

 

Again, the suggestion is not in any way to get rid of the Actual Guild XP ranking. I still think there's a place for that. That's precisely the reason I suggested this as an "addition", rather than a replacement. 

[gilby90813]

Although I like the idea, I was hoping it would be the measure of real activity. Like time logged on or messages in guild chat. Many guilds have players who take the scenic route to leveling and they are just as active (if not more) then the high xp folks.

What I don't like about using xp to rank guilds is because of how it almost works exponentially giving those with higher levels much more guild xp. I did the naughty thing and went guild hopping. I returned and somehow I have the most contributed xp despite not being in the guild the longest.

Sorry to sort of trail off topic but it is related and would be more motivation for the smaller but active guilds IMHO combined with your original suggestion

i like this idea but i think auto refresh would ruin it and youre right about gxp doesnt say anything about activity

Edited by gilby90813, 02 December 2015 - 02:51.

[WWWolf]

I really like the idea...

 

In some ways I agree with tharzill that it should just be the one list but then you would have guilds droping their inactive players to try to be on top and that can be destructive in itself.  There are times when personal life pulls a player away from FS for a while and when they return you don't want them to find themselves homeless - kicked out on the street like they don't matter with all the effort they put in before just wasted because even if they return, they won't regain that guild XP... Long story short - I would vote no to removing the current list.

 

I also kinda like yotwehc's idea about tracking player activity with other metrics than XP but this would be extremely difficult to do.  As gilby pointed out, if a player is using auto-refresh, it would break any metrics that tell you the average amount of time players are loged on to the game in the guild.  Also, if you start measuring the number of messages in guild chat, you will inevetably get some guilds to start posting garbage in their chat just to pad up the count and make them look more active...  I still like the idea of it - I just don't know how you would do it...

[Mister Doom]

Hey I liked that idea. Average player activity could really play to my strengths. lmao

[SirAdmiral]

I really like the idea...

In some ways I agree with tharzill that it should just be the one list but then you would have guilds droping their inactive players to try to be on top and that can be destructive in itself. There are times when personal life pulls a player away from FS for a while and when they return you don't want them to find themselves homeless - kicked out on the street like they don't matter with all the effort they put in before just wasted because even if they return, they won't regain that guild XP... Long story short - I would vote no to removing the current list.

You probably didn't matter to begin with if you got kicked in most situations related to xp.

---

Now for the thread itself. I voted no. Why? There are many top lists for guilds. Exp is just one aspect and not really that important. If you truly want to rank guilds it needs to be either 100% GvG or an average of GvG rating, wealth, and maybe something like Titan killing. Being a high level doesn't mean anything.

[WWWolf]

Now for the thread itself. I voted no. Why? There are many top lists for guilds. Exp is just one aspect and not really that important. If you truly want to rank guilds it needs to be either 100% GvG or an average of GvG rating, wealth, and maybe something like Titan killing. Being a high level doesn't mean anything.

Therre are many styles of gameplay in FS.  It does not make any sese to ignore guilds because they choose not to participate in GvG or hunt Titans.  Guild wealth is almost pointless as it doesn't factor in FSP or gear.

[Egami]

Now for the thread itself. I voted no. Why? There are many top lists for guilds. Exp is just one aspect and not really that important. If you truly want to rank guilds it needs to be either 100% GvG or an average of GvG rating, wealth, and maybe something like Titan killing. Being a high level doesn't mean anything.

 

Just to point out:

 

There are Guild level ranks for all the individual things you pointed out. The "100% GvG" is already there.

 

As far as some averaging system, the idea does sound interesting but I have no idea how you would implement that. It sounds like an additional and separate ranking system. Perhaps you could start a thread on it? 

 

Regardless, thanks for your input. 

[SirAdmiral]

Just to point out:
 
There are Guild level ranks for all the individual things you pointed out. The "100% GvG" is already there.
 
As far as some averaging system, the idea does sound interesting but I have no idea how you would implement that. It sounds like an additional and separate ranking system. Perhaps you could start a thread on it? 
 
Regardless, thanks for your input.

I meant determining "the top guild" Period. I was kinda going off when you were talking the top 250 list and "competition."

Edited by SirAdmiral, 02 December 2015 - 23:45.

[EpicPiety]

Personally we kick dead xp already... Totally agree with the OP anyway. At least make another top list if you won't integrate it into the current top lists.

[Tastria]

I went with the "yes" button.  

     

    My logic is that it wouldn't hurt at all, and might get some more activity going.  I don't know how much coding would be involved, but I'd think it would be simple enough so that if it didn't work out well, things could go back to the current style, and there wouldn't be any problem.

     

      Plus it would be a hoot to view the top 250 guilds (I'm being optimistic here) after this went into effect 

[Egami]

@Tastria... yeah, I was "hoping" that with the programming already in game for changing players to Inactives, it might be "easier". 

 

And for sure... I'm not at all a leveler. I'm more in line with yotwehc's comment of the "scenic route". But I'd hope this would cause a lot of excitement for those really focused on the levelling aspect. 

 

Anyway, just an update: Social life permitting, I'll start actually advertising this thread this weekend.

 

Whether you're a yes, no or no opinion, please let everyone know to log in their opinion.

 

Thanks and prosperous smacking to everyone! (o0

[WWWolf]

I meant determining "the top guild" Period. I was kinda going off when you were talking the top 250 list and "competition."

On the surface, I like your idea for an overall "Top Guild" list.

 

On the other hand, if a player is in to PvP they might not care about what guild has the highest XP and if they are in to leveling they might not care what guild has the best GvG ranking.  For these reasons (and others) I think having multiple ways to rank guilds is better than just an overall top.

 

Still, an overall top does sound intrigueing... just not sure about the best way of doing this - perhaps you would have to have to take the average of each ranking such that if a guild is in 3rd place in GvG, 2nd place in level, 1st place in gold and 2nd place in TKP that would average out to 2nd overall (just throwing out some easy #s there as my brain isn't ready for advanced math right now lol).

[sweetlou]

With the aversion to losing xp why isn't taking xp out of the game suggested?

[Egami]

With the aversion to losing xp why isn't taking xp out of the game suggested?

 

That actually has been suggested.

 

Nothing to do with this topic however...

[Egami]

First shout box placed.

 

Hope to have more time "tomorrow" to contact people and spread the word.

 

It's really not about getting my way... it's about getting participation ,oP

[callmeabc]

Rising stars but for guilds?