Feedback: Guild Size

[asommers]

Some of our guilds are waaaaay too big. Hindsight is 20/20, and we should have had a guild limit initially, but we didn't, and I need to deal with this issue soon. I'd like to set a limit on guild size and am thinking of 500-1000 players max. Once we settle on the limit, you can continue to have the number of members you have now, but you will not be able to add any members (at a minimum) until your guild member count is less than the maximum size. Other limitations may occur if the player count is over the maximum guild size such as the guild not being able to participate in the Top Guilds leaderboard if over the guild size limit.

Thoughts?

-ALS

[Encryptions]

750, if guild ranking is based off the top 500 players then we should have atleast 250 slots for players who want to join the guild who have very low stats.

[InsanitrisesAL]

+1 to this remi i don't think having the most aps and active within 7 days does make the best guild ( no hate directed at anybody) say your a premium/ high end player looking for other players to run lb , timed dungeons / or even professionally farm e sunk which is mainly what people are looking for in a guild these days (5-6) yrs gm experience, these proficient players youd be looking for can be found in the top ranking guilds previously and for the most part will remain this way / IA , CU , and DM in particular have an abundance of top teir aps / leaderboard runners / and yes even sunk farmers for the more active ones , i believe guilds with 2-3 k members should have to downsize like top guilds had to before to make high lb / not just downsize but to also remove their inactives

[papas]

@asommers I dont see what's the need of making limit to a guild size. If they can handle the 1k+ members then is np. How will that benefit game community?anyway personally wouldn't hurt in anyway the guild I'm in but maybe others guild would mind.

This has nothing to do with guild lb rankings lol. @Insanityrises

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[InsanitrisesAL]

Voicing my opinion just like yourself , cheers mate

[PatD]

between 750 and 1000 is good imo

[Enetry]

+1 to this remi i don't think having the most aps and active within 7 days does make the best guild ( no hate directed at anybody) say your a premium/ high end player looking for other players to run lb , timed dungeons / or even professionally farm e sunk which is mainly what people are looking for in a guild these days (5-6) yrs gm experience, these proficient players youd be looking for can be found in the top ranking guilds previously and for the most part will remain this way / IA , CU , and DM in particular have an abundance of top teir aps / leaderboard runners / and yes even sunk farmers for the more active ones , i believe guilds with 2-3 k members should have to downsize like top guilds had to before to make high lb / not just downsize but to also remove their inactives

Yeah , Guild activity should add points and inactivity should decrease points .

[Neutrone]

750 or 800 should be alright

[Fkned]

Some of our guilds are waaaaay too big. Hindsight is 20/20, and we should have had a guild limit initially, but we didn't, and I need to deal with this issue soon. I'd like to set a limit on guild size and am thinking of 500-1000 players max. Once we settle on the limit, you can continue to have the number of members you have now, but you will not be able to add any members (at a minimum) until your guild member count is less than the maximum size. Other limitations may occur if the player count is over the maximum guild size such as the guild not being able to participate in the Top Guilds leaderboard if over the guild size limit.

Thoughts?

-ALS
Yes thoughts. Why? I am getting pms and messaging, from a certain guild, both publicly and privately, ( bet you are too now that I see this) that will remain nameless, how they dropped and my guild are nabs because of our size, and why are we on lb, etc. Took 1.5 years to build this guild to this size, and we include anyone who meets level reqs. You already made it more exclusive by counting only the top 500 players, and I get that. Keeps it a level playing field. But now because guilds allow members to leave game and come as they choose, you want to limit that?? Firstly. This is specifically targeted towards Bellum, as being the largest top 10 guild. You would be building rules of exclusion, not inclusion. How can this be good for the game? Limits on who is counted, I get. It gives a border. Limits on who can be where? Pointless. Elitist as well. Your 500 cap does exactly as intended, the number of people over that is irrelevant. My 500 members counted will have to work as well, moreso, because I allow freedom. Game is supposed to be a place to have fun, be active, enjoy. Be with your friends, even if you take a break. That builds game loyalty. That is a reason to return to this game out of the very many out there when rl intrudes, or you don't like an event. The nameless guild mentioned previous cuts after one week offline, hate to get sick or take a break... Anyway, That's the guild I built. And you are going to make me cut players to be on lb? Entity also meets over max as number one as well. And are also recruiting, as is every guild, as it always will be. I still have to draw 500 online within the week like everyone else. With more casual players as well. Because in my guild, they don't 'have' to live here in order to count. More importantly, you know what the next step will be for every one of those guilds? Get bigger. Because my guild is already there, big fat and happy, we get cut or they don't count?? This is a rule tailored for a purpose, and particular people. Not to enhance gameplay, in any shape, manner, or form.

Itsed, Master of Bellum

[Fkned]

If a concern is about a single guild becoming one giant superstore btw, and must add a limit, I don't believe you are thinking high enough at 1k. Letal was over that previously, as a top lb guild, and nobody complained, or felt they monopolized the game. The purpose of the lb change was to remove the stagnation. Not form it in another direction. 1250-1500 is where imo you should be at a max if you must implement at all. By nature, big guilds are active, and activity is the point I believe. It allows room to take and build new players,+keep alts in the guild you wish to be in as well.
Itsed, Master of Bellum

[Yennah]

Thoughts? Why do we worry about guild size? Why are we setting limit? What is the purpose if you already set the requirement for guild ranking? Top 500 active players. So... why do we even have to limit the number of players in a guild and include it in the requirements to be in lb? Just because some guilds are waaaaay too big? So what? People are free to choose whichever guild they want to settle in. In our guild, people come and go. They are free. How is "sorry our guild is full sound to you? Please think about this carefully. Because for some players, it's unfair.

[Dummluck]

Disagree to this because it only ranks top 500
Size is irrelevant, set a cap at 10k like most things in game
Being in a huge guild means have huge activity
30-50 Legends always online, 100+ During birthday event
This would crush our community we work so hard to build
Guilds shouldn't have to down size, to meet requirements

[Empressfury]

Some of our guilds are waaaaay too big. Hindsight is 20/20, and we should have had a guild limit initially, but we didn't, and I need to deal with this issue soon. I'd like to set a limit on guild size and am thinking of 500-1000 players max. Once we settle on the limit, you can continue to have the number of members you have now, but you will not be able to add any members (at a minimum) until your guild member count is less than the maximum size. Other limitations may occur if the player count is over the maximum guild size such as the guild not being able to participate in the Top Guilds leaderboard if over the guild size limit.

Thoughts?

-ALS


Bellum has been dealing with all sorts of bullying since the new leaderboard, people have a problem with such a large guild being on leaderboard. "No names" but we all see them complaining about it.

If sts submits to the whining then we will simply see it really isn't a fair system. Size should be a choice, we just have different waves of active peeps. And we have the pros, we have the noobs, and we have all ages from kids to elderly here, and even special needs people here. We are the melting pot of Arlor if you ask me.

The thing about guilds is they should be inclusive-its 2023 yall. Bellum is a family type guild. We have all types of people, and all types of gamers. The guild that would be targeted by a size cap would be Bellum. It appears to me, that not only are we being targeted by jealous players, but now also the devs? Please tell me how that's not what happening here.

[papas]

I really like the way how descent the members/gm of top guilds posting their opinion. Idk who are those that bullying these guild holding atm top spots or if it really happened, but to be clear noone from CU is one of them. Feel that I need to say this cause maybe some think that previous rank1 guild would be the ones.
We don't care abt guild lb. rank1 came naturally through just playing a game while having fun.
As I mentioned I don't mind abt size of guild, but sinse they add a reward on rank1 there should be some limits.
Maybe u can consider that sts just removed guild lb cause in its previous form it was easily broken by ppl dummy farming and bottling hauntlet. We saw ppl got 3-7days banned cause that reason in the past.
And this new lb is a mini weekly event.
Idk if this would make u guys feel any better.
Anyway guilds are the same no matter algorythm of lb has changed. Cu wasn't better than entity before and ain't worse guild now.
Cheers





Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Soimienn]

The new guild member cap discussion is ridiculous. The 500 that makes the Ap list will have to work as hard no matter how many members a guild have (given both guilds have 500 players). If two teams have a starting lineup and a full bench. Why should it matter that one of the teams have 150 more club members that does not cut it to match day. It’s so wird that the argument “they have more players” holds any ground at all when the point system is based on a limited amount of players🤦*♂️🤦*♂️🤦*♂️🤦*♂️

[Jadedunicorn]

Why restricte guild number what do you think it's going to achieve the lb has been adjusted and even with this restricted guild allowance inplace its not going to affect the current lb standing .
Why are u pandering to some of the old stale guild who think that it's there right to be on top as that's how it's been for the last 10 years . Now this new system is in place they been left judged and found inadequate that's there fault not sts they sould have been more open and let fresh blood in from start . It's there fault there guild are low in numbers as they closed the doors keeping there guild small . Now there crying about guild numbers they have always been allowed to have as many as they wanted in guild they just refuse to let ppl in . Now they want to have restrictions put on guild who open there doors for anyone allowed ppl in and now have mass numbers .
So don't place restrictions on guild numbers now there no point it won't change the new lb in anyway at all

[InsanitrisesAL]

This isn't about targeting any particular guild to you guys complaining but i will say the majority of complaints about this discussion are due to the fact that it would no longer benifit you / yall / your guild ect , thats all ty

[Dummluck]

Again this will not effect LB standings, so it does not effect our ranking
This effects our community in which we built to be the most active guild in AL
What this does is make us remove 750+ members to be evaluated for LB
It's cutting our community in half, imagine telling half your guild goodbye
Tbh you couldn't imagine that bc majority of guild only have 200-600 members
Instead of setting a cap, why not accept the new system and start recruiting
Over time Majority of guilds will have 500+ members to be evaluated for LB

[asommers]

This isn't an attack on anyone's guild, the issue is the larger the guild, the higher the overhead required when doing anything with it or its members.

If I didn't have a penalty (restricting adds or removing from top guilds), the guild size wouldn't change which defeats the purpose.

Looks like if we're counting 500 members for top guild, doubling that for total members would be fair. This may be moot anyway, I can probably do some internal analysis to see what guild counts look like if we removed any non-officers from the guild that hasn't logged in in 30d, 60d, 90d, etc.

-ALS

[papas]

Lvl cap for aps to be counted is still 40+?
There are few ppl that joins a guild with low lvl alt just to chat/merch so maybe those can be excluded of guild members cap?


Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Fkned]

This isn't an attack on anyone's guild, the issue is the larger the guild, the higher the overhead required when doing anything with it or its members.

If I didn't have a penalty (restricting adds or removing from top guilds), the guild size wouldn't change which defeats the purpose.

Looks like if we're counting 500 members for top guild, doubling that for total members would be fair. This may be moot anyway, I can probably do some internal analysis to see what guild counts look like if we removed any non-officers from the guild that hasn't logged in in 30d, 60d, 90d, etc.

-ALS
Isn't that exactly what old lb did, showed.activity at x days? So you know those numbers. The issue I have with this, is this-
Inactive players do lb no good, that's what people complained about, and you fixed it. And tbh I don't care if they help lb or not. Nor do they affect other guilds.
It's plain as the nose on the face, that at 75% activity in a 30 day span, my guild currently runs over a 1000 members active every month, here's my issue. On a very regular basis, someone who has been gone a while, comes back, and says, haven't been on in a while, what's going on, what's new, etc etc, says hi to peeps, and gets back into the flow of the game. And they can ask that question where they were, and still be a part of what they were, with the people they knew, when they stopped playing, and mostly inevitably, return.
If you wish to halt further recruitment due to your maintenance or management issues, that's fine Freeze us. Inevitable attrition will lower numbers, and I will trim as needed, but penalizing the active by removing lb status is unfair, to say the least.
Is there a way for u to tag an inactive member as such, to put to the side let's say, together yet apart, so maintenance doesn't have to be done with them? We know it affects lb zero, if they aren't on rn they dont count. Tbh I would be content with removing say, 90 day+ inactive, if I knew the first thing they saw when returning was an automatic invite to return to the guild they were removed from due to game mechanics.. Three months is nothing. It's summer school, it's a newborn, divorce, sickness, it's...life.
Show a guild count overall, show active status, inactive status at x number, pigeonhole the inactive, where they go into a pile and no maintenance needs to be done to them til they dust off the character and log in? Had a member have a baby, told me he was going to be gone an uncertain amount of time, had no idea when or if he would return... I told him he would still be here when he returned. He did. Six months later. Shared his stories, with his friends, with what to him, online at least, were his friends. We are a family guild, and act that way. Find a way to do that, and I will happily trim 90 day inactive, if I had a place to put them, besides out on the street. Cuz that's not good for my guild, or the game. Imagine it's you, logged in after you just been gone a while for whatever reason, years long player to find yourself being noplace once again, like a nab.
Yes I've cut people. Thousands, literally. Doesn't mean that a player who has years invested in the game, is og and op, should just be tossed. I'll say it again. 1k isn't enough. Letal was that plus of active, I am over 1k of active. I know of several other guilds that are over that as well. Raise it. Please. As much as you can and allow reasonable maintenance. Or find a way to separate them without cutting them. Off my soapbox now.

[Fkned]

Btw, trim 90 day inactive through the game with an auto invite to return to where they were and yes, I will shut up ��

[Zerowilder]

Why should there be a guild limit? Guilds have always been about being the biggest and 'best' putting a cap on guilds is unfair to all players who want to participate but cant because they're forced to leave or can't join.

The reason people are asking for a guild cap is from pure jealousy of the success of other big guilds who have worked extremely hard for what they have achieved.

I say let the players choose and let them decide which guild they want, as we're the ones playing the game, its been this way for years and all of a sudden a few players cry and now its a topic.

All the best

[Zerowilder]

Isn't that the whole point of a guild to be the biggest and best?

[Drvilli]

Some people may know me as a long time officer of Bellum. Myself and many others have put in countless hours of our time to make our guild what it is, capping it at 1k or even less would spoil the spirit that made us big as we are. We have people who do seasonal lbs, event lbs, evg lbs, you name it, we do it, because our guild environment is friendly and warm with no requirements on their time. We are people who play because we truly enjoy the concept of this game, play with whoever you want, whenever you want and do whatever you want. Only the top 500 aps get counted and activity. Previously high lb guilds horded high score players only, makes game play feel like a job, you must earn you spot, you must grind all day, ect. We are huge, no arguments, but we dont have all the requirements others do on how to spend their time.

[Oawaoebi]

Why did you guys reworked it? Keeping the old style just changing the requirements of being level 40+ and last 7 days online would have totally fixed it and removed dead guilds from the lb . Add some borders to kdrs so people who dummy farm don’t have an advantage.


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[Glixr]

If the goal is more activity in AL, shouldn't the metrics measured be each guild's APs achieved that week and total hours spent playing maps and events? And additional points for current week's total event banners and badges and lb winners? I think your list would look very different if we measure what playing actually occurred each week versus tabulating APs up to 10 years old.

This new system rewards historical achievement, not current activity. Any guild who recruits players with lots of historical APs will rise to the top, not the guild with the most dedicated players grinding every day and building community.

To choose 500 players as the pool to be evaluated seems an odd choice to me when only 2 of the 50 leaderboard guilds come close to fulfilling that requirement. Are there even enough active players currently running AL to fill 50 guilds to 500 players? Again, if increased gaming activity is the goal, why not make the calculation pool requirement a set number of hours for each character or account running Arlor maps or events rather than such an arbitrary number of guild members? There are tons of players afk for hours and even days in towns, houses and guildhalls all over the game; players just logging in or those sitting idle mean nothing to the guild or our community.

It is those players actually playing this great game every day for hours that builds friendships and great guilds that last. Those great guilds that work hard and earn the love of their players and last for years will continue to thrive because of those bonds, regardless of where they land on this leaderboard. I hope you rethink what you're actually rewarding with this new calculation method, because it certainly isn't anything that matters if we want to have 50 active guilds having fun and attracting and retaining new players every day.

[Immortal_Blood]

2.5k max, big guilds in AL is cool

[Amistletoe]

Adding a limit in guild size sounds like a good idea. It might be better if the guildmaster itself be the one to add a guild cap (like an additional feature that only the gm can execute where he/she can set the guild cap to a particular number or disable it if he/she don’t want to add a limit). Again, players are free to choose what guild they want to join for as long as they meet the requirements of the guild that they will be joining and the guild itself can accommodate and is pleased to have them.

[Nocturnus]

I have a question regarding the size and player count for Lb.
If a guild has 1k players, is it more likely to have 500 or more players online than a guild with only 500 players?
Because the new algorithm would mainly count online players.
I mean should the limit be 500 if the count for Lb is 500?
To make it more equitable.

[Encryptions]

I have a question regarding the size and player count for Lb.
If a guild has 1k players, is it more likely to have 500 or more players online than a guild with only 500 players?
Because the new algorithm would mainly count online players.
I mean should the limit be 500 if the count for Lb is 500?
To make it more equitable.

Guild activity, it would only count 500 of the highest ap players online, it wouldn't really chance lb much since lb is more about activity than what people have individually imo.
If it was about what people have then they wouldn't do the 1 week in the guild to count towards aps thing. Lb should just be based on the most active guilds having the most players online, no one really cares about what others have, we are all normal people behind phone screens at the end of the day.
Rather be in an active guild with new / decent players than an inactive guild with old pros. Having a 1k limit would be nice. There won't be guild rules like "must be active every day and have x aps to stay". They will have 500 extra people to rely on.

Sent from my Phone using Tapatalk

[Nocturnus]

What I mean is, it is more likely to have 500 players online in a guild of 1k players, than in a guild of 500 players.
In that case they should make the Lb in 1k of players the same as the limit in 1k, or simpler 500 for Lb and 500 maximum.

[Angelaxd]

put 500 maximum, so there will be more guilds competing and guilds will not stagnate with 700 dead players and top 20 or something like that

[Immortal_Blood]

put 500 maximum, so there will be more guilds competing and guilds will not stagnate with 700 dead players and top 20 or something like that

no, i disagree , sorry.

- 2.5k allowed.

ALS, make script that removes inactive members then house mails them which triggers a guild invite when they open it.

also, I guess it could say, "welcome back, you've been gone a while and so you have been removed from <guild>. An invitation to join back has been sent, check alerts."

- kinda Baron's idea; evolved. lol

[Angelaxd]

no, i disagree , sorry.

- 2.5k allowed.

ALS, make script that removes inactive members then house mails them which triggers a guild invite when they open it.

also, I guess it could say, "welcome back, you've been gone a while and so you have been removed from <guild>. An invitation to join back has been sent, check alerts."

- kinda Baron's idea; evolved. lol

why do you want so many? nor that everyone played

[Immortal_Blood]

why do you want so many? nor that everyone played

1. Because me and some friends spent a long time recruiting players to the guild

2. Because a guild member limit of 500 will mean nobody can join nor recruit players into my guild, because I'm not kicking anyone and I'm the only officer, unless of course a script as mentioned above is added to which point the entire guild will probably be deleted XD

[Angelaxd]

1. Because me and some friends spent a long time recruiting players to the guild

2. Because a guild member limit of 500 will mean nobody can join nor recruit players into my guild, because I'm not kicking anyone and I'm the only officer, unless of course a script as mentioned above is added to which point the entire guild will probably be deleted XD

It is not mandatory that you recruit more than 2000 people, it is not necessary that you put the whole community in your guild, months go by and the more you recruit others will leave or die for months and years in the guild, only take out those who have been inactive for a long time and put new

[Oakmaiden]

300-500 seems more than enough. A guild master should know who is in their guild. A smaller size will encourage removing inactive players in favor of active ppl. An auto remove after 90 days to save time going through the list.

Other games I play have caps. Auto replace inactive guild master to next high ranking player.
I’ve been in 1k+ member guilds and 200 member guilds. All had about the same amount of ppl online at any moment... 20-50 ppl at most.

One guild had 100+ afk officers...

[papas]

Sinse u wanna do a penalty to oversized guilds u can maybe do a random count between all active members to get those 500 for aps count? Or maybe max members to be counted will be 450.
They don't deserve of being totally disqualified from lb.
Idk if this can work in any way. For sure they will lose their max possible rank points, and will get a much lower total aps.
Just a thought not sure if it's OK for entity and bellum

Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Hexame]

+1 Making it 500 - 800 seems fair enough

[Monelgr]

l agree 750 players as a limit cuz rn we have many guilds with 1k+ players and they are top 10 guild rank is not fair for the lb players and those guilds are lagging in social - Guild when you scroll down to see the members

[forgeyt]

750 <3

Sent from my M2101K6G using Tapatalk

[Fkned]

l agree 750 players as a limit cuz rn we have many guilds with 1k+ players and they are top 10 guild rank is not fair for the lb players and those guilds are lagging in social - Guild when you scroll down to see the members

750 too small, at least three of the top ten are over or at that already. System already being adapted to, making it that small just messes up what people have been working on for four months already. Hopefully asommers as mentioned, makes this a moot point and guild size won't matter. If not, guild cap should be minimum of triple the weekly lb qualification. If lb were monthly I would say double. Logging in isn't a job, and requiring people to do so to stay in a guild every week is not beneficial to the game imo. What happens there is when peeps do break from it, they know they are coming back to basically having to make all new friends/find new environment again, this game strongly social and that's a large factor.
Also,events like Easter bring people back to the game, where they left it.


Itsed, Master of Bellum

[papas]

750 too small, at least three of the top ten are over or at that already. System already being adapted to, making it that small just messes up what people have been working on for four months already. Hopefully asommers as mentioned, makes this a moot point and guild size won't matter. If not, guild cap should be minimum of triple the weekly lb qualification. If lb were monthly I would say double. Logging in isn't a job, and requiring people to do so to stay in a guild every week is not beneficial to the game imo. What happens there is when peeps do break from it, they know they are coming back to basically having to make all new friends/find new environment again, this game strongly social and that's a large factor.
Also,events like Easter bring people back to the game, where they left it.


Itsed, Master of BellumIf u see activity of guilds, u can see that only 3 out of top 50guilds have max(500) members to be count for lb. You are the minority. I'm not saying that its a bad thing. Sinse u wanna run ur guild that way is up to u.
Imo size of guild limit should be 500 and 80% of that(400) should be counted for guild lb. Even then most of guilds won't hit max members to be count for aps.


Στάλθηκε από το LDN-L21 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

[Angelaxd]

750 too small, at least three of the top ten are over or at that already. System already being adapted to, making it that small just messes up what people have been working on for four months already. Hopefully asommers as mentioned, makes this a moot point and guild size won't matter. If not, guild cap should be minimum of triple the weekly lb qualification. If lb were monthly I would say double. Logging in isn't a job, and requiring people to do so to stay in a guild every week is not beneficial to the game imo. What happens there is when peeps do break from it, they know they are coming back to basically having to make all new friends/find new environment again, this game strongly social and that's a large factor.
Also,events like Easter bring people back to the game, where they left it.


Itsed, Master of Bellum

You speak for your benefit since there are almost 2 thousand in your guild, the most acceptable should be 700-800 (this way there will be more guilds and they will keep their popularity high by being active and good players

[Deadsuperman]

Dam putting guilds in a box now, is this america?
Het... diis is communi.... ahiimm i mean dis is Russia [emoji635] lol... well if we're not fee to pack who we want where. If I had to pick within the given parameters of the post that's ez 1k. 500 is short even my dead guild can reach that within a month, and that's not even intensely trying. If you pick 750 your doing it to mess with my ocd and in that case.... I don't know who you are. I don't know what you want. If you are looking for ransom I can tell you I don't have money, but what I do have are a very particular set of skills...

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk