Guild Ranks

Saran

So yeah... can we please have your rank preserved when you become a guild leader? 

Effectively it would be like any other position in the guild, you would have your guild rank in score and the position would be added to that giving you the privileges associated with that position. The title could override your guild rank on gwho (or maybe just have it as your position) but honours would still reflect your actual rank.

In exchange for no instant max guild rank, the serving guild leaders would receive an automatic guildfavour every year with double the strength of a regular leader guild favour. Because the idea behind this is that they should still rise in the ranks and fall in them if necessary, guild leaders who break the rules and the like should be punishable just like anyone else, those who engage with their "tasks" (or whatever) and the like should also rise. 

And yes, I'm aware that this could mean that someone might become guild leader and then lose the ability to vote or perhaps they won't have the ability to speak on gts. This could be worked around, but I also... don't care that much, if someone becomes a guild leader and messes up badly enough that they get disfavoured to rank 2 then they should lose their ability to vote(to be honest though, this plain just shouldn't happen ever), or if they haven't earned the privileges associated with rank then they shouldn't be handed them. 

I suppose for perspective, last time I was Keeper in the Hartstone I checked the Annals to see the spread of guild members at each rank... Effectively it was all guild rank 19 and then a spread between ranks 1-5. There were a few exceptions but Astrasia is the only person I can think of who has hit double-digits in guild ranks without being a guild leader. It also kinda ruined the idea of adding some rewards tied to rank because... well everyone could just run for guild leader and get all of them instantly.

This has mostly been brought up by me going through my old drive of ideas for the Hartstone as well as other discussions recently. But it'd just be a nice thing tbh.

Lavinya

Yeah I'm sorry but I have to disagree. I get where you're coming, and can even get on board with returning to your original guild rank upon no longer being a leader, but if your leaders are failing and need to be punished to a point where they mechanically couldn't even contest anymore, there is already an option - contest them!

I personally wish it were easier to reach higher ranks in guilds, but the number of favours needed once you hit about rank 7 starts to get crazy. All of the guilds have that spread - ex-leaders and then almost everyone else between 1 and 5. I think that is more a flaw of the guild favour system.

My suggestion would be this - instead of guild favours, allow leaders to appoint people to ranks, like in orders. If you're worried about nepotism or someone being instantly appointed to GR19, have a process of only being able to gain 1 rank at a time, or have it require a second confirmation by another leader (like ministry appointments). To control it even more, have secretaries only able to appoint ranks up to 5 (or 3), and only leaders beyond that.

I admit I've always found it a bit distasteful that people can skip a lot of hard work by gaining a position, then sit forever at GR19. I wouldn't be upset if people returned to their former guild rank. Maybe winning can grant a rank in itself (like it works in cities when you gain a position). I know I was one of the few people who was actually GR8 I'm quite sure when I first became GA in the Nihilists, and it is traditionally a guild where people worked to attain rank thanks to an inner hierarchy.

But no, please no to being able to knock a guild leader off GTS or similar. If they're that bad, destroy them politically and replace them.

Saran

If losing the privs is an issue then they can also just be tied to the position so they can't be lost.

One reason this came up is from a discussion about people who become leaders, go inactive, get replaced within a few months, and now they're rank 19.

As opposed to your rank being a reflection of service and all that stuff.

Saran

@Astrasia has mentioned that she doesn't think it's actually possible to move to rank 16 after all the favours she's received

Edit: could actually be a bug no one has come across in the time since release

Qistrel

It's partly a fault of Guild Leaders in Hartstone just never sticking around.

Saran

It's a bit too common there but I don't think it's exclusive to the guild.

Daraius

I wouldn't mind seeing guild ranks pared down, maybe to ten. I've also always thought the instant and permanent promotion upon election was silly, and personally I'd feel pretty cheap to skip seventeen ranks for doing nothing but winning an election against a most likely inactive opponent. (Do GA, GC, and GL all insta-promote? Cuz that's nuts) 

In Achaea my house rank went up as I stayed in office as HL, but I'm pretty sure I still had access to all the relevant house powers. Wouldn't mind seeing that put in place here.

Eritheyl

People progress past GR3 in this day and age? Well put me in socks and call me Beatrice.

Tarkenton

I got all the way to GR5 in the Shadowdancers, and I think GR4 in the Illuminati. I enjoy the feeling of accomplishment.

Eritheyl

Oh, uh, actually I am GR4. I think the highest I bothered to get was GR6 in the Institute. Anways. Disagree with the OP in terms of keeping people at numerical rank and increasing it annually because they managed to not be inactive/get replaced/suck. Though yeah, I'm over the insta-19 after being elected, I just don't find the purpose in it. You shouldn't be deferred to as an elder/enlightened person of your faction (which I consider GR19 to be, conceptually) because you won a popularity contest at some point.

Also, @Daraius is right, cut the ranks down so people might actually give them some weight.

Lavinya

More succinctly - I like the idea of returning to your rank after you're replaced/resign as leadership (maybe apply the significant guild favour/one rank increase at the end as a reward for service). Permanent GR19 is silly in my mind, for winning an election but possibly doing nothing else.

I'd like to see guild ranks pared down, or made a lot easier for ranks to be reached without a bajillion favours, eg rank appointing like in orders over guild favours.

I don't like the idea of guild leaders being punished with a loss of rank/powers/perks (like GTS) while in power. If they are bad enough to warrant disfavouring they probably warrant being contested.

Aerotan

GA, GM, and GC all insta promote to 'rank' 20, 21, and 22, respectively (This only relates to certain commands that some GLs can use on others, but not vice-versa. Essentially all three outrank GR19, and each of the others 'outranks' one another, mechanically. [This is a similar mechanic to the one in place that differentiates between Demigod <100>, TA <101>, and VA <102>])

Elanorwen

I had an alt that was like... GR8 in the Tahtetso? Something like that. Let me tell you, the amount of favours at that point is utterly ridunculous. And really, there is no need for there to be more than 10 guildranks... not to mention some of the monumental rank names that you see because there's just too many guildranks. Master Rider of the Rear Guard comes to mind in the Templars.... Now tell me someone wasn't chuckling about that one.

Marcella

I got to GR9 in the ur'Guard.

Saran

People progress past GR3 in this day and age? Well put me in socks and call me Beatrice.

From what I've seen, people give up after that because... well now you can vote and contest. 

There has even been a rather lengthy argument the popped up a few times in the Hartstone because people want it to be super easy to get to rank 3... they actually didn't care what happens after that but they really wanted to get everyone to rank 3.

I feel this is ultimately because what happens after rank 3 "doesn't affect them".

Eritheyl said:

Oh, uh, actually I am GR4. I think the highest I bothered to get was GR6 in the Institute. Anways. Disagree with the OP in terms of keeping people at numerical rank and increasing it annually because they managed to not be inactive/get replaced/suck. Though yeah, I'm over the insta-19 after being elected, I just don't find the purpose in it. You shouldn't be deferred to as an elder/enlightened person of your faction (which I consider GR19 to be, conceptually) because you won a popularity contest at some point.

Also, @Daraius is right, cut the ranks down so people might actually give them some weight.

The main reason I suggested the annual favours is just because I feel that serving as a leader is something that generally you would be favoured for except that you're the one generally handing out the favours.

So someone like... idk... @Everiine who (afaik) was a guild leader for rl years, is the sort of person I would expect to come out of leadership at a much higher rank than they went in. 

On the other side, those who don't last long and who don't do anything while leaders might get... a couple annual favours before they get replaced (or should at least). Thinking about it, I'd also stop the favours if your position is being contested at the time.

But it's also not the worst thing if it's not included either.

Saran

For some reason the talk of changing the number of ranks is making me want to say that guild honours should enable access to the max rank.

Like 1-10 is your normal but like... having the guild honour would mean if you got to rank 10, another favour would put you at rank 11, or the honour inflates your rank by one so the only way to become the best of the best is for senpai to notice you.

/randomthought

Riluna

I'm not averse to the rank reverting back, mostly just because it's so easy to be elected, with so many guilds and positions within them available for the taking.

That said, even if you don't see much mechanical benefit in the enormous gap between GR5 and GR19, those ranks "not affecting" the members is entirely the responsibility of your guild. There's a lot of RP potential, at least. I'm not talking about just bragging rights, or being more respected as an obvious elder, although I do find it odd that it feel like more of an accomplishment even getting something like GR14 because it's so much harder, and so much more work to get than GR19/20.

The Moondancers at least have loads of secrets within their Tower that aren't even accessible to the lower ranks. A few demand at least GR10 before you even have a chance to see them. The most unfortunate part about them is that I'm not even sure the current generation of MDs is even aware of half of them, much less even remembers why we went through so much effort to even build them in the first place. But it offers the opportunity for people to continue striving to belong, to really work and learn and earn a place that only the truly special will ever even see. To be one of the Few... things you can't just take by winning an election because even then, nobody told you they were there, so it still takes real EFFORT to find them on your own.

Condensing the whole system probably wouldn't hurt, though mostly just because of how thin the population is these days. Proportionally, it does take more work than it used to, especially if you've only got one member of the leadership favouring you only occasionally.

I would, however, like to see guild ranks directly influence vote weights. It makes sense to me that those who have devoted themselves, often for RL years, have MUCH more of a say in guild politics than somebody who just defected, or is fresh from the portal, but plays a lot.

Saran

Riluna said:

I'm not averse to the rank reverting back, mostly just because it's so easy to be elected, with so many guilds and positions within them available for the taking.

That said, even if you don't see much mechanical benefit in the enormous gap between GR5 and GR19, those ranks "not affecting" the members is entirely the responsibility of your guild. There's a lot of RP potential, at least. I'm not talking about just bragging rights, or being more respected as an obvious elder, although I do find it odd that it feel like more of an accomplishment even getting something like GR14 because it's so much harder, and so much more work to get than GR19/20.

The Moondancers at least have loads of secrets within their Tower that aren't even accessible to the lower ranks. A few demand at least GR10 before you even have a chance to see them. The most unfortunate part about them is that I'm not even sure the current generation of MDs is even aware of half of them, much less even remembers why we went through so much effort to even build them in the first place. But it offers the opportunity for people to continue striving to belong, to really work and learn and earn a place that only the truly special will ever even see. To be one of the Few... things you can't just take by winning an election because even then, nobody told you they were there, so it still takes real EFFORT to find them on your own.

Condensing the whole system probably wouldn't hurt, though mostly just because of how thin the population is these days. Proportionally, it does take more work than it used to, especially if you've only got one member of the leadership favouring you only occasionally.

I would, however, like to see guild ranks directly influence vote weights. It makes sense to me that those who have devoted themselves, often for RL years, have MUCH more of a say in guild politics than somebody who just defected, or is fresh from the portal, but plays a lot.

Yeah, it's those aspects of the Moondancer tower that inspired some of the ideas.

There's actually a few ways that I had previously thought of for how ranks can work in guilds. The two ways I can see for modification are to either modify the number of ranks or to modify the number of favours required.

I think it's more the formula in my mind, less how many ranks there are but how many favours it takes to get from start to "finish". So I feel like we could retain 20 ranks, but reduce the number of favours that it takes to get there by either a quarter or a half. (bonus, if favours work like experience then people would be bumped up relative to the change)

Of course, I'm me and I very heavily favour player customisation so my ideal solution would be to allow guilds to set the number of ranks they have (from options) as well as the "pace" that you advance at.

Because I can see guilds that wouldn't really favour a long rank path, while others might really like it such as the Moondancers with their hidden perks in their hall though perhaps they would also prefer it to be at a faster pace.

Riluna

I feel like that could be, if not solved, at least ameliorated by people not being so stingy with their guildfavours. The vast majority seem to feel like the favour must be from precedent (like from a task in a scroll). The system could work a lot differently if more people just gave favours out more often.

Allow, or perhaps even encourage, your GR5s to favour each other for once, like they can mechanically do but nobody seems to currently allow. This would make sense even for silly little things like "Bob really inspired me today."  A GR5 favour is worth 1/4 a guild leader's... so it's not like that's going to make a huge difference when we all seem to recognize that the favour "points" that you need get really high, so it's not like nepotism is going to be that out of control. Not to mention that a guild leader's disfavour actually hurts that point level, when all they're trying to undo an "unofficial" favour. 

The only restriction on favours that makes any kind of sense to me is up to GR3, sometimes GR5 (which you can get really really quickly), because so many guilds use that to track initial lessons/assignments.

EDIT: This also gives you the ability as a guild leader to track how your people are working and interacting with each other, simply by checking the logs.

Saran

I think that could be exacerbated by the whole... gr3 to guild leader thing. it's not really something that affects that many people because of this because the people giving out favours are most likely to be on the high end and their favour is really strong. This could be helped by allowing people to give out differing strengths of favour, like... a guild leader/rank 19 might have a max level favour but also could have the opportunity to give a low favour like a gr5?

But I guess the other consideration is that reaching high ranks through favours is something that we don't really seem to have had many players encounter. Again Astrasia has mentioned that she feels like she's received a significant amount of favours but still hasn't ranked up yet.

Riluna

I'm not I understand the objection. Even if somebody is trying to exploit their GR19 rank and favour their friend for silly reasons, you've still only got one favour a day... and with the stated logs that's enough to make it easy for guild leadership to pick up on it, if that's what's going on, and thus respond appropriately (that would easily be a GDF offense). Since it already takes so many favours... that itself kind of limits the damage that can be done.

Most guilds don't currently seem to allow their GR19s to favour anyway, outside of guild tasks. We've got a lot more room to be more liberal with our favours before I can see the admin even caring enough to change things at all on the mechanical side. A lot of the slow pace is our own fault. I don't think we're using the system the way it was meant to be used in the first place.

EDIT: I also really like the higher ranks being a special, rare thing that only the most dedicated should see.

Saran

I've seen gr19 favours, but they're generally the same as guild leader favours because they give so many "points" so they appear to be reserved for similar purposes (someone passed a test or whatever). Because of the way that favours work on a functional level it's also kinda sucky if the people that favour you are people at gr5 so you have to be favoured four times as much as someone who happens to impress an elder. 

That's why I suggested allowing people to favour as if they were a lower rank in addition to their current rank, because then you can give favours out to people relative to what they've done as opposed to who you are.

Moi

As a data point: The Cantors have tests that go as high as GR 10. On the rare occasions when someone asks how you advance beyond that point, I outright tell them that they're expected to contest for an elected guild position at that point. And, yes, you're allowed the favour outside of tests. If someone manages to skip a rank that way, more power to them.

Lerad

Condensing the number of guildranks sound like a good idea. It's one thing to let guilds have a free hand in customizing progression, and it's another thing when trying to get someone from rank 14 to rank 15 takes so many favours as to be a hassle. If making favours immediately increase the rank is not feasible, then shaving down the number of favours (so guilds can re-scale their progression tasks) will be the next best alternative.

Shuyin

The guild system as a whole is severely outdated and needs an overhaul IMO

Saran

If we go down that road, can we make them really individual?

As an example, I'd be interested in seeing if we could have (functional) martial groups where the guild master is elected hunger games style and has the champion artefact because they're the best combatant in their guild (and if you don't like them then "get good scrub"?)

Maybe with automatic low favours for winning ranked spars.

Totally not a guild I'd actually play in, but a random thought nevertheless

Everiine

Nothing stopping anyone from giving out regular favours for player-organized spar. Right now you couldnt' do the Hunger Games style election, since the only requirements to contest and win and position are the coded requirements, and we can't add to that, (HELP ELECTIONS), but it's an interesting though.

Saran

Everiine said:

Nothing stopping anyone from giving out regular favours for player-organized spar. Right now you couldnt' do the Hunger Games style election, since the only requirements to contest and win and position are the coded requirements, and we can't add to that, (HELP ELECTIONS), but it's an interesting though.

Yeah, though the reason I suggested automation for it would be to reinforce the... archetype of the guild I suppose? You can fight your way up the ranks as opposed to I suppose the "nicer"/"politer" method where you get favoured by a player for it.

But yeah, I was suggesting a coded change. like a guild could be tagged "martial" and it would modify things, such as adding the hunger games "election" method