Showing Posts For culturespy.1324:
In an effort to reduce the flaming and ‘toxicity’ I started searching for unfarmed megaservers, then offering a taxi for those wanting to finish their Living Story.
That’s so backwards.
But it is a much better solution than trolling and I intend to help if I can.
I’ve seen people looking to finish LS stumble across a farming map on accident and catch a ton of rage and I don’t like it at all, but I understand why: the cooperative farm maps have been disrupted by trolls time and time again, always with the excuse that they’re “just there to finish the event”. You can see it in the screenshots that started this thread. It gets old fast.
I didn’t participate in Blix farming, but from what I’ve read, it’s the same few people. I’ve also heard they’re active in EotM. These people are the catalyst that turns this whole situation “toxic”. If not for these trolls being purposefully disruptive, the community would find a way to make everyone happy.
This conflict demonstrates the problem with vigilantes: They’re often worse than the problems they claim to solve.
If the people trying to disrupt these event farms really believed they were making the game better then I could understand their self-righteousness even if I didn’t agree with it. But what I’ve seen is clearly trolling and totally indefensible.
…..
(ObGW2) I think that “play how you want” should include some form of “farming” as part of an array of activities requiring various levels of engagement and time commitment. There’s two axes there, and all quadrants serve a purpose, to someone, some of the time. If people have a desire to farm, give them something to farm and you’ll find other events less abused and the community less divided.
While I’m at it, I really miss Boss Blitz. That was just about the perfect event, all it needed was to help players self-organize a little better so they wouldn’t have to resort to voip to coordinate.
Proposal Overview
Add “Societies” to the game – a new type of guild-like organization focused on providing services via subscription.
Goal of Proposal
- Provide a way for players to engage with their favorite community leaders
– Relieve guilds of the need to function as service providers
– Support social play by not forcing players to choose between friends and activities
– Pave the way for, but not absolutely require, one-guild-per-player, if desired
Proposal Functionality
A society would resemble a guild, with a membership roster, hierarchy, and possibly shared storage. However the roster would be much smaller, as low as 20 members. These members would function as a sort of executive board for the society.
Players wishing to interact with the society would be able to “pledge” to it. This pledge would function as a subscription, enabling a player to receive broadcast announcements from the executive board. When the board of a society wants to organize an event they could send a broadcast to their subscriber base. Other proposed guild features, such as an events calendar, may also apply here.
Pledging to a society would be voluntary on the part of the player and able to be revoked at any time. The mechanism for Pledging would depend on a player action like joining a squad, rather than an invitation sent from the board as with a guild.
When the pledges of a society gather on a map with members of the board to do events, the society would get some sort of credit for the success of the event. The society credit would function a lot like influence and merits, and societies would be able buy a lot of the same sort of upgrades.
Representation would be separate from guilds. Pledges might not even need to represent their society. Their presence on the same map as a board member could signal to the system that they are participating in a society function. The board members would still need to choose which society they wish to represent at a given event, so that the game knows which society to assign credit to, should they be on more than one board.
The board should have access to a list of their pledges. They would need the ability to tag, label, sort, and/or categorize pledges. This would be used to help the board when scouting out new talent, designating which pledges are able to serve as team leaders, flagging players as needing additional assistance, or flagging players for disruptive behavior. This information should be private to the board.
Associated Risks
All of the risks of inter-player communication: trolling, harassment, spam. This would be self-limiting, as pledges who feel that a society’s messages are unwanted could easily revoke their pledge and find or found a new society whose communication style they prefer.
The board may need a way to kick a pledge from the society.
Large guilds may feel their responsibilities being encroached on or feel pressured to also form a society for their guild.
It may prove difficult to sort out which society gets credit if multiple societies are present on a map for an event. Perhaps go by the total number of pledges present for each society.
Players may not initially understand the difference between a guild and a society.
Some guilds may already have “society” in their name, which could lead to confusion.
As essentially a new system, there would be a lot of front and back end code and UI changes, with all the risks associated with software development.
(edited by culturespy.1324)
1) What is currently a part of being in a guild that can’t be taken away, and why would it be bad to take it away?
2) Is there anything that is currently part of being in a guild that could be taken away and given to a more focused guild association? What could we do to mitigate some of the negativity of taking away current functionality? For example replace it on all guilds or enhance it for the one guild that it is tied to?
3) What kind of features are there that don’t even exist yet that would really only make sense with a more fixed association with a single guild?
(I’m a member of a large PvX guild, but in this post I don’t speak for them.)
1) Cannot be taken away:
Group identity
Sense of belonging
Communications
Leadership structure
2) Can be moved to some other kind of organization:
Rewards and bonuses
Allegiance to favorite WvW commanders
Access to guild-specific content (guild missions)
Access to other content (more on this below)
3) Can only be done with one-guild-per-player:
A declaration of War between two guilds
Alignment with some sort of faction system
….
The #2 question sounds like it’s hinting at some sort of higher order player-run organizational structure that might work like TTS, TxS, and GW2Community – larger groups that organize world boss fights but don’t require constant representation.
That sort of organization doesn’t necessarily have to be done by guilds, but it’s a fact that certain people out there have the leadership qualities (and cat-herding abilities) it takes to get people in stacks, in teams, into maps, and get those fights done. Likewise, some commanders in WvW are better than others and thus develop a following. For the people standing on those tags, membership in the guild isn’t an identity, it’s a subscription to a certain type of in-game experience. And just like in real life, it would be nice to be able to continue to maintain more than one subscription as a part of having more than one hobby.
In this line of thinking, “subscription” implies it’s something the player chooses to maintain as long as they enjoy doing so, as opposed to guild membership which is more of a two-way street where people have to worry about the possibility of being gkicked for inactivity, failure to rep, or whatever. I may flesh this idea out more for another post.
I’m certain that some guilds would oppose having their focus and scope changed because their basic identity rests on being able to provide these experiences for players, and the leaders feel very rewarded by the trust (and power) they’re given. Taking all the (2) items away, leaving them with just (1) turns a guild into a mere social club. Maybe that’s for the best, I don’t know.
I also worry that if we were restricted to one guild per character or per account without some kind of alternative for organization, we’d have a situation like what we had in GW1 where you might be a part of a great faction farm guild but have trouble finding elite-zone speed clear groups, etc.. Guilds will specialize to retain and motivate members, but members will then be abandoning other types of content.
Just whisper yourself. It works.
That’s what I do now, but it’s a bit inconvenient. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the only way to begin a whisper with yourself is to /w and then type your own name.
Yep, but you can type your shortest character name.
Thanks, that’s a good tip. Should help a bit. Would still like to have /party of one for maximum convenience.
I find it more convenient now to use the preview out of the wardrobe. Except upcoming datamined items everything should be in there, no?
But what about waypoints?
Just whisper yourself. It works.
That’s what I do now, but it’s a bit inconvenient. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the only way to begin a whisper with yourself is to /w and then type your own name.
If you have a private bank guild and you’re representing that guild, you might try “/g” for guild chat.
That would work, but some guilds are pretty strict about 24/7 representation outside of cities. I’d rather have a direct solution than a workaround. Thanks for the suggestion though.
This could be a great addition to the new event compass, but geared towards veteran players. Instead of a drop-down, change the selection of what sort of things you want in the compass into check boxes and add a “world bosses” category.
Thanks!
Instead of “no one hears you” (or whatever the message is, exactly, I forget), can it please just pretend that a solo player is a “party of one”? That way, I could copy-paste chat codes to myself without using /w, /s, or worse, /m. Or maybe even do both – echo my message to me and also warn me that I’m alone.
Thanks.
Yes please, build templates in all game modes. Thank you!
Maybe even go as far as a full “inspect” system, so you could just right click someone and see exactly what they have equipped, right down to the dyes, so you could replicate their look and build if you wanted.
Obvious problems with this idea:
- “Zerk only” groups would find enforcement easier, but maybe that’s not really a problem. If that’s not how you play, maybe you should just avoid those groups.
- In WvW you wouldn’t want the enemy to inspect you.
- In PvP you might not even want friendlies to inspect you, so as to keep your secret recipe to yourself.
Being a part of a template should prevent a piece of gear from being accidentally destroyed, sold, salvaged, etc.. Maybe even move template gear into a special kind of non-bag (account-wide, for legendary sharing?) storage.
I’d like to revise and amend my remarks regarding difficulties imposed on large guilds by Megaserver.
Others have proposed solutions to the server community / identity, RP, and language issues. The following should not be incompatible with any of those ideas.
Problem
Because Megaserver is trying to keep instances as full as possible, a large guild that could max out an instance by itself will have a hard time getting together. Guilds have been trying to solve the problem themselves by using the party system to ferry people into one instance, but for popular content the instances become hard capped quickly. It’s also very inconvenient and time consuming.
Even with the “sorting hat” features – it’s unclear if those have been added yet – Megaserver can never know ahead of time whether a member of such a guild is just there to solo, or if the rest of the guild will be on their way shortly. It can’t read minds. What we need is some way to tell it when we’re ready to be grouped together.
Proposal
Guild officers should be given a button that instructs Megaserver to begin a consolidation process. This would create a new instance of the officer’s current map and offer each guild member from other instances a ferry to the new guild instance. The guild instance should be exclusive to guild members for a short period of time – just long enough to accept the ferry and port in. After that, the guild instance joins Megaserver’s pool of available instances for anyone to join according to the whims of the sorting hat. Guild members who are late to the event would either be sorted in by the sorting hat or would have to ask to be ferried in by party, but the bulk of the guild would be united quickly and easily.
I would hope that if there has to be a price tag on accessing the guild-instance button it would be a one time cost. It can’t have a long cooldown or a high price tag per use or it would be useless.
In case the creation of extra instances really is a problem from a server cost standpoint, note that it’s likely a net gain of zero instances. By consolidating a guild onto their own instance, you vacate the other instances that probably would have become hard capped anyway.
Megaserver is ruining the community on SoR and making it impossible to organize large guild events.
I feel sorry for the Anet people who are going to have to spend their whole weekend with the itching thought in the back of their head “Man, I’m going to be buried in email when I get back to the office.” Don’t roll out big patches right before your long weekend, guys!