Guild Wars 2

ProphetZero.6017:

So there’s already a decent amount of unhappiness on the Guild Quests, and I think from the current viewpoint this is a pretty fair assessment. For various reasons:

1. Putting the only event that doesn’t require Guild Merits in the War tab: This penalizes non-WvW guilds, just as placing it in another tree would penalize WvW guilds

2. Lvl 5 requirement: This simply just isn’t feasible for small guilds

The good news is it’s an easy fix and here’s how

1. Create 5 tiers of events, these tiers are scalable but start at a level appropriate to size. That is a 5 person guild can do T1, 10 T2, 20 T3, 30 T4, 40 T5 this already appears to be the case at least for the 3 Tiers of the bounties and you could keep it at 3 tiers (5, 20, 40) but that would leave some holes.

2. Each T1 does not require Merits to unlock

2. Each new tier requires ANOTHER unlock (with Merits past T1), this lets guilds unlock as they expand rather than requiring a large guild to begin with.

3. Create a separate tab for the “Guild Challenge” Guild challenges require the equivalent Tier of each other challenge to be unlocked.

This setup allows accessibility to the content for smaller guilds, while still requiring a lot of work (even for large guilds) to unlock the highest tiers.

Your idea is is quite plausible but from what i’ve seen from other developers and publishers of mmo’s, they will do nothing to improve the new system and will loose most of their player base as a result

ProphetZero.6017:

So there’s already a decent amount of unhappiness on the Guild Quests, and I think from the current viewpoint this is a pretty fair assessment. For various reasons:

1. Putting the only event that doesn’t require Guild Merits in the War tab: This penalizes non-WvW guilds, just as placing it in another tree would penalize WvW guilds

2. Lvl 5 requirement: This simply just isn’t feasible for small guilds

The good news is it’s an easy fix and here’s how

1. Create 5 tiers of events, these tiers are scalable but start at a level appropriate to size. That is a 5 person guild can do T1, 10 T2, 20 T3, 30 T4, 40 T5 this already appears to be the case at least for the 3 Tiers of the bounties and you could keep it at 3 tiers (5, 20, 40) but that would leave some holes.

2. Each T1 does not require Merits to unlock

2. Each new tier requires ANOTHER unlock (with Merits past T1), this lets guilds unlock as they expand rather than requiring a large guild to begin with.

3. Create a separate tab for the “Guild Challenge” Guild challenges require the equivalent Tier of each other challenge to be unlocked.

This setup allows accessibility to the content for smaller guilds, while still requiring a lot of work (even for large guilds) to unlock the highest tiers.

This is a good way to look it and would allow all guilds to get guild missions of use to them ok would still need fine tuning but is a lot better then whats already in place.

But most of the damage even tho a short time has already been done!

Again all i say is this is PvE based content so why do we need AoW lvl 5 with is nothing to do with PvE content before we can even start it!

That is my only problem really Cause even small guilds would have economy ranked high and again medium PvE guilds wont have it up and it takes about 75000 influence to get it there my guild has about 40 active members a day bringing in about 800 influence a day so in about 750 days we will be able to do it from a guild of 100+ total members!

I can’t even begin to say how much I agree with #1. My main guild is an smaller RP guild, we would love to do some of these events as a guild but since we did not consider War to be very important before we are now way behind the curve. I personally want NOTHING to do with WvW, I freely admit I suck at it. I already was peeved that I can’t get map completion without doing WvW, and now this. One of the great things about GW2 is not forcing player into content they don’t want. Going against that model to make players do things they don’t want to unlock content they do is never a good idea IMO.

Anet came out a while back saying this was not going to be catered to larger guild, and that is exactly what this new system does! I am the leader of a small guild, 35 members right now (mostly have 13 on at a time.) And there is NO WAY the price for unlocking the missions is in any way feasible in the near future! Having to have tier 6 I can handle… Still would take some time, but it is somewhat understandable. 50k influence though? For ONE mission at that! There are already guilds who are doing the missions! Seriously! Its great that some guilds have 250+ members and have the influence just sitting around, but what about the rest of the community? My guild is growing, but at this point, I feel this is going to hurt us (And all the other small to medium guilds) more than anything. I am so dissapointed in the update, and in the content all together. It seems like it would be really fun, but as stated – no way we’ll even begin to try for the next couple of months. By that time though, I’m afraid it won’t even matter.

I actually posted this on Reddit here:
http://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/19bko8/i_wish_all_the_people_who_complain_would_be_like/

Specifically:

http://www.reddit.com/r/Guildwars2/comments/19bko8/i_wish_all_the_people_who_complain_would_be_like/c8mm9x3

Basically, the way I see it is that the influence cost should not scale, necessarily, but should be based on the size of the mission you’re undertaking. Obviously the missions may need to be reworked a little bit, but the general idea is: bigger guilds can do larger challenges for more upfront reward, smaller guilds can do smaller incremental challenges that add up to the same amount of reward overall. I’ll go ahead and post the edit and TLDR here:

Here is my modest proposal:

• Unlock 4 of the missions at rank 4 (Bounty, Rush, Trek, and Puzzle) of any upgrade path for 10,000 a piece. The maximum unlock cost for any puzzle is then 28,000 influence from start of an upgrade path to finish.

• Unlock the Challenge mission and potentially other harder mission types at rank 5, for 20,000 a piece (gives something to work forward to, while not gating all content). Better yet, make different Challenge mission types available along each of the different ranks. Increase the reward of this type of mission (cost / reward).

• Space special merit rewards along the different ranks from 4 to 6, or have different tiers / amounts of time the rewards are in effect through the ranks.

• Have more of the cost of playing the missions fall on the actual “building” of the mission. For the first mission types, Tier 1 is 200 Influence, Tier 2 is 500 influence, Tier 3 is 1000 influence. (If there are more tiers, space appropriately). Balance the rewards to reflect the cost vs. reward scenario. Then, adjust these costs and the rewards for the the Challenge missions.

This is just one idea, mainly because I find there to be serious flaws with the “tax” like idea proposed in the post. I may actually post this on the forums at some point, but I’m going to need to be out of work for that.

EDIT: I would also like to say, if we really want to go the extra mile, we can do away with the “unlocking” of the missions period. This would remove the gate entirely. Instead, we could put the whole cost on the actual “building” of the missions (I would still end up tier-ing the costs and adjusting rewards as appropriate). This would make every guild able to at least run the missions. This would essentially be the “fairest” system possible, without resorting to a “size incentive” system, which can easily be exploited.

Bigger guild/ smaller guild. This is a dilemma.
Which is considered to be a small guild?
A 15 player guild with all of them active daily
or a guild with 50 members that are online / representing only 3-4 at a given time?

Ronah.2869:

Bigger guild/ smaller guild. This is a dilemma.
Which is considered to be a small guild?
A 15 player guild with all of them active daily
or a guild with 50 members that are online / representing only 3-4 at a given time?

I think the best definition for the size of a guild is to measure the average number of players representing per day coupled with the average number of hours each of those players represented. While this is not a guarantee, this would give a clearer metric establishing what the potential base influence a guild can earn, which better correlates with “size” as we’re concerned with regards to these guild missions. The last item we could add is multiplying that ratio by the average time each player spends playing per day while representing the guild (sorry, a lot of math, I know).

From there, we could easily describe a metric which maps to different “guild sizes”.

EDIT: Sorry for the multiple edits and lots of math work, but this seems to be the best approach I can figure for a metric. I would probably break it down as follows (note, all metrics must be taken while members are representing):

• Guild Size = C * Avg. Players per Day * Avg. Hours per Player

The only value we have yet to decide, is C. From there we can correlate “Guild Size” with influence gain.

Note, all of that aside (just more so my mathematical mind thinking how to capture this), I still think it’s best to do away with the gating entirely, but adjust the cost of each guild mission of set difficulty to reflect different tiered “sizes” we expect to accommodate with the system. Using a methodology as outlined above, we could define a set of bins to which different sizes map, with expected influence costs. Anyhow, I’m somewhat rambling at this point. Carry on!