Association Size Limits

Feedback, bugs, and general gameplay related discussion.
Kegor
Sojourner
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: St. Cloud, MN
Contact:

Association Size Limits

Postby Kegor » Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:22 pm

30 people is just not enough. It would be nice to allow people that don't play as much to have a spot in our guild.. but the way it is set up now.. if you want an active guild you can't let people sit there and take up space if they only play once or twice a week. Not only that but it would just be nice to have more players allowed in assoc so you could do more purely guild stuff. Once or twice a week at the most peak times just doesn't seem all that special.

40? 50? What would be best to give associations the freedom to grow and zone as a guild as they desire... discuss. Unless you have never been apart of an active association or given up on the idea that guilds are worth anything.

* Zoom
Llaaldara
Sojourner
Posts: 998
Joined: Fri Aug 16, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Dobluth Kyor

Postby Llaaldara » Wed Mar 30, 2005 10:53 pm

I never really understood why there was a limitation on guild sizes. Is it a code thing or something? I'd be all for removing it entirely or increasing it as you suggested to 50, or more.
Thilindel
Sojourner
Posts: 3173
Joined: Sun Aug 31, 2003 9:09 pm
Location: Indianapolis

Postby Thilindel » Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:03 pm

Would be nice to have 30 active and 30 reserve
Yasden
Sojourner
Posts: 1597
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Lake Stevens, WA, USA

Postby Yasden » Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:49 pm

Because it forces people to be diverse in their choices instead of having a small number HUGE associations encompassing the entire mud, as the case was on Soj1.

I don't see the reason for wanting more people, Jaz. :P You already have a full roster, why do you need more? Boot out inactives (I use a 30 day MIA policy), make your recruiting process a little more strict, whatever. All associations are really at this moment are for a private chat channel that you can talk smack about so-and-so repeatedly. I'm looking forward to guildhall code etc, even though Orbdrin D'oloth won't be around for it, I'm sure.

T
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Wed Mar 30, 2005 11:58 pm

I don't know the reasons for it and i was a staunch advocate of upping the guild limits significantly however I may have drifted a bit in my position...

if there is to be competition, there must be at least 2 sides.

If everyone is in a single guild it drastically limits the potential for competition. This makes less sense on the evil side today, but maybe not of tomorrow.

Some measure of competition is very important to many people here, there is also the social aspect which I've questioned in the past, are we still hack and slash or have we moved more towards MUSH (a social mud). If we have moved towards mush, assoc limits should be upped and player controlled channels should be implemented. I'd say at least half the players come here mostly for the social content, and i am supporting elimination of many of the barriers to open communication including a who list that shows all people including invis and hidden ones and social player channels that are unregulated.

I really don't know if I'd support larger or smaller associations at this point... There isn't a way to fit the needs of everyone involved, however, limits on associations seem very artificial, why exactly would an association be limited to a certain # of members unless it was for RP/charter reasons?
Kegor
Sojourner
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: St. Cloud, MN
Contact:

Postby Kegor » Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:28 am

Just doesn't make sense. There is already a limit on group size which is fine, but that is all the more reason that association size shouldn't matter. All that stuff about competition is nice and all but that doesn't make much sense to me either. It's not like guilds discriminate a whole lot when it comes to helping other people that are not members of thier guild. Maybe only when they are busy doing something with thier guild possibly.

I want to put emphasis on my main argument tho. Should people that don't play as often as other people be discriminated against when it comes to joining an active association?

I already do that too btw Yasden, but people play from different time zones and all that too.. so it is rare to find a select 15 for zones except on special occasions. More alts could solve this problem, but that leads us right back to discriminating against the people that don't play as much.

* Zoom
Last edited by Kegor on Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
thanuk
Sojourner
Posts: 1902
Joined: Thu Jun 20, 2002 5:01 am
Contact:

Postby thanuk » Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:38 am

We ended up splitting into 2 guilds, one of actives and one old folks home. I dont mind, but it would be nice if we could share an ACC channel. Our roster would be 48 ATM, and maybe 12 of them are active but id say about 35 log in every once in a while
Mysrel tells you 'have my babies'
You tell Mysrel 'u want me to be ur baby daddy?'
Mysrel tells you 'daddy? No, I think you have the terminology wrong'
You tell Mysrel 'comeon now we both know i would be the top'
Mysrel tells you 'can be where ever you want to be, yer still getting ****** like a drunken cheerleader'
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Postby teflor the ranger » Thu Mar 31, 2005 12:39 am

Without limitations on guild sizes, I doubt there could be as much competition between guilds. In fact, if they further restricted guilds to say, 25 players, there'd probably be two more guilds on the mud.
Corth
Sojourner
Posts: 6002
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2001 6:01 am
Location: NY, USA

Postby Corth » Thu Mar 31, 2005 4:22 am

What you guys want isn't an increase in guild sizes. Its an increase in the amount of people that can access ACC. Or maybe you want to have private chat channels that are not guild specific. Considering that the mud is becoming more and more a place to meet and chat with old friends, rather than a game, its not particularly surprising that people want more social options.

Corth
Having said all that, the situation has been handled, so this thread is pretty much at an end. -Kossuth

Goddamned slippery mage.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Thu Mar 31, 2005 9:33 pm

PLAYER CONTROLLED CHAT CHANNELS.

I keep asking for it, we keep moving more and more towards a social mud. I hope someone acknowledges this and starts implementing features that fit the changing player base. (everyone on who list, tells ignore invis/hide)

I would not increase assoc size limits, i'd decrease them back to the original 25 or 20 (perhaps I finally see the logic in the original number and yes i was a proponent of increasing the size). Associations are supposed to be RP features or competition features, not out of game social organizations.

If you continue to refuse to imp chat channels you just keep asking us to bastardize existing features like associations.

I'd like to hear one good reason why we shouldn't have player controlled channels of unlimited size and unregulated content?
and tonights winner in the Toril EQ lottery is demi belt and skull earring!
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Postby teflor the ranger » Thu Mar 31, 2005 9:56 pm

Player controlled chat channels will do nothing but encourage players to isolate themselves from the rest of the mud population.

It also creates a seperate world, and many players will wander like ghosts through the mud without actually attributing anything to the mud society at large.

http://www.torilmud.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15747
Ambar
Sojourner
Posts: 2872
Joined: Tue Jul 02, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Our House in Va.
Contact:

Postby Ambar » Thu Mar 31, 2005 11:15 pm

teflor the ranger wrote:Player controlled chat channels will do nothing but encourage players to isolate themselves from the rest of the mud population.

It also creates a seperate world, and many players will wander like ghosts through the mud without actually attributing anything to the mud society at large.

http://www.torilmud.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=15747


naw .. its just a huge assoc chatline ...

I could chat with my old guildies and my current

sounds fun to me

can still use gsays for group, tells, and lfgc to find groups :)
Kegor
Sojourner
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: St. Cloud, MN
Contact:

Postby Kegor » Fri Apr 01, 2005 10:51 pm

Was kinda hoping to hear from a forger on this topic to see what they thought or haven't thought. I have heard enough about imaginary factors such as competition among guilds since that can't really exist with association size limits the way they are now. This thread is not about chat channels either, thats a different topic all together.

How would you like to log in and see a list of 60+ people in your association and know that at least 15 of them will always be on at peak times everyday to zone, or maybe at all hours of everyday if you had an extremely active association. That would change the face of associations quite a bit in a very positive way. Maybe then some of you might understand what this topic is really about. GUILDS FUNCTIONING AS GUILDS. Not a few people on here or there at different times to chat or twink something or do exp.

Can you see what I see? It could very easily happen and it would rock.

* Zoom
Burmadapig
Sojourner
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 6:56 pm
Location: New Orleans
Contact:

Postby Burmadapig » Sat Apr 02, 2005 2:18 am

How about Guild Alliances?

Alliance could be with another guild or with individual players.

Create alliance chat channel.

Alliance members could see alliance chat.

Assoc chat would remain private to that association.

Individual players who have an alliance with a guild could be a member of another guild or not a member of a guild whatsoever.

Alliances would foster the spirit of competition, while keeping associations small enough to allow many associations to exist.

Associations could boot inactive members and make them allies thus keeping association slots for active members.

Allies would be listed in association list.

There would be an unlimited number of allies.
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Postby Gormal » Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:25 pm

If guild sizes were upped, then there'd be no reason with our dwindling playerbase to have more than one or two guilds per side. If anything, reduce guild sizes to 20 players and force people to compete for something again.
Burmadapig
Sojourner
Posts: 164
Joined: Fri Apr 11, 2003 6:56 pm
Location: New Orleans
Contact:

Postby Burmadapig » Sat Apr 02, 2005 6:56 pm

That was another thing about alliances that I was going to suggest. It would be a good idea to reduce guild sizes if implemented.
Yasden
Sojourner
Posts: 1597
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Lake Stevens, WA, USA

Postby Yasden » Sat Apr 02, 2005 8:40 pm

Gormal wrote:If guild sizes were upped, then there'd be no reason with our dwindling playerbase to have more than one or two guilds per side. If anything, reduce guild sizes to 20 players and force people to compete for something again.


15. That way no one is excluded on Guild Nights.
Kegor
Sojourner
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: St. Cloud, MN
Contact:

Postby Kegor » Mon Apr 04, 2005 1:49 am

You guys just don't get it. I give up.

* Zoom
teflor the ranger
Sojourner
Posts: 3923
Joined: Fri Jul 26, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Waterdeep

Postby teflor the ranger » Mon Apr 04, 2005 2:30 am

Jaznolg wrote:All that stuff about competition is nice and all but that doesn't make much sense to me either. It's not like guilds discriminate a whole lot when it comes to helping other people that are not members of thier guild. Maybe only when they are busy doing something with thier guild possibly.


I don't think you get it zoom.
Kegor
Sojourner
Posts: 665
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2001 6:01 am
Location: St. Cloud, MN
Contact:

Postby Kegor » Tue Apr 05, 2005 12:42 am

I get it just fine. Most active associations around are still not able to do the harder zones around without 20 people that play 8 hours a day and have 3-10 alts. This is not a possibility, as most people have a time consuming RL.

I can attempt to comment on the goodie aspect of this, but I don't really know what kind of alts are on etc that people have. But I am sure it's probably about the same or lesser extent of the activity of my own guild.

What does competition have to do with anything when you have to fill out 3-8 spots of your group with whatever other people you can find? Please explain.

I think increasing guild size would make all active associations better and allow for competition where there is none now. It would also open the door for people who don't play as often or apprenticeship type newbies. It would not shun non guilded people, as I'm sure guilding people would be a more common and viable option for people with more slots open in guilds thus making unguilded people less common.

Anyhow I have probably said all this before. But to summarize hopefully for the last time... it would make the mud better in a number of different ways to have larger associations weather you see it or not.

Maybe my idea of a guild is different from most peoples, I don't know. I play this game primarily to play the game and go zoning and do quests etc. If all you want is a chat channel to talk to 1-10 of your guildies then the current association setup is for you. Maybe you should just consider leaving your association and using OOC instead tho, as that is a larger chat channel with more of your friends from other inactive and incapable associations.

* Zoom
Gormal
Sojourner
Posts: 3917
Joined: Tue Feb 13, 2001 6:01 am
Location: A Whale's Vagina
Contact:

Postby Gormal » Tue Apr 05, 2005 1:06 am

If you want to do all guild zones then kick out your inactive or shitty players... might as well disband MO then though... hrm... I begin to see your conundrum.
kiryan
Sojourner
Posts: 7275
Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2001 5:01 am
Location: Los Angeles, CA and Flagstaff, AZ
Contact:

Postby kiryan » Tue Apr 05, 2005 10:36 pm

you can't swear, talk shit about other players and mean it, or discuss mud topics on ooc

we need player controlled chat channels so associations can stop being bastardized chat channels and actually be zone/rp guilds/associations.

If you didn't have to be in an association to chat on a channel with your friends, maybe guilds would stop guilding everyone's best friend and we could lift limits. How many organizations don't seek to actively grow? If guilds are RP functions, then the limit should be an RP'd thing also.
and tonights winner in the Toril EQ lottery is demi belt and skull earring!
Botef
Sojourner
Posts: 1056
Joined: Fri May 10, 2002 5:01 am
Location: Eastern Washington
Contact:

Postby Botef » Wed Apr 06, 2005 12:05 am

I think zoom's point here is either being missed entirely, or the threads just been hijacked and is now about the need for social channels. The point here is that there are rarely 15 zonable people on regularly (for evils), and that in order to do things as a guild is impossible given the association limits because the majority of zoneable players dont log on more than once or twice a week. Evils regularly have to recruit neutral players in order to zone.

The gripe here is that we can't do things as a guild. Saying kicking inactive players is the solution simply isnt true in the case of evils because there are not 15 day to day active players, there is instead a mix of 'weekly regulars' who are split very widely amongst the global time zone and have a diverse playing frequency during a given week.

By increasing association size we are then able to recruit more of these 'weekly regulars' who are only able to dedicate time to zoning once or twice a week, thus allowing us to actully do something 100% as a guild on a frequent basis, not once every couple of weeks - if ever.

As to competition, this would imo create more competition. Currently there really cant be guild competition for evils because there just are not enough of us. When you cant even fill your group with all guildmates, how can you expect there to be any competition with people who are not in your guild when you need them to fill slots 99% of the time? Guild competition for evils is non-existant currently because there just is not enough people who log almost everyday with the intention of zoning.

Will increasing guild size lead to less guilds? Probably, but these guilds will be able to compete with eachother as guilds and with the playerbase on a whole, which currently does not occur and never will occur untill either the evil playerbase of active, daily players grows exponetially or association size limitations are increased. The idea that a bunch of small guilds will create competition is flawed given the difference of player frequency now days. That will never happen, because these guilds will all be reliant on eachother when they want to zone.

So in short, I say the argument that increasing guild size would reduce competition simply isnt true given the current state of our playerbase. I'll also go out on a limb and say that, given the current playerbase, there never could be real guild competition unless the number of active evils greatly, greatly increases.

I wont coment or even argue about the effects on the good race population because I dont play there.
Yasden
Sojourner
Posts: 1597
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 6:01 am
Location: Lake Stevens, WA, USA

Postby Yasden » Wed Apr 06, 2005 2:23 am

A lot of folks (NOTE: NOT ALL) join associations for the eq, whether it be by handouts or zoning. Pure an simple. They could care less about the name, 90% of them have never read "assoc info #" to learn the history of their association. They only joined because they know they can get a group more easily that way, and can chat with their friends.

So yes, associations are very much a social thing at this point in time, until you get people who take pride in where they are and what it stands for. Not that them being social is a bad thing, but I'm sure guildhall code will help boost intraassoc morale and get people more involved in its history and "building" and the like.

T
zodana
Sojourner
Posts: 9
Joined: Sun Mar 06, 2005 1:51 am

Postby zodana » Wed Apr 06, 2005 2:58 am

Well said Botef, after reading the whole thread I surely understand better.

Why not make this possible for the evil side alone? Why do some proposed changes in the mud have to effect everyone evenly? I dont get the whole we have to have a balanced homegenous *sp? mud. Sounds reasonable to let the evils do this if it help them enjoy the game more.

Zodapop

Return to “T2 Gameplay Discussion Archive”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests