Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Small to Mid-Sized Guilds


Recommended Posts

Hello,

So what systems are in place, or will be in place to protect and/or encourage small to mid-sized guilds playing CF? After speaking to a few others on the subject, its strongly believed that CF will cater to zerg vs zerg and smaller guilds either join them or die. And please do not mention alliances as that is a band-aid for a much larger issue. 

 

Thank you. 

Edited by QuasiDoc
typo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • QuasiDoc changed the title to Small to Mid-Sized Guilds

The only mechanic they have in place that takes into consideration non-zergs is Divine Favor cards. Some of the cards are scored "per member" meaning the more active players you have that don't contribute holds you back from winning said cards. These were how my small guild (<10 active players) managed to consistently finish top 3 or top 5 in dregs.

However, with this patch these cards now mean nothing for actual guild scoring and are presented as more of a side-quest deal.

Your concern is extremely valid and this subject deserves serious consideration. It happens that in this community the loudest voices (and the ones ACE choose to hear) come from the larger well-known guilds. Some of these people are conscientious of the issue and engage in community building to ensure we have a well-rounded playerbase at the end of the day. And others will tell you that it's a throne war and the appeal is getting zerged into submission as they watch you put on your kneepads.

You're right that alliances aren't a true solution, again, even more-so with this patch because the idea of having 5 smaller size guilds punch up against the zerg sounds great until you realize you're fighting the 4 other guilds in your alliance for Conquest points and that remedy quickly falls apart.

The one hope we have is future rulesets somehow enforcing even numbers or making Divine Favor a win condition again. If there's anything I'm missing that might be in place to protect/encourage small to mid-sized guilds to play this game as the man asked please add. Because I think a lot of us would love to see more of these mid-sized guilds enter the picture and add a dynamic that were currently lacking.

Edited by BlackBlood
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, BlackBlood said:

The only mechanic they have in place that takes into consideration non-zergs is Divine Favor cards. Some of the cards are scored "per member" meaning the more active players you have that don't contribute holds you back from winning said cards. These were how my small guild (<10 active players) managed to consistently finish top 3 or top 5 in dregs.

However, with this patch these cards now mean nothing for actual guild scoring and are presented as more of a side-quest deal.

Your concern is extremely valid and this subject deserves serious consideration. It happens that in this community the loudest voices (and the ones ACE choose to hear) come from the larger well-known guilds. Some of these people are conscientious of the issue and engage in community building to ensure we have a well-rounded playerbase at the end of the day. And others will tell you that it's a throne war and the appeal is getting zerged into submission as they watch you put on your kneepads.

You're right that alliances aren't a true solution, again, even more-so with this patch because the idea of having 5 smaller size guilds punch up against the zerg sounds great until you realize you're fighting the 4 other guilds in your alliance for Conquest points and that remedy quickly falls apart.

The one hope we have is future rulesets somehow enforcing even numbers or making Divine Favor a win condition again. If there's anything I'm missing that might be in place to protect/encourage small to mid-sized guilds to play this game as the man asked please add. Because I think a lot of us would love to see more of these mid-sized guilds enter the picture and add a dynamic that were currently lacking.

Yeah, they have really dropped the ball when it comes to designing actual game mechanics that incentivize interesting play. I'm not sure where they go from here, but I hope they are prepared for a 1-campaign long game lifetime. I hope they do future rulesets, but I think it'll be too little, too late. 

No force projection/splitting, no identity building with cities, no engaging mechanics for small guilds, all incentive to zerg and consolidate...it's really looking ugly at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, McTan said:

I'm not sure where they go from here, but I hope they are prepared for a 1-campaign long game lifetime.

They will apply for another 1.5 million covid bailout in a couple more weeks giving ACE enough funds to release in 2022. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, QuasiDoc said:

Hello,

So what systems are in place, or will be in place to protect and/or encourage small to mid-sized guilds playing CF? After speaking to a few others on the subject, its strongly believed that CF will cater to zerg vs zerg and smaller guilds either join them or die. And please do not mention alliances as that is a band-aid for a much larger issue. 

 

Thank you. 

Alliance mechanics is at your service.

Tyrant: you were too tough, they gave up. (10/15/2020)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, QuasiDoc said:

Hello,

So what systems are in place, or will be in place to protect and/or encourage small to mid-sized guilds playing CF? After speaking to a few others on the subject, its strongly believed that CF will cater to zerg vs zerg and smaller guilds either join them or die. And please do not mention alliances as that is a band-aid for a much larger issue. 

 

Thank you. 

Faction campaigns are intended as the content for solos or small guilds. Usually you do your own thing, sometimes run in to allies, sometimes enemies, and everyone shows up in a big uncoordinated mess of small groups at siege timers. Half of your allies will care about actually winning, the other half won't. It is absolute chaos and great fun, and you stand a decent change of ending up on the winning board even by yourself if you just show up to timers.

This was our only campaign type before divine favor was introduced and we've been waiting on its new fversion with all the cards and mechanics to come back for a while, but we won't see it until they're done with most of the rest of the game as the creative director doesn't consider it a priority.

If you are asking what you're supposed to do as a small guild in dregs? Farm and try not to get killed, maybe try for a few per member cards for that loot. The feb stream made it very clear that ACE is not interested in small guilds winning campaign types and world bands focused on alliances and territory conquest. Dregs isn't designed for small guilds, but unfortunately until we're further along in development it is the only option you have if you want to play a real campaign.

PopeSigGIF.gif

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, PopeUrban said:

Faction campaigns are intended as the content for solos or small guilds. Usually you do your own thing, sometimes run in to allies, sometimes enemies, and everyone shows up in a big uncoordinated mess of small groups at siege timers. Half of your allies will care about actually winning, the other half won't. It is absolute chaos and great fun, and you stand a decent change of ending up on the winning board even by yourself if you just show up to timers.

it's only valid on real faction campaigns that are not like the current infected where you have to run for minutes before getting to the pvp zone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A small guild that want's to do well in the GvG campaign really only has one choice in my opinion, join an alliance. A small guild can do OK in the FvF 'campaigns' cause you're automatically in an 'alliance' with your faction mates.

If you are willing to grow, your experience in FvF can serve as a recruitment tool. If you are a small guild cause you don'r want to grow, you are very unlikely to be on top of the leaderboards in CF.

macdeath_sig.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MacDeath said:

A small guild that want's to do well in the GvG campaign really only has one choice in my opinion, join an alliance. A small guild can do OK in the FvF 'campaigns' cause you're automatically in an 'alliance' with your faction mates.

If you are a small guild cause you don'r want to grow, you are very unlikely to be on top of the leaderboards in CF.

Many guilds in mmorpg's are small and they dont grow. This could be different since its more of a PvP game then those PvE mmorpg data that I have access too. If most guilds are small, and lets assume they are for the moment, wouldn't that mean the majority would be excluded from a portion of the game? Some might even argue that the GvG campaigns are the start of the game. I personally remember Faction campaigns had many unresolved issues and in the end, most players just stopped playing until dregs. Effectively forcing small guilds into a ruleset with known issues is not going to end well.

Edited by mystafyi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bunches of players around the world have stayed together from one game to the next, they have created guilds and stayed in that tight group. Some "small guilds" dont want to recruit for the sake of recruiting to play the numbers game, if Ace wants to play the numbers game it wont end well as small guilds are what makes these type of games fun, not everybody wants to zerg ball around pissing everyone else off by making players rage log.

Ppl who say "join an alliance", yeah they can do but until the alliance system is fixed so large guilds cant ally with each other, its just another broken system in the game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fefner said:

Bunches of players around the world have stayed together from one game to the next, they have created guilds and stayed in that tight group. Some "small guilds" dont want to recruit for the sake of recruiting to play the numbers game, if Ace wants to play the numbers game it wont end well as small guilds are what makes these type of games fun, not everybody wants to zerg ball around pissing everyone else off by making players rage log.

Ppl who say "join an alliance", yeah they can do but until the alliance system is fixed so large guilds cant ally with each other, its just another broken system in the game.

I'm in one of those guilds that has played together thru many games. PRX was founded 21 years ago and we don't do much recruiting of new players although we do except a few from time to time. But we aren't 'small'. we have about 200 members in our guild. 'Only' ~ 60 have bought Crowfall so far, and we haven't made the decision yet if CF will become one of our 'official' games.

We sent a small (~20 member) advance team into CF at the start of beta to 1) learn the ropes, 2) document the game, & 3) make a recommendation. I'm a member of the advance team. We haven't made the decision yet.

Many of our people think that there is too much of a PvE preparation before we can do meaningful PvP.  IMO, patch 6.4 has reduced that somewhat and we're looking forward to what changes will be in 6.5 before we're ready to commit to CF.

But, IF we do commit we will be here on day one of launch prepared to play to win. I know several other large guilds that will also be playing to win.

macdeath_sig.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a large scale sandbox pvp game. It can't work for small/medium guilds unless the small/medium guilds find some fun sand in the sandbox on their own. If you expect a game systems to favor a small guild that can't be exploited to oblivion by any large guild then you need more experience with the genre.

It's very simple:

A large guild can always make a small guild to compete at that scale. And have the large (rest of) guild to back it up.

A small guild can't make a large guild to compete at that scale.

Bottom line: Small guilds are shafted by default.

Find your own fun sand - it's doable! Just don't count on game systems as those can be gamed.

/salute

Gen. Prom
Guild Leader of KDS
Recruitment Post - Guild Recruiting and Management - #warstory
Visit us at www.kdsguild.ro

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Prometeu said:

It's a large scale sandbox pvp game. It can't work for small/medium guilds unless the small/medium guilds find some fun sand in the sandbox on their own. If you expect a game systems to favor a small guild that can't be exploited to oblivion by any large guild then you need more experience with the genre.

It's very simple:

A large guild can always make a small guild to compete at that scale. And have the large (rest of) guild to back it up.

A small guild can't make a large guild to compete at that scale.

Bottom line: Small guilds are shafted by default.

Find your own fun sand - it's doable! Just don't count on game systems as those can be gamed.

/salute

 

With respect. this is ignorance at its best and I'll use Albion/Hell Gates as a example of how small guilds can remain competitive in a large guild game. Dregs could work in a similar way where guild and player caps of 10/20/50 ect are offered while also catering to Dregs that allow for much larger numbers.. Given the many exclusions CF currently already has, limiting content due to guild size is a recipe for disaster and in a market that will soon offer many more options to the genre, id argue the success of CF is very much reliant on being able to appeal to all. 

 

You'll be one of the first to be here crying about how dead the game is if current systems are not adjusted! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, MacDeath said:

A small guild that want's to do well in the GvG campaign really only has one choice in my opinion, join an alliance. A small guild can do OK in the FvF 'campaigns' cause you're automatically in an 'alliance' with your faction mates.

If you are willing to grow, your experience in FvF can serve as a recruitment tool. If you are a small guild cause you don'r want to grow, you are very unlikely to be on top of the leaderboards in CF.

Why do we need leaderboards?  Why do we need win conditions?  I realize this is a game, but I was hoping more for a game like EvE, where there are no "win" conditions.  In an environment where there are no forced/arbitrary win conditions, then a small guild can absolutely win at what they are trying to achieve.  Allow the players to determine their own success, or at least what the community would consider success by the games social standards; don't give us artifical win conditions.

Having different rules for different campaigns is one thing, but that doesn't mean we need to "win" at this game.  When I watched Game of Thrones (one of the titles mentioned that CF wanted to emulate), the win condition of the show ended the show.  Do we really want the game to end?  Or do we want the intrigue that happened throughout the show, and the never ending political intrigue and territory fighting that took place.  This is the biggest flaw with ending campaigns is it gives no sense of permanence in the game world.

ACE would have been more successful making SB 2.0 instead of what they currently have.

lUvvzPy.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, QuasiDoc said:

I'll use Albion/Hell Gates as a example of how small guilds can remain competitive in a large guild game

I haven't played Albion in awhile, but initially Hellgates were 5v5 deathmatches with no connection to territory control endgame. That is an example of small scale content (although it's instanced arena, not open-world like CF) but it doesn't equate to small guilds competing with zerg guilds for territory or score.

What CF can do eventually is make a different ruleset Dregs Campaign targeted to smaller guilds if enough players want it instead of Factions. Rules like no friendly alliances, cap on guild members, more Victory Cards with per member score, or friendly-fire outside of group.

tiPrpwh.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Teufel said:

Why do we need leaderboards?  Why do we need win conditions?  I realize this is a game, but I was hoping more for a game like EvE, where there are no "win" conditions.  In an environment where there are no forced/arbitrary win conditions, then a small guild can absolutely win at what they are trying to achieve.  Allow the players to determine their own success, or at least what the community would consider success by the games social standards; don't give us artifical win conditions.

Having different rules for different campaigns is one thing, but that doesn't mean we need to "win" at this game.  When I watched Game of Thrones (one of the titles mentioned that CF wanted to emulate), the win condition of the show ended the show.  Do we really want the game to end?  Or do we want the intrigue that happened throughout the show, and the never ending political intrigue and territory fighting that took place.  This is the biggest flaw with ending campaigns is it gives no sense of permanence in the game world.

ACE would have been more successful making SB 2.0 instead of what they currently have.

We don't NEED leaderboards, but Crowfall has em. Since Crowfall is a game that 'We can win', many guilds will want to win AND many guilds will define winning as being at or close to the top of the leaderboard.

The campaigns end but the guild goes on and the rewards from the previous campaign can help you get a fast start in the next campaign. No guild is guaranteed to stay at the top as the scores are reset at the beginning of a new campaign. 

ACE might well have been more successful if they had modeled Crowfall closer to SB, but they didn't. This is the game we have. I shall play it to win or not play it at all.

macdeath_sig.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, QuasiDoc said:

id argue the success of CF is very much reliant on being able to appeal to all. 

Imo Death is the only real equalizer (for all) - for now at least. For the living diversity is the base (special/niche)

I think we are talking apples and oranges. Focus on the ideas and let the ignorance be ignorance.

great-minds-discuss-ideas.jpg

Gen. Prom
Guild Leader of KDS
Recruitment Post - Guild Recruiting and Management - #warstory
Visit us at www.kdsguild.ro

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/26/2021 at 11:15 AM, mystafyi said:

Many guilds in mmorpg's are small and they dont grow. This could be different since its more of a PvP game then those PvE mmorpg data that I have access too. If most guilds are small, and lets assume they are for the moment, wouldn't that mean the majority would be excluded from a portion of the game? Some might even argue that the GvG campaigns are the start of the game. I personally remember Faction campaigns had many unresolved issues and in the end, most players just stopped playing until dregs. Effectively forcing small guilds into a ruleset with known issues is not going to end well.

The "known issues" is the reason we still don't have them back. They could easily put up old stlye faction campaigns right now using the current code base but they don't because of those issues.

They want to fix those known issues (ability to deliberately stack teams, ease of spy placements, bad reward scaling for the gametype) that plagued the gametype before it is re-introduced.

PopeSigGIF.gif

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Teufel said:

Why do we need leaderboards?  Why do we need win conditions?  I realize this is a game, but I was hoping more for a game like EvE, where there are no "win" conditions.  In an environment where there are no forced/arbitrary win conditions, then a small guild can absolutely win at what they are trying to achieve.  Allow the players to determine their own success, or at least what the community would consider success by the games social standards; don't give us artifical win conditions.

Having different rules for different campaigns is one thing, but that doesn't mean we need to "win" at this game.  When I watched Game of Thrones (one of the titles mentioned that CF wanted to emulate), the win condition of the show ended the show.  Do we really want the game to end?  Or do we want the intrigue that happened throughout the show, and the never ending political intrigue and territory fighting that took place.  This is the biggest flaw with ending campaigns is it gives no sense of permanence in the game world.

ACE would have been more successful making SB 2.0 instead of what they currently have.

From its inception "You Can Win" was a core feature of the game, alongside "eternal heroes, dying worlds" Every change that has been made, even the big ones like cancelling passive training, has been made to support this core concept, and to make this core concept work.

Win conditions are one of crowfall's primary features going all the way back to kickstarter, and the entire game loop is built around temporary worlds with win conditions. Win conditions end the campaign just like GoT's win condition ended its campaign.

I don't want to play SB 2.0

I want to play a game where I have temporary campaigns to win, and be able to do that as part of a player made alliance or preset faction, and I want to take the spoils and rewards back to my player owned kingdom to bling it out and make it grow. I want to be able to choose alongside my guild which type of campaign we're going to play next and be able to effortlessly and fluidly transition back and forth between them and have the game's systems actually support and encourage me to do so, or take a break and play something else for a while while still retaining the custom city that we worked hard for in its own little pocket dimension.

I would not have backed SB 2.0 in kickstarter. I didn't back Crowfall expecting to play a game that does not have Crowfall's only unique selling points of lasting progression, expansive permanent player housing, and temporary winnable pvp servers with rewards for winning.

I want that system to work for everyone, have a place for everyone that is both challenging and achievable, and that gives them the ability to assume risk/reward scales appropriate for their guilds and choose campaigns and therefore enemies appropriate for their skill levels.

That's why I backed crowfall. Because SB 2.0 would turn out excatly as SB 1.0, EVE, and every other permanent sandbox does. Eventually the game does end there too, it just starts already over for anyone but the best of the very best, very largest organizations after a year or so.

"You can do whatever you want" is often where the statement ends, but in reality every one of those games is in a situation of "you can do whatever you want as long as the people that already won the game decide to let you"

Edited by PopeUrban

PopeSigGIF.gif

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...