Curse

red orc · May 16, 2007, 11:43 AM // 11:43

It has been some time since I talked about it. During that time I came across a phenomenon that plague young guilds and their leaders. I think it is something similar to "novo rich" syndrome. It goes as follows:
A person joins a starting guild. The guild starts fighting. First it stay at rank 1000, then as it finds a build and a GH it starts to climb the ladder. Soon the guild hits 1030-1050. Now a play begin to unfold. It has many incarnations but the outcome is one: One by one guild members that have played the guild from the start are picked and kicked out. Some examples:

1. Guild has good alliance and monk is picked. "You just don't play enough" (3 times a week and not 6 times a week) => kick.

2. GH changes to burning and leader say we're going to play 4 para, 2 sf, 1 dh monk, 1 lod infuse. One of the members say: we had a nice build, we were able to play it 8vs8 or break a split, why change to burning and to a build that will not work ? First fight they face a rit spike and guess who gets kicked ? The one that tried to warn about the build. "It is just not working".

3. A new runner joins (he's r6) the old runner, who has proved himself and saved at list a couple of fights by himself get kicked. "Too many times I don't know what you're doing".

4. a sin find himself playing less and less. He does not ask why, cause he knows he's going to be kicked out. After some time he gets an invitation from another guild and he leaves.

Soon friends of the kicked ones find themselves out as well....

There is just no loyalty of guild leader to the people who built the guild.

Patrograd · May 16, 2007, 12:27 PM // 12:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by red orc

One by one guild members that have played the guild from the start are picked and kicked out. Some examples:

Quite often there are players who look OK, decent even, against rank 1000 opposition. When you suddenly find yourself at rank 350, these players suddenly appear horribly out of their depth and unable to adapt their playstyle. If the team wishes to move from being a casual rank 350 team to being a slightly more serious rank 150-200 team, then hard decisions sometimes need to be made.

Quote:

1. Guild has good alliance and monk is picked. "You just don't play enough" (3 times a week and not 6 times a week) => kick.

If the team can recruit a monk that plays six days a week, and the team wants to play six days a week, does this not make sense? If the old monk just doesnt meet the activity requirements of a guild trying to improve its rank, then maybe he just isnt suitable?

Quote:

3. A new runner joins (he's r6) the old runner, who has proved himself and saved at list a couple of fights by himself get kicked. "Too many times I don't know what you're doing".

A runner that doesnt comunicate is, after all, a liability, and the higher on the ladder you go, the greater the libaility he becomes.

Quote:

There is just no loyalty of guild leader to the people who built the guild.

Probably this is true part of the time, although it is also true the other way around just as often, a guild carries a player up the ladder, teaches him the mechanics and tactics of the game and the first time an offer comes in from a top 200 guild then he's off. He's probably not wrong to decline that offer, in similar fashion to the leader not being wrong in kicking if he finds that players dont meet the standards he needs.

Sometimes you can give people chance after chance after chance and they just dont adapt to the slightly higher standard of opposition. They are probably better off going to play back at 1000 rating again where they are able to actually help the team and can enjoy themselves without feeling like they are letting everyone down and holding everyone back.

Basically, it is possible to grab a group of guys from RA and, with some decent tactics and a decent build climb the ladder pretty easily to 1050-1060 rating. At that sort of rating though the standard of opposition you face dramatically increases. You are suddenly not faced every other fight by rank 6k teams called "The Dragon Knights of Ascalon" (copyright WOC), suddenly every other fight is against a rank 150 team instead, and the players who arent good enough become very, very quickly exposed. Now assuming the leader gives everyone a fair chance, and they consistently let the team down against better teams, and the team as a whole doesnt want to get dragged down - is the leader not correct to make the necessary roster changes to enable his guild to survive at their higher rank? Does he not owe that much to the players on his team who *are* good enough, who *are* active enough?

Trevor · May 16, 2007, 12:46 PM // 12:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by red orc

3. A new runner joins (he's r6) the old runner, who has proved himself and saved at list a couple of fights by himself get kicked. "Too many times I don't know what you're doing".

This happens? Tsk tsk. A decent flagger will always make his own decisions and act on his own accord.

Div · May 16, 2007, 01:10 PM // 13:10

Sometimes the leader has to do what he has to do to put the guild up to the next level. Maybe he kicks some really good players, or maybe those players are only good at the lower levels of the ladder. What I don't understand is that if the guild is ~rank 300, why they would maintain such a dedicated small core. Maybe they're trying to climb up, but for the meantime why do so much kicking?

red orc · May 17, 2007, 01:32 PM // 13:32

Im talking of a pattern that I & some friends of mine see happening.
Needless to say that each described item happend in a different guild by a different guild leader and guild member. However you can find a similar thread in all of them.
btw, all described guild have stayed in the same ladder position (or worse) 1-3 month after the described incident.

XvArchonvX · May 17, 2007, 07:53 PM // 19:53

These are pretty precise events. Are you sure this is a pattern or just a series of happenings that you experienced? This sounds more like a story of someone who is bitter from being kicked out of their guild to me...

InfernalSuffering · May 17, 2007, 10:43 PM // 22:43

The event I find much more common is when the PLAYERS find the LEADER isnt up to par and ditch him to make a new guild. Usually an officer (or sometimes a member) will break away with most of the core team and form a new guild that will usually far exceed what the expectations would have been for the other guild. This isnt necessarily bad but most guilds I have been in have had this happen at one point or another.

Vermilion · May 17, 2007, 11:08 PM // 23:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by InfernalSuffering

The event I find much more common is when the PLAYERS find the LEADER isnt up to par and ditch him to make a new guild. Usually an officer (or sometimes a member) will break away with most of the core team and form a new guild that will usually far exceed what the expectations would have been for the other guild. This isnt necessarily bad but most guilds I have been in have had this happen at one point or another.

Well being a leader is hard.

In every guild I've been in, either the leader is a dick or isn't on enough or doesn't do anything. I was kicked once for just considering leaving, lawl. Sometimes though, Ive experienced the leader not kicking those who are holding the team back, and thats not better. If someone can't be successful against similar ranked opponents and simply cannot improve over time, then they're holding the guild back. Of course it was always me.

InfernalSuffering · May 18, 2007, 03:15 AM // 03:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vermilion

Well being a leader is hard.

In every guild I've been in, either the leader is a dick or isn't on enough or doesn't do anything. I was kicked once for just considering leaving, lawl. Sometimes though, Ive experienced the leader not kicking those who are holding the team back, and thats not better. If someone can't be successful against similar ranked opponents and simply cannot improve over time, then they're holding the guild back. Of course it was always me.

No, not kicking the sub-par people doesnt help either. I know I've been in guilds saying to myself "These three people will have to be kicked in order for us to be competive at the level we want to be," and then done everything I could to get people to see their flaws so they didnt hamper the "team" for too long. Playing 3 times a week usually isnt enough for a guild that wants to get competetive, especially if they are on the wrong 3 days of the week. Of course there have been times when somebody will get a better offer and they will leave. I usually respect that decision because more than likely you would have made the same one. I have been offered a few offers to other guilds but when it comes down to it you just tell them that you like where you are right now and tell them you will give them a pm if you change your mind.

Point? Changes need to be made, whether or not you are on the giving or receiving end it hurts but life it competition and competition is life. You live with life so learn to live with competition.

s w o r d y · May 18, 2007, 04:48 AM // 04:48

kicking ppl out of guilds for no reason is a pleasure everyone should experience at least once

thank you for watching my show

Lord Mendes · May 18, 2007, 11:39 AM // 11:39

lol @ having a "leader" who is in charge.

LiQiuD · May 18, 2007, 04:08 PM // 16:08

I'm in the position of GL in my guild, and we have been steadily making our way up the ladder. I will say that it's not fun to be in this position some times...I've had to kick people that started the guild with me, because they weren't active enough, or weren't good enough as we moved up the ladder. It's never fun to do that, and have to explain it, but it's required if you want to be competitive.

If you don't want to be kicked for any of the above stated reasons, don't join a guild that plans on being competitive on the higher end of the ladder. It's that simple.

Yue · May 18, 2007, 05:20 PM // 17:20

If you expect to be a competitive guild, then kicking people is a necessary evil. As your guild improves, either all your players improve with it or those that don't get left behind. In order to be competitive, the players must be at least somewhat on the same level. Otherwise, those players that aren't will just become a liability. It's the individual players' responsibility to improve their own play and keep up with the rest of the guild. This is all necessary to be competitive. If that isn't the goal, then this won't really apply. But, getting stronger players to replace those that can't keep up is unavoidable.

Trevor · May 18, 2007, 06:59 PM // 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yue

If you expect to be a competitive guild, then kicking people is a necessary evil. As your guild improves, either all your players improve with it or those that don't get left behind. In order to be competitive, the players must be at least somewhat on the same level. Otherwise, those players that aren't will just become a liability. It's the individual players' responsibility to improve their own play and keep up with the rest of the guild. This is all necessary to be competitive. If that isn't the goal, then this won't really apply. But, getting stronger players to replace those that can't keep up is unavoidable.

YEAH WE'RE ONES TO TALK.

Bloodied Blade · May 29, 2007, 07:59 PM // 19:59

Yue is correct. If a guild decides to become more competitive then the players within the guild itself should strive to become better at the game. If someone isn't willing to do a little bit of work in order to stay up to par and support the team, maybe they shouldn't be in the guild and should be replaced by someone who is more motivated.

Also, I have to agree with Lord Mendes on one point- There is no specific person who actually "leads" a guild. There is a person who is in charge of promoting people to the status of "officer" so that the promoted people may more easily improve the guild, nothing more. If your appointed "leader" suddenly decides that they are now in charge of everything, he/she may find him/herself rather alone in that argument.

Just because you created the guild (or named it) does not mean that you suddenly govern all of the people within it.

Genova · May 29, 2007, 08:24 PM // 20:24

Why are people in the habit of thinking that leading is about making others obey ? Leading is about serving, get this in your mind, and if your leader doesn't serve you, he doesn't deserve his status. Leading is about being human and a mediator while having the balls to stand by opposition and support your members when necessary. The player who have the skills to be the leader may even be bad at the game and never improve (funny I know), but this doesn't mean he doesn't know how to lead... think about it.

beorntheold · Jun 04, 2007, 08:21 AM // 08:21

yep, agree with Genova almost completely.

this is not about the dark side of guilds, it's about your leader being an asshole.

fenix · Jun 04, 2007, 08:53 AM // 08:53

haha you have a guild leader that people listen to? nice! sound's like it hasn't worked though, that's why most other guilds just have everyone equal, and not some 'do as I say' leader. If your leader is an ass, get everyone to leave and make a new guild, without him.