Topic
guild and guild loyalty
|
i have noticed in more recent months that guild loyalty is a thing of the past and guilds suffer as a result, its hard enough to form a stable raiding team in todays selfish pug world.
time blizzard looked into ways of making guild loyalty worth while and help guilds or not as it pleases them:). i am out of ideas as to forging forward when so many guild jumpers join the guild only to quit out as soon as something tastier comes along, any ideas would be welcomed . |
|
Cataclysm was intended to promote guild play. There is only so much blizzard can do to socially engineer the behaviour of player thou. (imo they could do a lot more in many aspects of the game)
A guild has to inspire loyalty to get it. I am very choosy about the guilds i join but i have chosen guilds which deserved my loyalty. In 7 years of playing wow actively i have been in a grand total of 3 guilds. Loyalty is not something that can be demanded in an environment where everything is optional and fairly anonymous. |
|
Loyalty is where a player sticks with something. When you leave a battleground or dungeon group you are punished with a deserter buff. When you leave (opposed to being kicked from) a guild you are a deserter TOO. I've suggested in the past a 24 or even 48 deserter buff if you do a guild quit. Basis for my suggestion was seeing a guild hopper make their way through no less than 16 guilds (including mine when it was level 11). If a person leaves genuinely for another guild then the other guild SHOULD be willing to wait a day or two days even for them to be able to do a guild invite. (My idea also includes ability to create a guild of their own).
In my idea a person can rejoin a guild they quit within the 24 or 48 hours with only losing 10 percent of total reputation. A person exalted with guild would be 42,999 - 4,300 = 38,699 rep when returning to the guild within that 24 or 48 hours. So you do suffer a bit of punishment even if you rejoined. But the deserter buff (like the BG or dungeon one) would stop people making harsh decisions of leaving a guild as quick as they do now. And as I said, a genuine offer to join a new guild would be there still in a day or two days. Also I suggested a "guild leaders chat channel" that would mean that guild leaders would have more responsibility towards each other. In that channel it can be discussed when a person joins a new guild, and the new guild leader could ask the old one for what sort of person it is. A channel like this would make sure that there's a lot more accountability to being a leader as well then. Because if one guild goes out purposely to steal members from another it would be headline news in such a channel. |
You cant steal something which has a will of its own. Furthermore placing a mandatory debuff on anyone leaving a is also something i would not like to see. Players leave guilds for any number of reasons. Arbitrarily punishing them is unreasonable. The deserter debuffs in instance grps and battlegrounds make sense because they are immediate and goal oriented events and the debuff serves to deter an immediate impact on other players participating in said event. A guild may have a specified goal but primarily they are a social hub or platform for organizing pve/pvp events not an event in itself. |
|
|
i have submitted ways to help guilds such as using those guild achievement points coupled with guild rep to enhance perks or unlock higher levels of perks, but to date i have suffered with my guilds inept raiding and apathetic members, still i plod along hoping and working towards pushing the guild forward.
|
|
Edited by Luria on 06/11/11 14:34 (UTC)
Maybe you should think of different ways to handle recruitment. Maybe the solution to unloyal guildhopping members lie somewhere in your own behaviour?
Why would I want to join your particular guild, and why do I want to stay around? One aspect is that you make me feel like I'm special for being in your guild. If a guid takes great care who it invites, and I have to go through a form of screening process to join, I know I'm in an exclusive group. I'm just not anybody, I'm up to their standards and they think I seem nice. And the other members are also carefully chosen so they can't be all that bad either. Whether it's a social guild or a hardcore raiding guild or anything in between, the ones worth my time would have a screening process wether it be application forms or interviews or anything of the sort. I would expect there to be something to weed out bad people from even starting a trial. I wouldn't want to join a group of anybodies assembled through a spammy macro and who might all be idiots. If they are all anybodies that can join the guild regardless of if they are good or not that means I'm an anybody too. An anybody is replacable in a heartbeat and can leave the guild in a heartbeat too. Feeling a little special is important. To make members feel special your first step is to recruit with care. In my opinion this step is the most important though it seems it's out of fashion for many guilds lately. Maybe that's why OP finds loyalty being a thing of the past? I haven't noticed any loyalty-changes at all, but then again my guild is actively trying to not scrape the barrel when recruiting. Edit: typo |
|
Loyalty is a fickle thing, Some players choose a guild for life, while other choose a guild until they are geared enough to join a better one.
The only thing you can do to encourage loyalty is to encourage it, reward it, create a system where loyalty is rewarded. Many guilds enforce a mandatory trial period or EPGP or another form of DKP, none of which I personally would be interested in monitoring or enforcing. The only system that really has a chance of success is "loot council" where the longest and most deserving players are rewarded, and until a player has proved their worth they are denied loots. but basically there is little that can be done, just accept that players will guild hop until they reach their goals, or they will stay for the fair and friendly atmosphere. |
|
There should definitly be some Rep based restriction to guild perks as this would make amyone joining a guild work for the benifits of being in that guild I have seen members of my guild join and then do nothing to add to the value of the guild why should they then be able to come back whenever to make use of guild perks they had no hand in achieving.
|
|
I don't see any loyalty problems with my guild. Then again, the core and later on some new players have been sticking along since it was around level 3 and some even before. Sure, there are those who leave when they see a guild that they like better but those who are online each day have always been there and have traveled in the rocky path of our guild. We all will defend it till the end. Or that's how I see the situation. :P
|
|
i have noticed in more recent months that guild loyalty is a thing of the past and guilds suffer as a result, its hard enough to form a stable raiding team in todays selfish pug world. Makes it all the more important to find quality people and stick with em. The second poster is right, its not Blizzards fault the playerbase behaves anti-social. |
|
Simple solution, devise a system of guild loot. Eight or more people from the same guild in a raid receives guild tied loot - ie gear. If someone then leaves the guild, they loose their gear along with their perks, etc. This would prevent the rather crappy situation we see now of 'xxx are currently recruiting skilled, geared players for blah blah blah'. Simply put, smaller (less progressed) guilds are constantly being harvested by bigger ones. If these bigger guilds want the members then maybe they should be the ones bringing them up to speed. All that we have these days is this rather vampiric system. |
|
|
Simple solution, devise a system of guild loot. Eight or more people from the same guild in a raid receives guild tied loot - ie gear. If someone then leaves the guild, they loose their gear along with their perks, etc. This would prevent the rather crappy situation we see now of 'xxx are currently recruiting skilled, geared players for blah blah blah'. Simply put, smaller (less progressed) guilds are constantly being harvested by bigger ones. If these bigger guilds want the members then maybe they should be the ones bringing them up to speed. All that we have these days is this rather vampiric system. Questions: 1. The only time people could leave their guilds/get kicked without becoming naked is at the start of an expansion when they all have is questgear? 2. Does everyone who leaves or gets kicked out of a guild deserve to start over? 3. How would the naked players gear up again without being subjected to being naked once more? 4. How much gear would we have to store in our banks just to be sure we have replacement gear just in case we get kicked or have to leave the guild we are in? 5. Puging is better than going in guildruns because any gear I get from pugs can't be removed? 6. Would anyone even go in guildruns then? 7. Is there no valid reasons for leaving a guild? 8. Are the top guilds of the server to blame for people leaving guilds? 9. Is your idea a simple solution, or just a very bad one? This is the worst thought through suggestion I have read on these forums in quite a while. And that is a form of achievement because most ideas here are poorly thought through. /golfclap |
|
|
Edited by Lucylucre on 23/11/11 10:00 (UTC)
Answers:- 1. How do you get to naked? A player would still have all the VP and rep gear they'd earned, world event stuff, and craftables, BoEs bought, etc. You could have 13 slots filled with 378s or thereabouts - your naked claim is, therefore, a red herring. 2. See above, they wouldn't be starting over, you've built your argument on a false premise. 3. Once again, they wouldn't be naked. 4. Hmmmm, let's see, what would you absolutely need in your bank, not necessarily helm or shoulders as token drops could be exempt since as invested your own VPs, so that would be a weapon and an off hand if you use both, and even those can be bought. 5. Pugging, also known as working in co-operation with other players, would indeed serve you well. To turn your question on its head, it's currently better for players to join a guild, become part of its raiding team, then leave once they have the gear required to join a better guild. This isn't anti social? 6. Of course people would do guild runs, those people who wish to invest in the guild. Obviously, those people who simply want to 'use' the guild and the people in it for their own ends would be drawn up a little short, ie it wouldn't suit the opportunists. 7. Yes, there are valid reasons for leaving a guild. Do you think, however, in a game that's meant to be social in its emphasis, that the primary valid reason should be 'because now I have the gear I couldn't have got without you guys, I'm off to greener pastures and you lot can just whistle'? Or, alternatively, 'I'm having a hissy fit, I'm outta here, wait, I want to come back, wait, I'm outta here, wait, I want to come back, wait, I'm outta here, wait, I want to come back' (because your membership is trackable) promotes guild stability? 8. No, not the top guilds, I didn't say the top guilds, I said the larger and more progressed guilds; and here's the rub: those larger guilds are often more progressed simply because they have a bigger player base to choose from, they build a core team out of the best of what they have, so many people who've jumped ship to these places ultimately find they're just part of a pool, something the management can draw resources from if and when required. Essentially, the new players become nothing more than a very large bench. This, obviously, doesn't improve their play experience, instead, it merely services a few. Furthermore, these guilds are often subject to the same problems they've caused in the smaller guilds, ie people leave either a) to join a more progressed guild; or b) because they're sick of being on the bench. This results in circular activity. These larger guilds needs to recruit more, creating more of the same problem, and those players who feel forced to leave are once again stripped of their perks. 9. Thing with my idea, as opposed to your criticisms, is that I built mine on facts. Your naked argument simply isn't true, so everything that flows from it is also false. |
|
Loyalty? What do you mean by loyalty? If your guild offers to its members things they like; if they feel they are in an environment they very much enjoy, doing things they enjoy in a way they enjoy... they will stay. If you don't offer them what they want, they leave... Seems pretty simple to me.
I have been in guilds where the guild leaders required loyalty from their members. Such people really need to wake up. You can't require from people to be loyal to something they don't enjoy/like. Define your guild, set up its rules, adhere to them. Be fair. Eventually, you will gather around you people with the same ideals and ideas, and you won't have to worry about too many people leaving too often. Remember, if too many people are leaving the guild, the issue is not with them - it's with you and your guild, as much as it would be easier to turn a blind eye to the fact. |
I don't like the idea either. I would be left with 3 items. I have craftable boots, a Reputation ring and a Reputation trinket (which highly depends on the rest of the gear composition, meaning I'm just wearing it right now, because I have to). That's not naked, but close enough. It is starting over because it undoes all the gear progress. Whenever you join a new guild, you're not an asset to the progress, you're a hindrance. You would be holding them back with your crap gear unless it's the start of a content patch or expansion. As a guild you would be forced to invest gear in the new players because they don't have any appropriate gear to further the progress. Trial periods would be difficult because you wouldn't really take the players to progression raids considering their gear but you wouldn't want to really invest the gear considering that others probably need it, too, and it would all be lost if the trial period didn't work out. A bit like being stuck between a rock and a hard place.... then again, recruitment is usually heaviest during farm periods so I suppose it wouldn't be too bad. It would make recruitment in progression periods very difficult, meaning that all non-Content-clear guilds would have it more diffficult....wouldn't that be the medium-progression raiding guilds which you are trying to support? Seems contra-productive to me. You're also assuming people are leaving guilds simply because of gear. I don't know anyone who does that (as far as I know). Some people may do that, but often guilds and player expectations don't necessarily match. I also don't think your idea fits well with Blizz's philosophy of character progression through gear. |
|
|
I would be left with 3 items. I have craftable boots, a Reputation ring and a Reputation trinket (which highly depends on the rest of the gear composition, meaning I'm just wearing it right now, because I have to). That's not naked, but close enough. Yes, of course, you would be naked apart from the three items you've mentioned, your legs, hands, chest and shoulders. It should be noted, however, that you're mostly kitted out in 391s, while the average player, like the guy who raised the questions, tends to have the VP wrists, the VP ranged weapon and the reputation back and also has access to the VP ring and neck. So, yes, you can't walk out of a guild BiS in every slot, but that's very far from naked, and a million miles from unable to raid and back to the beginning.
The old guild was forced to invest gear in players who then left, and the old guild's progress suffered as a result, re-gearing was required. Plus, the old guild had to recruit new members, go through the trial period process, give pieces to people while others needed them, etc. All the issues you raise are the issues currently faced. If these are unacceptable then they're unacceptable. What you seem to be saying is that they're only unacceptable to new guilds.
Hmmm, funny story, on our realm there's a 25 man guild who've lost two members with the legendary staff, this is an old, established guild and these were old, established members. Now the staff awards a guild edition, so it's recognised there's a certain level of guild input. Some gear Blizz obviously sees as guildish. And I'm not assuming people are leaving guilds simply because of gear, what I actually said was it was more to do with progress, the grass seeming greener; but in order to get to this greener grass people are required to gear up, for the very reasons you've identified yourself. This has resulted in guild jumping, guilds being seen as stepping stones to the next level. There's now a food chain. Not only that, but many claim with the difficulties apparent in 25 mans 10 mans are easier ... and sure enough, what we're seeing are people leaving the 25 man guilds and setting up their own 10 man teams. It really rocks a 25 man guild when 10 of their core members go; and of course these 10 members can make immediate progress. |
|
That made me laugh so hard my stomach began to hurt, take a look at your OWN gear, +40hit gems fail nr.1, you´re way over the hit cap even for a frost DK. and the mace you´re using, agility mace to be specific. Also Binar not to be specifically after you (thats why we have trade chat) but the guild you´re in as far as ive understood from a few of my friends who used to be in that guild; they´re only there for perks and rewards. Nothing else. Generally i like some of the ideas with a "debuff" alike to deserter buffs from BGs/Dungeons. Seeing how many people ive met have jumped from low lvl guilds to lvl 25s just for the perks. |
|
Edited by Seelix on 24/11/11 16:31 (UTC)
The old guild was forced to invest gear in players who then left, and the old guild's progress suffered as a result, re-gearing was required. Plus, the old guild had to recruit new members, go through the trial period process, give pieces to people while others needed them, etc. All the issues you raise are the issues currently faced. If these are unacceptable then they're unacceptable. What you seem to be saying is that they're only unacceptable to new guilds.
Hmmm, funny story, on our realm there's a 25 man guild who've lost two members with the legendary staff, this is an old, established guild and these were old, established members. Now the staff awards a guild edition, so it's recognised there's a certain level of guild input. Some gear Blizz obviously sees as guildish. I'm not just talking about new guilds. From what I've heard and read on the forums the medium progression guilds are having a lot of problems, e.g. with recruiting capable members. It seems that quite a few are on the verge of breaking up and have been for quite some time. I think that this proposal would crush them. Of course I don't really have any numbers, but Ragnaros may be quite the guildbreaker.... if that's even the reason. Those guilds that you mention probably have the exact same problems with people leaving as yours, e.g. the 25 man guild. Or are you only talking about 10 man guilds? I've never raided in one and have no desire whatsoever to do so, but I've heard about guilds disbanding and some members forming 10 man teams after their 25 man wasn't able to field a raid group anymore. Should they be punished? 10 man guilds aren't really on my radar, so I don't really know much about them. I'm just not convinced that the proposal would be good for guild survival with all the recruitment problems those guilds already have. People join raiding guilds for the progress. When there isn't any, people start to leave usually. It would help a lot more if they split 10 and 25 man up again like it was in WOLTK, in my opinion. |
|
|
Ye, capability isn't necessary so much an issue of gear as an issue of skill, and, for sure, people are complaining about a current skill shortage.
On the other hand, there are old guilds on my realm really struggling to recruit because of the 'LFM geared players to join our raid team' trade spammers. Once upon a time, if you wanted to raid, you joined a raiding guild, and you stayed in that raiding guild for quite a while. Nowadays, you grab your gear and hop about all over the place. Some of the newer guilds, with fairly stinking practices (random replacements, shonky loot distributions, etc), are starving these established medium progression guilds of recruits. In the end, yes, it's up to the player, but their decisions and behaviour are governed by the systems in place.
We don't have a problem with people leaving, it's a stable social guild, our emphasis isn't on raiding. I don't have an axe to grind.
Hmmmm, this is undoubtedly correct, but there's also the phenomenon of the 10 best men, once fully geared, leaving to form their ideal raiding team and, in the process, destroying the 25 team they're from. Of course, there are a variety of reasons this occurs, the most obvious one being the claim that 10 is easier than 25, but combined with the fact these guys used the extra 25 loot (especially the legendary) deal before cutting and running supports the accusation of opportunism.
I don't know about this. I hated that six boss farm in ICC 25 just to enable over gearing for 10 man raids. |
Loyalty is where a player sticks with something. When you leave a battleground or dungeon group you are punished with a deserter buff. When you leave (opposed to being kicked from) a guild you are a deserter TOO. I've suggested in the past a 24 or even 48 deserter buff if you do a guild quit. Basis for my suggestion was seeing a guild hopper make their way through no less than 16 guilds (including mine when it was level 11). If a person leaves genuinely for another guild then the other guild SHOULD be willing to wait a day or two days even for them to be able to do a guild invite. (My idea also includes ability to create a guild of their own). A deserter buff won't fix anything. Wait x hours and it's gone. No visible remnant of that person's past, nothing. It won't stop people from leaving your guild, it will just delay that person from joining a NEW one. It has zero impact on a person's loyalty. Showing guild history on your Armory (which guilds and how long) would be a solution, but I can see this being a privacy infraction. If you're really keen on this, there's sites with Armory-parsers that do this for you already anyway. Why should there be a punishment for rejoining your old guild? There shouldn't be a punishment for someone to rejoin his old guild within a short time. Let his (former) guild leadership decide if there should be a punishment and if that person should be re-invited. I know I would think twice about re-inviting someone after he/she left us for another guild. Recruiting people is always a gamble. If the applicant has stated any former guilds, feel free to contact those guilds. If your guild has a tendency to attract people who soak up all loot and then leave, then don't give loot to trials. Make your applications public - usually the most loyal people have nothing to hide. There's always a chance that someone will get decked out in epics and then leaves for a better guild. If this happens then have your GM contact the GM of that new guild, but don't be a total b*tch about it. It happens in real-life as well, where people hop from job to job. Just take it for grant. To summarize: Loyalty comes with a person. You can't force it upon someone through game mechanics like a deserter debuff. If you want people to stay, then you gotta make sure your guild is worth it. |
