Guild Wars 2

EDIT I really should have just named it “GW2 and the Death of Guilds”. The small part is something really near and dear to my heart.

This is an absolutely crucial article to read as we get ready to head into HoT. I have tried to articulate this very point on these forums but sadly my communication skills are not up to snuff. There are some things I disagree with for sure, but for the most part, I have to say I agree.

I remember when we were doing the Guild Hall CDI. I was a huge advocate of pro-rating the amount of whatever guilds had to earn in order to get basic amenities for their guild halls. For example(and this is all hypothetical), if a 100 person guild needed 100 gold to have a basic merchant at their guild hall then a 10 person guild should only need 10 gold. Smaller guilds shouldn’t be forced to pay the same 100 gold just because “that’s the way it is”. We already earn Influence at such a slower pace and really I wish that was pro-rated as well.

Before I ramble on and on, really just read this article. Devs too, please. I think it’s so important for little, tight knit, guilds to be able to thrive just as much as the “Corporation Guilds” this article addresses. And. please don’t comment til after you have read the article http://massivelyop.net/2015/04/09/massively-overthinking-the-death-of-the-mmo-guild/

I really believe this is a discussion we should all be having. Community in MMOs should not be homogenized and watered down.

Thanks for your time.

I find it more of a events problem. Like small guilds have a problem complete guild missions etc. Also a merits problem since that’s something you can’t buy.

I don’t think the gold or influence etc is unreasonable. I don’t know why people keep complaining about they dont’ have the influence. Even my personal guild bank dont’ have a problem reaching tier 5.

The problem you should have is not enough influence to sustain much buffs. Because a few gold to unlock your track or buildings isn’t much, since you only need to do it once.

In regards to the article, it shouldn’t be a surprise that since MMOs have shifted towards being more and more structured gameplay, that numbers outweigh anything else. The reason devs don’t focus on small guilds is because the doing so creates greater risks(exploiting), isn’t cost effective, and overall gameplay usually isn’t designed for it.

Scaling costs can be exploited, and looking at it from a realistic standpoint, when buying something it costs the same whether its 1 person buying it or 100 people chipping in to buy it.

I doubt you will see a change in that culture unless MMOs revert back to a sandbox or more open style risk vs reward gameplay.

I think they mentioned lineage 2. I didn’t play that game.

I also played another game which use a union system. Basically every union consists of 10 guilds of 50 people. So usually people hang in their own small guilds but when there is a large events, all 10 guilds group up. And people have the option to talk in guilds or nation etc.

It would be nice if GW2 have that kind of a system. The only thing Anet need to do is make an option for 2 guilds to share guild mission credits. So 2 small guilds can do guild mission together and both get credits.

If Guild Wars 2 brought back alliances and gave them the alliance chat, this would allow small guilds the ability to remain small guilds yet have access to more guild chat, more guild activities, people to group with and the ability to coordinate guild missions between multiple guilds so that they are available to and doable by these small guilds.

I don’t think small guild struggle at all, I think “very casual” guilds struggle.

My Guild has about 10 active members, of which maybe 6-8 take part in guild missions (bounty,trek,challenge,puzzle,rush) we have close to 100% success rate in these too, except for the odd missing bounty. Honestly challenges and puzzles are easier with a small co-ordinated group. Our gold generation is large, because we know how to do it.

Basically, size is not the issue here, it is how many seriously active core members you have.

MMO’s used to be about finding people with similar goals, socializing, and having fun. Now, MMO’s are more about convenience. This is a (perhaps) inevitable outgrowth of an aging player base that doesn’t seem to have as much time as it used to.

Community is what you make of it. There is literally no reason you can’t be a completely viable 10 person guild in GW2. Things are easier with more people, of course, but nothing is at all out-of-reach. If people aren’t keen on being in small guilds, it’s mostly because they don’t want to be, or because they like being in large guilds better. Don’t make game mechanics (or remove them) to try and force people to participate in a culture that is unable to sustain itself.

Kyratic.7038:

I don’t think small guild struggle at all, I think “very casual” guilds struggle.

My Guild has about 10 active members, of which maybe 6-8 take part in guild missions (bounty,trek,challenge,puzzle,rush) we have close to 100% success rate in these too, except for the odd missing bounty. Honestly challenges and puzzles are easier with a small co-ordinated group. Our gold generation is large, because we know how to do it.

Basically, size is not the issue here, it is how many seriously active core members you have.

Could you actually do the bounties without leeching off kills from the larger guilds? Mind you, if you usually depend on non-guilded players in bounties, then the whole mission system is not designed for you at all – you are only able to participate by exploiting outside resources. Which you have no control over (i assume that lack of control is the reason for your mentioned occasional bounty fails).
I’m also curious how are you able to do the courtain part in Langmar Estate with only 6-8 players.

Astralporing.1957:

Kyratic.7038:

I don’t think small guild struggle at all, I think “very casual” guilds struggle.

My Guild has about 10 active members, of which maybe 6-8 take part in guild missions (bounty,trek,challenge,puzzle,rush) we have close to 100% success rate in these too, except for the odd missing bounty. Honestly challenges and puzzles are easier with a small co-ordinated group. Our gold generation is large, because we know how to do it.

Basically, size is not the issue here, it is how many seriously active core members you have.

Could you actually do the bounties without leeching off kills from the larger guilds? Mind you, if you usually depend on non-guilded players in bounties, then the whole mission system is not designed for you at all – you are only able to participate by exploiting outside resources. Which you have no control over (i assume that lack of control is the reason for your mentioned occasional bounty fails).
I’m also curious how are you able to do the courtain part in Langmar Estate with only 6-8 players.

None of the Guild Puzzles are designed to require any more than 6 players, though obviously it’s often easier if you do have more. The ‘curtain room’ in Langmar Estate is designed to be done so that 6 players open the curtains simultaneously, run up the small JPs in the time limit, and do the correct emote at the top. Most guilds tend to circumvent the entire thing by having 12 players and setting up beforehand, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be done the ‘intended’ way (no value judgement intended here, btw).

Equally, a T1 bounty can definitely be done by 6 players. Unless you get one of the really annoying ones to find, or your group isn’t organised/skilful/etc.

Anet specifically designed Guild Missions so that they could be done by small guilds.

Olvendred.3027:

Anet specifically designed Guild Missions so that they could be done by small guilds.

Yes. They did. By their posts at that time, “small guild” was thought by them to be one with below 50 players or so. Guilds in the ~10 active player range didn’t even qualify for consideration.
In fact, putting bounties before treks in the unlock tree was a clear message that they didn’t want small groups to ever get to easier treks and rushes.

Olvendred.3027:

None of the Guild Puzzles are designed to require any more than 6 players, though obviously it’s often easier if you do have more. The ‘curtain room’ in Langmar Estate is designed to be done so that 6 players open the curtains simultaneously, run up the small JPs in the time limit, and do the correct emote at the top. Most guilds tend to circumvent the entire thing by having 12 players and setting up beforehand, but that doesn’t mean it can’t be done the ‘intended’ way (no value judgement intended here, btw).

Equally, a T1 bounty can definitely be done by 6 players. Unless you get one of the really annoying ones to find, or your group isn’t organised/skilful/etc.

Anet specifically designed Guild Missions so that they could be done by small guilds.

I can’t comment on the Guild Missions but you are right bounties can be easily done with 5-6 players, it may require a little bit of luck. Besides that you can easily solo tier 3 guild treks. Just make sure to finish the Sorrowful Sound puzzle before you start the trek.

Astralporing.1957:

Olvendred.3027:

Anet specifically designed Guild Missions so that they could be done by small guilds.

Yes. They did. By their posts at that time, “small guild” was thought by them to be one with below 50 players or so. Guilds in the ~10 active player range didn’t even qualify for consideration.

/shrug . Guilds with 10 players can do all the types of mission. I know, I ran missions for my guild for the 2nd half of 2013 with an attendance of ~8-16 each week. The only things we had trouble with were one or two of the Challenges.

Edit: Oh, and the Southsun Rush, ofc. But I’ve seen guilds with 50+ players in attendance have trouble with that as well, so…

how many of the 18 bounties are actually kill-able in a party of 6?

laokoko.7403:

how many of the 18 bounties are actually kill-able in a party of 6?

All of them. My fractal group did it for funzies one day. Diplomat Tarban and the Rat Wrangler can suck balls, though.

laokoko.7403:

how many of the 18 bounties are actually kill-able in a party of 6?

All of them. With small numbers, the main problem is finding them quickly enough.

Olvendred.3027:

laokoko.7403:

how many of the 18 bounties are actually kill-able in a party of 6?

All of them. With small numbers, the main problem is finding them quickly enough.

Yes, basically this. Killing a single bounty is not the problem. If you don’t have 2 teams, though, you might easily run out of time killing both of them, even if you don’t waste too much of it on searching. And some bounties can easily take over 15 minutes of searching alone if you can’t zerg it.

Olvendred.3027:

/shrug . Guilds with 10 players can do all the types of mission. I know, I ran missions for my guild for the 2nd half of 2013 with an attendance of ~8-16 each week. The only things we had trouble with were one or two of the Challenges.

Edit: Oh, and the Southsun Rush, ofc. But I’ve seen guilds with 50+ players in attendance have trouble with that as well, so…

Exactly this.
We’re with 6 people most of the times we do guild missions and we’re able to do pretty much everything. Except a challenge or two, and when we get the Southsun rush we cba to even try it :p

We’re saving influence and merrits atm for if we might need them for guild halls.
We haven’t bought anything else with influence anyways the last two years except for guild mission stuff.

There will be no death of small guilds with the introduction of guild bases.

Will it take more time/effort to make a guild hall with a smaller guild compared with a larger one? Sure, it probably will.

Should smaller guilds be “subsidised” in their guildhall costs? In my opinion, no. The costs should simply be balanced in a way as to be achievable by most active guilds.

If you make a conscious decision to keep your guild small to preserve community/friendship/family/etc, rather than expand and take advantage of having more members, that’s your issue and you should deal with the consequences of it (similar to how megaguilds sacrifice the personal, everyone-on-a-first-name-basis atmosphere to become more efficient at X and Y).

Having said that, the main difference between megaguilds and smaller guilds is their leadership. I’ve been in megaguilds where there was no closeness, no personality, etc, but I’ve also been in megaguilds where everyone supports everyone and it’s super friendly. Same as I’ve been in a wide range of small guilds, too.

In the end, it all comes down to how the leader(s) choose to manage the guild, and how much effort they put in to creating/preserving a community within their guild.

TL;DR – It’s not the size that matters, or even the state of the game itself that matters, but how guilds are managed that determine their fate.

Astralporing.1957:

Olvendred.3027:

laokoko.7403:

how many of the 18 bounties are actually kill-able in a party of 6?

All of them. With small numbers, the main problem is finding them quickly enough.

Yes, basically this. Killing a single bounty is not the problem. If you don’t have 2 teams, though, you might easily run out of time killing both of them, even if you don’t waste too much of it on searching. And some bounties can easily take over 15 minutes of searching alone if you can’t zerg it.

you can just do trek if you want the merits. I would say if you have 6 people just getting the guild commendation is enough.

My guild actually spend 30 minutes to pre-find all the bounties before we start. To ensure we can do tier 3 and make sure all the people get credits.

When guild missions were added, a dev active,y said they werent designed for small guilds nor would they be catering for smaller guilds. That was 2 years ago and I hope that thinking has gone away.

Small guilds are extremely important to mmos, they often contain groups of tightnit friends which can last a lot longer than larger guilds in the overall life of the game. But they need to feel a part of the game. Im hoping guild halls will be the start of bringing that back in some way.

Guilds and the content surrounding them is an evolving thing, just like any other aspect of a game. There will be trends and developers will always try to put their own spin on things. And as some in the article said, we also change as we grow and have experiences. So to me, a guild is not a solid fixed thing, never to change. it is a fluid living thing that can change drasticaly over the years and between games. That said, they are a great place to meet new people and make friends, and that to me is the main purpose of a guild. Anything else the developers give them is a bonus in my opinion.

Regarding guilds in GW2, I think for the most part they have a good system. There is certainly room for improvement and I agree with others that the merits system and guild missions seem very anti small guilds at the moment. Personally I would love Anet to take another look at guild missions. That in my experience is the biggest hurdle for small guilds. The first one you unlock is bountry, which for small guilds can be a real challenge to complete and earn merits from.

If they changed the order in which you unlocked GM’s, for example if you unlocked rush before bounty, I think this would help the smaller guilds to accumulate the merits they need to unlock other missions, without having to drastically change the way missions work. It just seems that they make the hardest challenge to complete, for small guilds, the first to unlock without merits. And that didn’t make much sense to me.

I also think that there needs to be more for larger guilds to do. Guild missions are fun, but they are extremely easy when you have a large guild, and do not present much of a challenge. I think we need more things like guild run world bosses and more challenging large group content for guilds to initiate. Hopefully we will get some of these things in HoT.

I’ll give my 2 cents, as the co-leader of a small guild that exist since gw1, more or less 9 years. It started very small, 5-6 players. Actually, we are about 15-20 logged every day, 134 people in the guild (but half not logged in for more than a month), so yeah, it’s basically a small guild. Our core philosophy is “Your real life above all”, meaning we do not kick someone that is not very active, and if this happens (4-5 months without activity) we invite them back when they come back.

Yet, we had everything unlocked by influence points very quickly, every guild content was quick to obtain, and we had no problem to complete that content. Yet, we are not hardcore players (except myself for short periods), and we didn’t pay a load of gold to get our missions.

From my experience (and that’s experience, and my opinion, feel free to disagree), saying that the game is actually killing the small guilds is wrong. Same for saying that’s unfair that corporation guilds can unlock things faster. “Together we’re stronger” that’s how the world works. And you can actually follow up pretty good if you do it right, i’ts possible, we did it ourselves (and we are far from the bests players).

Same goes for the multi-guild system. They say in the article that it’s part of the problem. Yeah, sure, some play with other guilds sometimes, we have that in our guild since we do not force the representation of our members. We’re more PvE/PvP oriented, and some actually want to do WvW and play PvE with us. We don’t see them very often, but they are here, from time to time, and it works great !

No, what is really killing the small guilds IMO : the guild leaders.

Far to often, i’ve seen guild leaders that doesn’t understand that running a guild is not something that goes on it’s own even for small guilds. You have to
- keep people in, organising events,
- keep having a good income of players (recruiting, in game or not) because you will ALWAYS have people leaving for something else, even the most dedicated
- Ensure that everyone can fullfill their objectives within the guild
- Ensure that everyone keep having fun whith the rest of the guild, that the social problems are quickly solved…

It requires time and dedication. And that’s something that is far too often forgotten, always leading to the death of the guild.

EDIT: Basically, what rapthorne.7345 said !

I’m pretty much the only member of my guild who regularly logs in any more. Kaybe one or two others log in every now and then. Even the guild leader has largely given up. Everyone else gave up out of boredom. My guild has over 350k influence and about half full on merits….. not bad eh. There was once over 300 members active at various times on the roster but it’s pared down to 60 or so members and only 2-3 really active ones. I don’t want to abandon the guild but there just isn’t much in the game that holds the members’ interest anymore.

Azrael.4960:

I’m pretty much the only member of my guild who regularly logs in any more. Kaybe one or two others log in every now and then. Even the guild leader has largely given up. Everyone else gave up out of boredom. My guild has over 350k influence and about half full on merits….. not bad eh. There was once over 300 members active at various times on the roster but it’s pared down to 60 or so members and only 2-3 really active ones. I don’t want to abandon the guild but there just isn’t much in the game that holds the members’ interest anymore.

then make use of the game’s system and join multiple guilds. rep your old one when friends are online, rep a different one when you want a group to do things with.

I couldn’t imagine being glued to a dead guild, I need to socialise too much

rapthorne.7345:

Azrael.4960:

I’m pretty much the only member of my guild who regularly logs in any more. Kaybe one or two others log in every now and then. Even the guild leader has largely given up. Everyone else gave up out of boredom. My guild has over 350k influence and about half full on merits….. not bad eh. There was once over 300 members active at various times on the roster but it’s pared down to 60 or so members and only 2-3 really active ones. I don’t want to abandon the guild but there just isn’t much in the game that holds the members’ interest anymore.

then make use of the game’s system and join multiple guilds. rep your old one when friends are online, rep a different one when you want a group to do things with.

I couldn’t imagine being glued to a dead guild, I need to socialise too much

Personally I don’t mind that much. If I want to chat to ppl, there are plenty of ppl to chat with in towns Or at big events. Hell, I played 5 yrs of GW1 in a guild of one.

Azrael.4960:

I’m pretty much the only member of my guild who regularly logs in any more. Kaybe one or two others log in every now and then. Even the guild leader has largely given up. Everyone else gave up out of boredom. My guild has over 350k influence and about half full on merits….. not bad eh. There was once over 300 members active at various times on the roster but it’s pared down to 60 or so members and only 2-3 really active ones. I don’t want to abandon the guild but there just isn’t much in the game that holds the members’ interest anymore.

That’s pretty typical of all games though. I read the WoW forums sometimes and see posts where people say that everyone they know is gone and their guilds are dead. One post, the OP said his guild was dead but he didn’t want to leave it because the he had been in so many guilds over the years and one after another had died.

Every guild has to constantly recruit or face death by attrition. That’s all games. Large numbers of people only play for a few months then they stop. Retention of players is a problem for all games.

To prorate cost based on membership would be to exploitable. Basicly. “Hey everyone come join this back up guild while I kick everyone from our main guild, upgrade it, and invite everyone back”. It would also discourage people from recruiting. This would not be aligned with the spirit of a MMO. People are going to have to face that a effective guild is more than a core group of friends in this game. The developers are obviously trying to encourage large scale cooperation.

Been a guild leader for a decade now. Things have definatly changed since Guild wars 1. My guild then was around 20-30 people largest was 70 in the first , and we did just fine as you never needed more than 8 for anything. Now. I try to keep my roster between 150-200 members we have about 70 people log in daily, over 100 that log in atleast once a week, and 30+ people online and repping during our peak hours. We host public guild missions and usually have 30-50 people show up to them. We are a guild that knows how to get things done and trim off the fat of non-reppers and non participants. You do not have to be a huge corporation guild in this game but it does require you to have something more than a small circle of friends.

To have numbers is much more important in this game than just having a good core closed off group of friends. Not only are guilds about community but you have to be able to produce resources to benifit the guild as a whole. To me this is a good thing. It gets people out of thier confort zones and is more inclusive to people who would have otherwise never been included in a core group. The game has more community if people are encouraged to participate in large groups and meet people rather than fractured into 100s if not thousands of small guilds that never play with anyone but those select few.

Multi-represent also provides a flexable but competitive enviroment. This has also increased the dedication and work demanded from successful leaders. As others have already stated.

Why be in a small guild only when you can be in both?
Why not benifit from large numbers when your friends arnt around?
Why not be and a large guild and have our friends there?

This are the questions that often get asked. And often how smaller guilds get absorbed into larger ones and die.

I don’t think the game is killing small guilds everything is obtainable for them, but there is defiantly a distinct advantage to being a larger guild. And I think a MMO should always encourage large scale coordination.

Interesting that so many guilds require 100% rep. There’s at least a portion of the player base that wants nothing to do with multiple guilds, and small guilds acting as mercenaries to large guilds in order to participate in guild activities.

Iason Evan.3806:

EDIT I really should have just named it “GW2 and the Death of Guilds”. The small part is something really near and dear to my heart.

This is an absolutely crucial article to read as we get ready to head into HoT. I have tried to articulate this very point on these forums but sadly my communication skills are not up to snuff. There are some things I disagree with for sure, but for the most part, I have to say I agree.

I remember when we were doing the Guild Hall CDI. I was a huge advocate of pro-rating the amount of whatever guilds had to earn in order to get basic amenities for their guild halls. For example(and this is all hypothetical), if a 100 person guild needed 100 gold to have a basic merchant at their guild hall then a 10 person guild should only need 10 gold. Smaller guilds shouldn’t be forced to pay the same 100 gold just because “that’s the way it is”. We already earn Influence at such a slower pace and really I wish that was pro-rated as well.

Before I ramble on and on, really just read this article. Devs too, please. I think it’s so important for little, tight knit, guilds to be able to thrive just as much as the “Corporation Guilds” this article addresses. And. please don’t comment til after you have read the article http://massivelyop.net/2015/04/09/massively-overthinking-the-death-of-the-mmo-guild/

I really believe this is a discussion we should all be having. Community in MMOs should not be homogenized and watered down.

Thanks for your time.

People will game the system if they can. Allowing a way to get the amenities for cheaper will be abused. All everyone would do is make a side guild and only include a few players, buy everything(at the cheap rates) then when they have everything they want everyone in guild switches to the new guild. Flat rates are the only way to stop that. DDO did it pretty good, they had flat rate but the tiers were unlocked with guild influence and the guild influence was easier to hold with the less people you had. This made it so the a guild of one person could get many of the benefits but not what the larger guilds could do. The large guilds could still invite guests to there guild halls(ships) to enjoy some buffs and such. Its hard to keep large guilds going and takes tons of work. You should not get everything they get unless you put in the work for it.

This is coming from someone who prefers small guilds. In most the games I’ve played the guilds I have been in normally have less than 10 members. Normally that’s just me and close friends and family members. I have been in some with more members but for some reason and tend to fall back into creating my own small guilds eventually.

Edited to add: I do agree that the ability to be in multiple guilds at once has ruined all guild loyalty. You now have everyone turning into fair-weather friends. That I have never liked about GW2 and felt it is a bad decision even if it is convenient for some people.

I appreciate the thoughts from everyone here. As guild leader of a small guild, I can say that Influence isn’t a problem now, but when guild missions first came out it definitely was a thorn in my side. It irked me that we had to wait longer to start doing bounties etc. because it took us longer to obtain the Influence needed. Just because ArenaNet hasn’t implemented any new systems to purchase for Influence doesn’t meant hat in the future it could’t be a problem.

The Alliance system in the first game was wonderful. It allowed smaller guilds to align and still gave leader types full control over their own guild. Not bringing alliances over to GW2 meant guild leaders had to rep the lead guild of the alliance or split off. It literally splintered alliances. It was awful. Is that partly on the people who put their own guild above being with the whole group from the original game. Totally. I can’t argue that. But there is also a modicum of attachment that comes with having your own guild. Without the tools to keep having alliances intact, it was detrimental to keeping groups together.

I just don’t want smaller guilds to have to pay the same amount of gold or other types of currency into Guild Halls as larger guilds have to. It means less players have to pay more into the system than larger guilds have to and I think that would be a mistake. Pro-rating the costs would be a better way to handle it in my opinion. It makes the costs for each member of a smaller guild similar to that of a larger one.

Mostly, this post is about proactively seeking out ways to offer suggestions to the devs on this topic before the decisions are set in stone. “Play how you want” should extend to the size of the guild you want to be in. Otherwise it’s, Play how you want, but you should be in a big guild because it’s much easier that way to get to the carrot. It’s a very Wal Mart way of handling things. Mom and Pop guilds get thrown under the bus due to lack of foresight on the developers parts and they end up losing players to the larger guilds because of it. An argument could be made saying, “Do you really want players that just want to do stuff faster in your small guild?” The answer is yes. If it’s all about convenience, shouldn’t small guilds have as convenient a time acquiring items and services for their guild hall as larger ones? I think the answer to that question is a resounding “YES”

With the way the GW2 guild system is set up… I dont really see a problem with it. Someone that is part of a 10 man hardcore PvP/WvW only guild can easily rep a PvE guild mission guild too (which would have a guild hall, compared to the smaller guild).

I admit that the developers are in a difficult position. How to make event scaling work for the smallest of guilds and for the mega guilds. The answer truly maybe you can not. I hope that they support efforts for the smaller guilds and allow us a means to still advance our guilds. If scaling does not work then maybe allow smaller guilds alternate events that require more iterations but can still grant the guild currencies that can be used to scale up their guild if they choose to live in a smaller guild. That or institute guild alliances so that smaller guild can work with each other to do events that are designed for larger guilds and allows people to keep their communities. Good gaming to you!

1. The HoT expac is going to have new features for guilds. We don’t know what they are yet.
2. The game’s design gives small, dedicated guilds a lot of content to play with.
3. Prior to guild missions, it had almost nothing that was a challenge for guilds with more than 50 regular players.
4. The current set of guild missions are old and some were never that challenging to begin with.
5. All of the current guild missions can be done by fewer than 10 people, depending on the people.

I think it’s worth waiting to find out what HoT has in store for guilds (large|small, dedicated|casual) before proclaiming the “Death of Guilds.”

Personally, i have no problems with the small guilds needing to pay the same prices, as long as nothing will be locked out beyond activities that were designed with big guilds in mind (in a manner similar to merits now). So yes, that means no pricing in merits (unless there will be changes to merit acquisition).

Going back the original post scaling the price of upgrades to some sort of average size of the guild could work as well if we are talking about non-tradable items, such as structures in the guild. Example installing crafting stations in the guild hall. Costs x merits for a small guild, x +y for next guild size and such. The smaller ones are still taxed with needing the min number of members to do the event that requires the merit but aren’t double taxed by also having to run it as many times to pay for the upgrade. I don’t believe that the design attempt is the guild with the most automatically wins, but if it isn’t let us know.

The only way you can really scale price, is if there is a upkeep cost that is based on how much it is used. Ex. If a trader is being used by 100 players then the upkeep cost is 100g per month, if a trader is only used by 10 players then the upkeep cost can be 10g. This can only apply if the cost of upgrades is a rolling expense, it can’t really work with initial or it being a 1 time buy.

I actually had the opposite experience than that of an article. It’s far easier to grow a guild in a game that’s less competitive, than one where group content is very much guild based.

As a leader of a guild in a multi-guild community – it’s much easier to lead a guild in guild wars than in Wildstar. Why? Because we can offer the social aspect. We offer someone to talk to, we offer events, we offer competitions, it’s for the lack of other word a family. In Wildstar on the other hand after a very hard year we crumbled. Why? Because people want to pass the content now now now. They get attuned and then leave, because this other more competitive guild can carry them trough raids. Nobody wants to be loyal and learn how to go trough content on their own. They just want to be in the best, most competitive guild around and get into the content right now.

Now to come back to upgrades – we’re around a 100 person guild with 10-20 people online at a time. We’re slowly getting all the guild upgrades. If need be I’ll pay for them from my own pocket, but I would say that so far we didn’t really run into any walls. It might be different for a 5-10 person sized guild, but even then, there are alliances. People join guilds temporarily to help them to run guild events. People that are currently in the map can help. It’s a very social environment that we have here.

I feel that authors of the article are looking back on their small guilds through rose colored glasses.

You always have guilds of two types, social or goal oriented. If you want raid gear, you will be in the second, if you want to socialize with friends, it will be first. If you wanted to raid with friend, then you needed to build up the social guild to the size necessary for raids, risking to destroy the guild as larger population often means larger amount of friction between members.

Small guilds were as bad then as they are now. In EQ (since it’s used as an example) you needed a fairly large number of people for plane raids (originally). Then Trakannon, Yelinak, Aten Ha Ra…Plane of Time (72 person raids, woo). A guild of 5 to 15 had almost no place in the raiding scheme.

So GW2 is no different. If anything it offers you a way to stay in social guild where you are friends with everyone, while also be in a large guild that allows you to get the rewards. You can still do smaller group content (fractals, dungeons, roaming teams in WvW) with your firneds, and swap to large guild only when you need something like triple trouble or commendations.

I am not saying that guild rewards are done well in GW2. Far from it. Scaling should be added. It has been done before (DDO), and (IMO) it worked really well there. I suspect that it is simply more effort in balancing than developers want to do.

Having a prorated cost or a upkeep cost based on membership would be disastrous for guild membership. Not only could it be exploitable imagine the toxcity behind it.

Casual players will be getting kicked constantly for not logging on enough and incurring the guild a cost. Guilds will only want to hold onto the closest friends, shun everyone else to keep thier rates low and never recruit to keep costs low.

Welcoming new memebers should always be a benifit to the guild. This is a MMO. Mass cooperation should always be encouraged and expanding community should always be encouraged. Helping others and building community should never cost you. Otherwise people just arnt going to bother with non-hardcore players in thier guild.

You simply want to tax larger guilds so you dont have to put in the contributions that a leader and members of a larger guild do? That is a terrible idea. You either suck it up and contribute more individually or open your doors to others and work to maintain a larger community. It should cost nothing to welcome people into your community otherwise there won’t be a community for those that don’t have much to offer.

If your guild is so obsessed with efficiency of getting rewards that it won’t take a new members if it will slightly reduce the efficiency, perhaps your guild does not have a healthy community to begin with. You literally require rewards to keep your community together.

DDO has scaling and has plenty of social guilds. If people enjoy each others company, they will not have an issue in helping each other, even if it slows down the loot generation slightly. But I guess helping each other isn’t what guilds were meant to be about. It was about loot.

So yes, currently smaller guilds don’t get as much loot. But at least members there have attachment to the guild stronger than their desire for loot.

It would be nice if a middle ground was found where rewards would not depend on the size of the guild, so people would not feel that they have an in-game reward for hanging out with people whose company they might not enjoy.

Zania.8461:

If your guild is so obsessed with efficiency of getting rewards that it won’t take a new members if it will slightly reduce the efficiency, perhaps your guild does not have a healthy community to begin with. You literally require rewards to keep your community together.

DDO has scaling and has plenty of social guilds. If people enjoy each others company, they will not have an issue in helping each other, even if it slows down the loot generation slightly. But I guess helping each other isn’t what guilds were meant to be about. It was about loot.

So yes, currently smaller guilds don’t get as much loot. But at least members there have attachment to the guild stronger than their desire for loot.

It would be nice if a middle ground was found where rewards would not depend on the size of the guild, so people would not feel that they have an in-game reward for hanging out with people whose company they might not enjoy.

likely what would happen is people would upgrade their guild to max as a 2 person guild and would only recruit after they’re at the full tiers. Or even worse, they would start selling fully tiered no member guilds. That already happens, but not very often.

Zania.8461:

If your guild is so obsessed with efficiency of getting rewards that it won’t take a new members if it will slightly reduce the efficiency, perhaps your guild does not have a healthy community to begin with. You literally require rewards to keep your community together.

DDO has scaling and has plenty of social guilds. If people enjoy each others company, they will not have an issue in helping each other, even if it slows down the loot generation slightly. But I guess helping each other isn’t what guilds were meant to be about. It was about loot.

So yes, currently smaller guilds don’t get as much loot. But at least members there have attachment to the guild stronger than their desire for loot.

It would be nice if a middle ground was found where rewards would not depend on the size of the guild, so people would not feel that they have an in-game reward for hanging out with people whose company they might not enjoy.

Its not really the scaling of loot thata the issue. Small guilds get the same rewards for completing missions and meeting the same requirements as larger guilds. Members in small guilds earn the same influence as members in larger guilds.

The issue is the idea of making requirements and costs more for larger guilds simply because they are large. It does not make since to give insintive for guilds not to recruit or penalize guilds for recruiting by making costs and requirements higher. It would only serve to discourage guilds from recruiting and welcoming in new people.

Gaining membership should be a gain not a burden for guilds. Taxing them for being large just so smaller guilds don’t feel like they are disadvantaged is backwards logic by applying disadvantage to what guilds are supposed to do. Grow. It forces smaller communities over large ones if members are not highly active and will ultimatly kill that guild when players play less. You want communities to grow in a MMO.

I had explained this in more detail in the guild hall cdi. My idea was that if a small guild decided to expand they would then have to pay for the next level. If a guild went from 10 to 100 players it would then cost them another 90 gold to keep said merchant. It’s to keep costs flat for members. 10 people paying 10 gold is exactly the same as 100 people paying 100 gold. Why should 10 people have to pay 100 gold for a merchant and the 100 person guild gets to pay 1 gold each? That’s asinine.

I am well aware that my views do not sit well with a large portion of the community, however I do think that this is a good place for discussion.

I am perplexed why people think that more members = better or that inviting more people should be promoted. I agree that it should not be discouraged, but forcing a small guild to grow will very often destroy the community the guild started with. I do not see why larger blob = ‘better guild’.

I am all for any checks and balances the developers are willing to come up with to prevent the exploiting smaller guilds. But I want them to be viable. Currently guild with <15 members is not considered a guild by ANets standards. If that’s the case, fine. Then either require 15 people to form a guild, or give a big message upon guild creation ‘Guilds with less than 15 people are not real guilds and can’t participate in the entirety of guild content’.

EDIT: Iason Evan, I would be perfectly happy with your suggestion. However it would be fair toward all guilds, and as you can see from previous posts, people believe that larger guilds need additional benefits.

I’m perfectly fine with small guilds. And hope the guild halls wont’ be “harsh” for small guilds to obtain.

But I just want people to realize the amount of work to make a large guild is absurd (in comparison to getting some influence or merit). And it typically fall upon a few of the leadership. I just dont’ see why some of the small guild leader actually think large guild actually have it easy.

Iason Evan.3806:

EDIT I really should have just named it “GW2 and the Death of Guilds”. The small part is something really near and dear to my heart.

This is an absolutely crucial article to read as we get ready to head into HoT. I have tried to articulate this very point on these forums but sadly my communication skills are not up to snuff. There are some things I disagree with for sure, but for the most part, I have to say I agree.

I remember when we were doing the Guild Hall CDI. I was a huge advocate of pro-rating the amount of whatever guilds had to earn in order to get basic amenities for their guild halls. For example(and this is all hypothetical), if a 100 person guild needed 100 gold to have a basic merchant at their guild hall then a 10 person guild should only need 10 gold. Smaller guilds shouldn’t be forced to pay the same 100 gold just because “that’s the way it is”. We already earn Influence at such a slower pace and really I wish that was pro-rated as well.

Before I ramble on and on, really just read this article. Devs too, please. I think it’s so important for little, tight knit, guilds to be able to thrive just as much as the “Corporation Guilds” this article addresses. And. please don’t comment til after you have read the article http://massivelyop.net/2015/04/09/massively-overthinking-the-death-of-the-mmo-guild/

I really believe this is a discussion we should all be having. Community in MMOs should not be homogenized and watered down.

Thanks for your time.

I disagree about smaller guilds having cheaper prices for guild upgrades.

The reason being is because guilds would coordinate their efforts to have members leave the guild until there is the minimum amount of players to get the cheapest price. So for example, a guild with 100 players would ask 90 members to leave and/or kick members to get the 10g price. Then after they get the upgrade all members would rejoin. Basically it’s too open for abuse.

I do understand it can be frustrating not being able to keep up with big guilds, but I think the system was designed with large guilds in mind.

^ to add to that, you got to remember that most guilds won’t be pestering their guildies for money. My approach was “hey guys, it would be nice if you left some gold in the guild bank for events and arena”, but there’s no reason why people would be forced to pay. Meaning that chances are if it’s anything money based, in a lot of guilds, no matter big or small, it would go directly from guild leader’s/ officers pockets. IN which case size influences nothing.

Charrbeque.8729:

Iason Evan.3806:

EDIT I really should have just named it “GW2 and the Death of Guilds”. The small part is something really near and dear to my heart.

This is an absolutely crucial article to read as we get ready to head into HoT. I have tried to articulate this very point on these forums but sadly my communication skills are not up to snuff. There are some things I disagree with for sure, but for the most part, I have to say I agree.

I remember when we were doing the Guild Hall CDI. I was a huge advocate of pro-rating the amount of whatever guilds had to earn in order to get basic amenities for their guild halls. For example(and this is all hypothetical), if a 100 person guild needed 100 gold to have a basic merchant at their guild hall then a 10 person guild should only need 10 gold. Smaller guilds shouldn’t be forced to pay the same 100 gold just because “that’s the way it is”. We already earn Influence at such a slower pace and really I wish that was pro-rated as well.

Before I ramble on and on, really just read this article. Devs too, please. I think it’s so important for little, tight knit, guilds to be able to thrive just as much as the “Corporation Guilds” this article addresses. And. please don’t comment til after you have read the article http://massivelyop.net/2015/04/09/massively-overthinking-the-death-of-the-mmo-guild/

I really believe this is a discussion we should all be having. Community in MMOs should not be homogenized and watered down.

Thanks for your time.

I disagree about smaller guilds having cheaper prices for guild upgrades.

The reason being is because guilds would coordinate their efforts to have members leave the guild until there is the minimum amount of players to get the cheapest price. So for example, a guild with 100 players would ask 90 members to leave and/or kick members to get the 10g price. Then after they get the upgrade all members would rejoin. Basically it’s too open for abuse.

I do understand it can be frustrating not being able to keep up with big guilds, but I think the system was designed with large guilds in mind.

Read my post above yours about 2-3 posts up. I said that it should scale as a guild grows.

Inspite of being called "Guild Wars 2, there are not enough Guild specific activities ingame. The once a week guild missions are just not enough. A lot more is needed to revitalize guilds. Hopefully the Guild Halls in the expansion will change everything for good. Finger Crossed. I really hope Anet understands the great expectations people have with the Guild Halls and designs the whole thing really well with good depth to it. This is one aspect of the expansion that MUST be a success