Quote Originally Posted by inkredble View Post
lets do some math

4. Deviant Misfits (+1) AVG: 6.6 (27) 3559650 ( 2) 59.7 ( 4) 94183.8 ( 5) 1.6 ( 5) 642.1 ( 3) 1.6 ( 4) 2362.6 ( 7) -3.9 ( 4) 376.9 ( 4) 389.2

--->>>> ACTIVITY ( 8) 44.3 ( 6) 55.7 ( 6) 65.7 ( 7) 72.0 ( 7) 78.3



lets fix activity.. say we do spring cleaning..
from activity 8,6,6,7,7
to 3,3,3,3,3

new avg: 5.1 (ROUGHLY u get my point)
i think "lowered ranked in everything else" is a little bit harsh , you have your point

Newer guilds like resilience "free bump" by 5 stats ..on activity because theyre new..
comparing to others while guild age is only ONE



and based on our experience, dm being number 1 for months before... rank #1 did not attract a lot of people but noobs joining #1 guilds which
we gladly rejected or eventually left.. the statistics doesnt attract people.. the RANK attracts noobs.
DM has not one #1 position, yet they are able to get to #1 solely due to this guild rank position. I understand that DM was number 1 for many months before, but with competition, it is not now.

Resilience is not actually a new guild but a merger of two guilds. Does that mean that a person who wants to be in the guild rank leaderboards has to suffer or find an older ranking guild name? That's a bit ridiculous.

This is not a statistic, but it is an immovable setback to every guild that does not benefit from it. If it was not an immovable setback, I would not complain as it promotes competition. So, I suggest that H2N should find a better statistic that guilds can compete in that does not have longevity as a factor.