Curse

masterjer1 · Aug 21, 2007, 01:54 AM // 01:54

An idea for all the PvE guilds out there that are looking for something else for their guilds. Something that has been going through my mind lately. Not sure if it has been brought up before, but I did do a search and found nothing on it, so here goes. Maybe Anet will take note here and consider.

PvP guilds have their rank system, the better they are as a guild, a better ranking. A means to show prowess and also a ways to bring in other people. A lot of people out their will ask to join guilds that are good, active, experienced, etc, etc, etc. How does one know this when joining a PvE guild. They don't, so when they do join, they look around then bail.

What I am getting at is a possible system for PvE guilds to accumilate and lose rank on a PvE basis. Ways of determining this could be of many ways. Here are a few possible examples.

Total accumilated experience per member account that are active within the last month of activeness. More active experienced members would help here of course. Any members not online longer than 1 month would be deducted. the 1 month is just an example of a time frame to help determine the rank gain/loss.

Total online hours was an idea that I threw out the window, due to the fact that many many people out there would simply leech time in. No one likes leechs.

Total accumilated progress of Title rank could figure in also. Notably, all PvE Titles here, no PvP Titles.

The gain and loss of members with experience would also add and take away from Guild rank. The amount of Rank added or lost would depend on the amount of experience and how many titles(if any) the member has/had.

Any other ideas and feedback is appreciated. If you are a PvP hardcore that believes PvE doesn't need anything else, just stay away. I don't need your constructive flames here. haha, jk. All feedback is appreciated.

Neoshift989 · Aug 21, 2007, 02:00 AM // 02:00

They do have one way of showing how active PvE guilds are, and thats by having alliance faction. The more faction ppl donate to the guild the higher the alliance faction goes which leads to owning towns.

Zinger314 · Aug 21, 2007, 02:09 AM // 02:09

There's no objective way to measure how good a guild is in PvE in Guild Wars, because there are no singular guild-wide goals to accomplish in PvE (in contrast to WoW, where the raid bosses killed by a guild signifies their status)

masterjer1 · Aug 21, 2007, 02:10 AM // 02:10

That is 1 way of possibly saying so I guess. But what I am trying to get at is that not everybody that likes the PvE aspect, likes to faction farm. I myself have played nearly 2 years along with a number of my guild members, and we don't enjoy the ff part(too repititious). Besides, not everybody out there owns all chapters like some of us do. The Kurzick/Luxon faction titles would also figure into the process of rank. And as a lot of people already know, many guilds only have a handful of active faction farmers. A few may have more. But thanks on the reply.

Zinger314 · Aug 21, 2007, 02:19 AM // 02:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by masterjer1

That is 1 way of possibly saying so I guess. But what I am trying to get at is that not everybody that likes the PvE aspect, likes to faction farm. I myself have played nearly 2 years along with a number of my guild members, and we don't enjoy the ff part(too repititious). Besides, not everybody out there owns all chapters like some of us do. The Kurzick/Luxon faction titles would also figure into the process of rank. And as a lot of people already know, many guilds only have a handful of active faction farmers. A few may have more. But thanks on the reply.

So, if you are happy, why would a PvE Ladder matter to you?

Master Ketsu · Aug 21, 2007, 02:28 AM // 02:28

PvE rank would be ignorered for the most part. But a good indicator of it is how many mambers have Elite armor/Obsidian.

Simath · Aug 21, 2007, 02:28 AM // 02:28

I don't think rank for PvE guilds is needed or necessary.

The system in which rank would be decided would have quite a few flaws. Just because Guild A has 100 members who are all active does not mean they are better than Guild B who only has 30 members (all of whom are active). As for the rank system being influenced by titles Guild A could have 60 members with 1 maxed title while Guild B has 5 members with 15 maxed titles each.

The fact that players would flock to the top guilds is also a problem. Most likely they wouldn't want to be part of the guild because of the guilds activities or because of the personalities of the people in the guild, but because they are a top ranked guild and they want to be part of something. Also if a player joined and wanted to spend his/her time vanquishing and the guild didn't have any interest in that particular aspect of the game the player might leave. That right there would drop there rank, if your system was used, and that obviously wouldn't be fair to drop the guilds rank because of that.

Onarik Amrak · Aug 21, 2007, 02:43 AM // 02:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Master Ketsu

PvE rank would be ignorered for the most part. But a good indicator of it is how many mambers have Elite armor/Obsidian.

How is that a good indication? They could just be a bunch of jerks who eBay gold.

Really, there's isn't any meaningful measure of ranking a PvE guild. Just a bunch of vague guidelines.

masterjer1 · Aug 21, 2007, 05:00 AM // 05:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simath

I don't think rank for PvE guilds is needed or necessary.

I actually don't think any of the titles or rank are necessary. But it is there. It was a thought, and it is the thoughts that count, whether tangible or not.

noname22369 · Aug 21, 2007, 08:01 AM // 08:01

It's hard to think what indicator to rank PvE guild. Maxed title? Elite Armor?

Series · Aug 21, 2007, 08:07 AM // 08:07

Guilds have a rank for GvG games. PvE guilds can play GvG too, just as how GvG guilds can farm up faction...

The Lurch · Aug 21, 2007, 12:39 PM // 12:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Simath

The fact that players would flock to the top guilds is also a problem. Most likely they wouldn't want to be part of the guild because of the guilds activities or because of the personalities of the people in the guild, but because they are a top ranked guild and they want to be part of something. Also if a player joined and wanted to spend his/her time vanquishing and the guild didn't have any interest in that particular aspect of the game the player might leave. That right there would drop there rank, if your system was used, and that obviously wouldn't be fair to drop the guilds rank because of that.

This sorta thing needs to happen anyway, IMO. Too many guilds running around out there. But, thats just my opinion.

KZaske · Aug 21, 2007, 12:58 PM // 12:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Lurch

This sorta thing needs to happen anyway, IMO. Too many guilds running around out there. But, thats just my opinion.

Two questions.
1) Why does this "need to happen?"
2) Why do you think there are "too many guilds?"

R!ghteous Ind!gnation · Aug 21, 2007, 03:38 PM // 15:38

/notsigned

Good in theory, bad in practice (no objective measures).

masterjer1 · Aug 23, 2007, 03:21 AM // 03:21

Not that this will happen, but like I said before. It's the thought that counts. The requirements that I brought up were only used as an example. I'm sure many other people that actually like the idea could help think of other ways that would help out. Other's I know of that I have mentioned this to ingame and in other forums have their own ideas about this also. One that was brought up to me was guild age. Some guilds out there have been around since the beginning. So lets immediatly cross [ZoS] out ok. Objectives could be brought up. It isn't like Anet hasn't thrown new things into the game before. I like a challenge. And if adding more content to the game helps in any way for such a far fetched idea as this. I'm game. I haven't tired of GW yet, and I don't see it happening any time soon either.

jk about the [ZoS] part btw.

Snow Bunny · Aug 23, 2007, 03:36 AM // 03:36

Mmm....most guilds that are pretty good at Pve and the like are already well known by the community. Guilds like DVDF for example.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zinger314

There's no objective way to measure how good a guild is in PvE in Guild Wars, because there are no singular guild-wide goals to accomplish in PvE (in contrast to WoW, where the raid bosses killed by a guild signifies their status)

? Wrong Forum. Kthxbye

[DE] · Aug 23, 2007, 03:42 AM // 03:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Mmm....most guilds that are pretty good at Pve and the like are already well known by the community. Guilds like DVDF for example.

Who?

In all honesty PvE guilds shouldn't have ranks. Killing dumb AI isn't hard (big purple monkey anyone?), making cash isn't hard, and obtaining titles is nothing more than time consuming. PvP guilds deserve ranks, PvE guilds don't.

Racthoh · Aug 23, 2007, 03:59 AM // 03:59

Ranking based on wealth is dumb. Some people get rich through good drops, others spamming in LA, others that happened to be sitting by the trader when the ectos were 100 gold each. Wealth doesn't determine how good you are, and you'd want your system that determines who is the best.

Being 'the best' or even just 'good' at PvE is your ability to choose the right skills in a pre-determined encounter. Good players are able to easily overcome areas because of their knowledge of the area, gained through repeated instances in that zone. You can't really rank that, especially when keeping a second window open on wiki guarentees certain success.

Right now, we have the challenge mission ladder. Probably the closest thing you'll get to a PvE ladder/rank. Numerous pre-determined situations, and you need to figure out what skills and *gasp* strategy will work best in each situation.

masterjer1 · Aug 23, 2007, 03:15 PM // 15:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Snow Bunny

Guilds like DVDF for example.

Hmm. Never heard of them.