Discussion - Should Guild Age Be A Guild Rank Criteria?

[H2N]

There have been several requests to include the guild age as an additional ranking criteria in the Top 50 Guild Ranking list. We would like to get your input on this idea. Please keep the discussion civil.

To help with the discussion, here is what the April-30-2014 Top 50 Guild Ranking list would look like if guild age was included as an additional ranking criteria. It indicates how each guild's final ranking would change. It also includes each guild's rank in the guild age ranking category, as well as each guild's founding date in GMT. Again, please keep the discussion civil.

*edit*: See this post for middle ground proposal based on the feedback.

*edit*: We are going to implement the middle ground proposal.

1. Deviant Misfits (4 -> 1 = +3) 20130116-001425 (15)
2. Epitome Of Silentkill (3 -> 2 = +1) 20130504-110232 (29)
3. Resilience (1 -> 3 = -2) 20140327-172948 (50)
4. Magnum (2 -> 4 = -2) 20140105-170955 (48)
5. Chosen (5 -> 5 = 0) 20140104-050757 (47)
6. Chivalrous Union (7 -> 6 = +1) 20130105-030633 (13)
7. Republika (6 -> 7 = -1) 20140316-191044 (49)
8. Mastermind Ph (8 -> 8 = 0) 20130403-165920 (23)
9. Eminence (9 -> 9 = 0) 20130618-111727 (34)
10. Farmers Inc (10 -> 10 = 0) 20130604-022544 (32)
11. Elite Runners (12 -> 11 = +1) 20130412-150622 (27)
12. Pheonix (11 -> 12 = -1) 20130607-110649 (33)
13. Immaculate (13 -> 13 = 0) 20130328-092607 (22)
14. Republic Of Indonesia (15 -> 14 = +1) 20121223-104940 (10)
15. Trickster (14 -> 15 = -1) 20130920-191758 (43)
16. Helden Von Heute (16 -> 16 = 0) 20130107-232843 (14)
17. Darksiders (18 -> 17 = +1) 20121218-010112 (9)
18. Garuda Indonesia (19 -> 18 = +1) 20121103-091325 (1)
19. Alte Garde (17 -> 19 = -2) 20130217-121234 (17)
20. Indonesia Elite (20 -> 20 = 0) 20121204-013215 (7)
21. Mythic Revenge (21 -> 21 = 0) 20130919-105739 (42)
22. Crisis Of Faith (22 -> 22 = 0) 20130123-132742 (16)
23. Insomnia (23 -> 23 = 0) 20130102-012953 (11)
24. Legends Of Russia (24 -> 24 = 0) 20130407-110053 (25)
25. The Commandos Elite (26 -> 25 = +1) 20130409-035534 (26)
26. Pinoy Rules (25 -> 26 = -1) 20131111-125252 (46)
27. 21 Jump Street (27 -> 27 = 0) 20130514-082003 (30)
28. Philippines Allstar (29 -> 28 = +1) 20130326-012804 (21)
29. Crime Sorciere (30 -> 29 = +1) 20121203-044514 (6)
30. Team Philippines (28 -> 30 = -2) 20130625-053816 (37)
31. Korea (32 -> 31 = +1) 20121104-052308 (2)
32. Polish Legends (34 -> 32 = +2) 20121118-100508 (3)
33. Philippines Finest (37 -> 33 = +4) 20121205-195748 (8)
34. Italian Legends (38 -> 34 = +4) 20121129-012153 (5)
35. Uroboros (31 -> 35 = -4) 20131102-120145 (45)
36. Legenden Sterben Nie (33 -> 36 = -3) 20130321-144031 (20)
37. Black Dragon (36 -> 37 = -1) 20130404-112302 (24)
38. The Lost Immortals (35 -> 38 = -3) 20130818-090316 (41)
39. Indonesian Legend (41 -> 39 = +2) 20130218-173655 (18)
40. Twisted Bastards (39 -> 40 = -1) 20130703-124315 (38)
41. Mundo Misterioso (40 -> 41 = -1) 20130418-023547 (28)
42. Culto Arcano (43 -> 42 = +1) 20121127-013813 (4)
43. So Br Brasil (42 -> 43 = -1) 20130618-141909 (35)
44. Usa Wolfpac (46 -> 44 = +2) 20130102-053850 (12)
45. Heirs Of Grace (44 -> 45 = -1) 20130712-153146 (40)
46. Trinity Knights (45 -> 46 = -1) 20130921-043117 (44)
47. Dirty Dozen (48 -> 47 = +1) 20130301-021036 (19)
48. Indonesian Brotherhood (47 -> 48 = -1) 20130619-180526 (36)
49. Brotherhood Legends (49 -> 49 = 0) 20130526-211428 (31)
50. Dark Legends Elite (50 -> 50 = 0) 20130705-204241 (39)

[Zeus]

I don't think so because this is a stat that nobody can compete with. Thus, you are basically awarding guilds that have been around for all 52 weeks on the guild leaderboards a permanent #1 or #2 position.

[H2N]

Avg Rank value for the top 5 with guild age ranking.

DM 7.1
EoS 7.4
Resilience 7.8
Magnum 7.9
Chosen 9.4

[Zeus]

Additionally, if this becomes a stat, here's what will happen:

1. To compete with it, people will just xfer guild members to an older guild. I have the possibility to do that and I know many others as well.
2. Existing guilds will be essentially given #1 or #2 without working for it. Then, to compete, what I stated in #1 will happen because it's the only way to compete.

I already disagree with account age, but that's manipulable because you can recruit both old and new players. With guild age, you cannot do anything except what I suggested in #1.

Thus, this becoming a stat would promote guild selling as people in the leaderboards will want to get their hand on the oldest guild that they can.

[Thrindal]

I agree with Zeus, while my guilds overall rank didn't change at all I don't think old guilds should get an automatic advantage. Newer guilds, almost by default, will be more active overall and thus more deserving of a higher rank. I think old guilds would prefer this because it offsets their higher inactivity instead of weeding out the inactives.

[Zeus]

I agree with Zeus, while my guilds overall rank didn't change at all I don't think old guilds should get an automatic advantage. Newer guilds, almost by default, will be more active overall and thus more deserving of a higher rank. I think old guilds would prefer this because it offsets their higher inactivity instead of weeding out the inactives.

This!

[UndeadJudge]

Additionally, if this becomes a stat, here's what will happen:

1. To compete with it, people will just xfer guild members to an older guild. I have the possibility to do that and I know many others as well.
2. Existing guilds will be essentially given #1 or #2 without working for it. Then, to compete, what I stated in #1 will happen because it's the only way to compete.

I already disagree with account age, but that's manipulable because you can recruit both old and new players. With guild age, you cannot do anything except what I suggested in #1.

Thus, this becoming a stat would promote guild selling as people in the leaderboards will want to get their hand on the oldest guild that they can.

I agree.

Also, the top guild stats are based on players skill - Achievement Points, KD ratios, etc. If age were implemented, it would sort of get rid of the whole idea of a "top guild".

Not to mention, Zeus is certainly right - some very old guilds exist with 1 member. It's easily manipulable to transfer everyone to that guild.

[Zeus]

I agree.

Also, the top guild stats are based on players skill - Achievement Points, KD ratios, etc. If age were implemented, it would sort of get rid of the whole idea of a "top guild".

Not to mention, Zeus is certainly right - some very old guilds exist with 1 member. It's easily manipulable to transfer everyone to that guild.

Yup, leaderboards would then be "longest guild" assuming that others are just as competitive in the other 15 categories.

[D.AL]

I agree with the including guild age.

[chiqui2go]

Newer guilds wouldn't have a chance to compete. And yeah, members are definitely going to transfer.
Thanks for the post guys!

[Cmrel]

Hands down


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Morholt]

Not in favor, for many of the reasons already stated. It's just going to be a bunch of guild transferring.

[inkredible]

Additionally, if this becomes a stat, here's what will happen:

1. To compete with it, people will just xfer guild members to an older guild. I have the possibility to do that and I know many others as well.
2. Existing guilds will be essentially given #1 or #2 without working for it. Then, to compete, what I stated in #1 will happen because it's the only way to compete.
.

given without working for it? establishing a guild for that long isnt work?
one year standing guilds are plain hard work while the newer guilds just filled with inviting powerful people.. and thats even less work

- edited

[H2N]

Please keep the discussion civil everyone.

[inkredible]

I agree.

it would sort of get rid of the whole idea of a "top guild".

Not to mention, Zeus is certainly right - some very old guilds exist with 1 member. It's easily manipulable to transfer everyone to that guild.

if they added guild age.. if would be 1/16 meaning , containing 6% of the other ranks , ur guild age .. same with account age wouldnt matter much if
14/16 of your rank beats most guild ... it doesnt really get rid of the whole idea of a top guild , Your guild is old and still made it to the top 50? well gratz master for keeping ur guild in pretty good dam shape and the members in it... this is debatable really

i could easily say pvp/ pve kdr "get rid of the whole idea of top guild" having good KDR doesnt mean youre good or your guild contains a lot of people who are good.. alot of people kill farm.. atleast being oldest guild isnt cheated and it is a credit for maintaining their guild for a long time.

[Zeus]

given without working for it? LOL keeping Deviant Misfits one of the oldest top 5 guilds.. you think establishing a guild for that long isnt work?
one year standing guilds are plain hard work while the newer guilds just filled with inviting powerful people.. and thats even less work

Yes, without working for it. This was a statistic that you never had to work for unlike other statistics. You were granted it and just so happen to get lucky. As H2N said, just keep it civil and there shouldn't be any issues.

As I explained before in post #4, oldest guild is easily cheated and encourages an entirely new type of play.

Lastly, as you can see, by adding this statistic alone, DM was able to jump 3 places to the #1 position despite being considerably lower ranked in everything else. Although all statistics are the same weight, this one would not be because it would essentially grant the oldest guilds a free bump.

To counter that free bump, read what I said would happen in #4. It wouldn't last long, it would just be temporary until people find a very old guild name to xfer players to.

[eyescoolblue]

I can understand what some are saying, but is it any different than recruiting players with rank boosting numbers. Top guilds will always attract top players. How many mergers or split-offs have occurred in order to do exactly that? The simple fact of the matter is that it is only one stat in the grand scheme of things (It barely adjusted the positions at all for the most part). Why shouldn't long time operating guilds be recognized for their contribution to the game? Most are established and have been helping to build a base of committed players that continues to grow.

In reference to the idea that people will want to join a particular guild just to improve their "status"...well that is up to the GMs and Officers to decipher who is who. Most LB players are known by these guilds. It would become very evident whether someone was just seeking a "spot to park".

The arguments I've seen so far that are against this idea seem to be from a viewpoint that this ONE stat would somehow turn the tides. Let's say that people start moving around....what are their other stats that affect ranking.....APs, K/D ratio, etc. Maybe the guild they left increases in a certain area(s) and gaining guild declines, not an impossibility.

Let's throw some numbers out there shall we?
Top 20 guilds who have an age rank 20 or less = 8
Number 1 ranked guild on age = 18th in ranking overall
Top 10 guilds who have an age rank right around 50 = 4
Number of positions that stayed the same = 14
Greatest increase (which there are only 2) = +4
Greatest decrease (which there is only 1) = -4
Top 5 guilds = 3 whose age date is 2014 (one of which is 20140327)

Not seeing the HUGE advantage/disadvantage here to anyone really. Previous posts mentioned this whole jumping ship to go to an older guild. Guess that means that Garuda Indonesia is about to get like 5k+ new members huh....ridiculousness. If anything I would imagine the only ones who may not like this idea are anyone that formed a guild full of top end players. They now have to contend with a stat they cannot manipulate except to return to former guilds or join another. In all actuality this will open up several slots in the top 50 for other guilds to jump up.

Bottom line...in any system people will find a way to manipulate it to their personal advantage (can u say "those using the 5 skill trick", "hot keys", macros, scam tricks on new players, fake hack accounts, blocking in pvp, I'm sure the list could go on).

I say go for it...include guild age as a factor.

[inkredible]

Yes, without working for it. This was a statistic that you never had to work for unlike other statistics. You were granted it and just so happen to get lucky. As H2N said, just keep it civil and there shouldn't be any issues.

As I explained before in post #4, oldest guild is easily cheated and encourages an entirely new type of play.

Lastly, as you can see, by adding this statistic alone, DM was able to jump 3 places to the #1 position despite being considerably lower ranked in everything else. Although all statistics are the same weight, this one would not be because it would essentially grant the oldest guilds a free bump.

To counter that free bump, read what I said would happen in #4. It wouldn't last long, it would just be temporary until people find a very old guild name to xfer players to.

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 "free bump"



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.

[inkredible]

I can understand what some are saying, but is it any different than recruiting players with rank boosting numbers. Top guilds will always attract top players. How many mergers or split-offs have occurred in order to do exactly that? The simple fact of the matter is that it is only one stat in the grand scheme of things (It barely adjusted the positions at all for the most part). Why shouldn't long time operating guilds be recognized for their contribution to the game? Most are established and have been helping to build a base of committed players that continues to grow.

In reference to the idea that people will want to join a particular guild just to improve their "status"...well that is up to the GMs and Officers to decipher who is who. Most LB players are known by these guilds. It would become very evident whether someone was just seeking a "spot to park".

The arguments I've seen so far that are against this idea seem to be from a viewpoint that this ONE stat would somehow turn the tides. Let's say that people start moving around....what are their other stats that affect ranking.....APs, K/D ratio, etc. Maybe the guild they left increases in a certain area(s) and gaining guild declines, not an impossibility.

Let's throw some numbers out there shall we?
Top 20 guilds who have an age rank 20 or less = 8
Number 1 ranked guild on age = 18th in ranking overall
Top 10 guilds who have an age rank right around 50 = 4
Number of positions that stayed the same = 14
Greatest increase (which there are only 2) = +4
Greatest decrease (which there is only 1) = -4
Top 5 guilds = 3 whose age date is 2014 (one of which is 20140327)

Not seeing the HUGE advantage/disadvantage here to anyone really. Previous posts mentioned this whole jumping ship to go to an older guild. Guess that means that Garuda Indonesia is about to get like 5k+ new members huh....ridiculousness. If anything I would imagine the only ones who may not like this idea are anyone that formed a guild full of top end players. They now have to contend with a stat they cannot manipulate except to return to former guilds or join another. In all actuality this will open up several slots in the top 50 for other guilds to jump up.

Bottom line...in any system people will find a way to manipulate it to their personal advantage (can u say "those using the 5 skill trick", "hot keys", macros, scam tricks on new players, fake hack accounts, blocking in pvp, I'm sure the list could go on).

I say go for it...include guild age as a factor.

like i said.. its only 6% ..its like getting arcane from openning crates almost.. lol

[Zeus]

I can understand what some are saying, but is it any different than recruiting players with rank boosting numbers. Top guilds will always attract top players. How many mergers or split-offs have occurred in order to do exactly that? The simple fact of the matter is that it is only one stat in the grand scheme of things (It barely adjusted the positions at all for the most part). Why shouldn't long time operating guilds be recognized for their contribution to the game? Most are established and have been helping to build a base of committed players that continues to grow.

In reference to the idea that people will want to join a particular guild just to improve their "status"...well that is up to the GMs and Officers to decipher who is who. Most LB players are known by these guilds. It would become very evident whether someone was just seeking a "spot to park".

The arguments I've seen so far that are against this idea seem to be from a viewpoint that this ONE stat would somehow turn the tides. Let's say that people start moving around....what are their other stats that affect ranking.....APs, K/D ratio, etc. Maybe the guild they left increases in a certain area(s) and gaining guild declines, not an impossibility.

Let's throw some numbers out there shall we?
Top 20 guilds who have an age rank 20 or less = 8
Number 1 ranked guild on age = 18th in ranking overall
Top 10 guilds who have an age rank right around 50 = 4
Number of positions that stayed the same = 14
Greatest increase (which there are only 2) = +4
Greatest decrease (which there is only 1) = -4
Top 5 guilds = 3 whose age date is 2014 (one of which is 20140327)

Not seeing the HUGE advantage/disadvantage here to anyone really. Previous posts mentioned this whole jumping ship to go to an older guild. Guess that means that Garuda Indonesia is about to get like 5k+ new members huh....ridiculousness. If anything I would imagine the only ones who may not like this idea are anyone that formed a guild full of top end players. They now have to contend with a stat they cannot manipulate except to return to former guilds or join another. In all actuality this will open up several slots in the top 50 for other guilds to jump up.

Bottom line...in any system people will find a way to manipulate it to their personal advantage (can u say "those using the 5 skill trick", "hot keys", macros, scam tricks on new players, fake hack accounts, blocking in pvp, I'm sure the list could go on).

I say go for it...include guild age as a factor.

Okay, here's the thing...

Everybody states that stats are manipulable. However, are they really? Ratios, lets take a look at the them. Yes, you can boost it by inviting twinks with a high KDR and low amount of kills. However, what does that do? It drops other stats like TDM kills per member or CTF kills per member. So, it's not really manipulable other than with hard work or inviting a player that already had a high amount of kills and a high KDR.

Secondly, it has turned the tides, has it not? The top 3 rankings were basically reversed due to guild age.

Thirdly, I do not mean joining another guild that already has an old guild age. What I mean is when you have held onto a guild name from the start of the game. I'm one of those players, I have quite a few guild names that I've held onto. So, this makes me having those guild names a very valuable asset. As I stated before in post #4, it will be the only way to compete in that statistic.

A guild like Resilience is already #1 in a majority of the stats, yet they dropped down to #3 from ONE guild stat. Can this be fixed? Sure, I just use one of my older guild names and that's that. How many others will do the same? A lot!

In any case, it's an unneeded stat that does not promote competition like the other statistics do. It is an immovable statistic that is only able to be manipulated as I've shown in post #4. Thus, that makes it useless.

Account age is also the same thing, which I disagree with as well. The only way to manipulate that statistic is by inviting old players. It's not really competitive by any means now, is it?

@Ink
I wish that I had a 6% chance to loot an arcane from a crate...