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

How Does Artcraft Plan To Prevent Massive Eve-Like Guild Conglomerates?

Recommended Posts

Recent discussions have made me realize that there is one behavior that would make me quickly abandon a game, even one like Crowfall in which I've put in hundreds of dollars toward the crowdfunding. That behavior is mega-guilding. In games like EVE and ArcheAge there is a pattern of impersonal blobs of 500-1000 player guilds that end up dominating the PvP play and stifling competition and upstarts.

 

As it is, the guild I represent is hovering around 75 players. We can't envision getting much bigger than 100 because then it becomes almost impossible to maintain a personal connection with guildmates without things devolving into cliques anyway. A good portion of us are invested in competitive play, and the other portions want to help contribute to that effort as well.

 

What does ArtCraft intend to do to defang these types of guild/alliance conglomerates? What measures will be taken to ensure they won't end up clogging all the channels and dominating the field by sheer force of numbers?

 

This is the one single thing that I can think of (besides terribly broken mechanics, which I'm not worried about here) that would make me immediately walk away from the game, and I would like to understand better how the sub-guilding outlined in the most recent Q&A video won't lead to tightly-knit guild groups (new ones like mine and long-standing ones like LotD, Pax, & the numerous Shadowbane groups) going extinct in Crowfall.


"Darken the moon and conceal the stars; our Light will never be extinguished." - The Tome of the First Flame

LW_sig_concept_7b_lighter_zpsu0zpsinn.jp


The Lantern Watch - A Crowfall-first guild. Welcome Home. Join us @ http://crowfall.shivtr.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By making player skill matter... :drops the mic:

 

That is not even close to a viable answer. Player skill should matter, but 20 skilled soldiers will still get run over by 500 zergs, no matter how many of the zerg players die in the process.


"Darken the moon and conceal the stars; our Light will never be extinguished." - The Tome of the First Flame

LW_sig_concept_7b_lighter_zpsu0zpsinn.jp


The Lantern Watch - A Crowfall-first guild. Welcome Home. Join us @ http://crowfall.shivtr.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There multiple ways and levels to play a game. The challenge is not to prevent people playing at different levels of scale. The challenge is to make the game fun for people at all levels of scale.


                                                     SR8DSigTemp_Tahru.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is not even close to a viable answer. Player skill should matter, but 20 skilled soldiers will still get run over by 500 zergs, no matter how many of the zerg players die in the process.

That would really depend how steep the skill curve is.  Also why wouldn't 500 people deserve to win vs 20?  That means 500 people are happy and 20 people are unhappy...

 

These are social problems more than anything... don't like a zerg, go build an army strong enough to take them out... there's nothing in the rulebook that says a group of 10 tight knit friends are entitled to reign supreme over 100 people. 

 

The more you make player skill matter the less likely a zerg will be combat effective....

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you're unfamiliar with the stagnation the big blobs caused in EVE for such a long time. Down to three mega-alliances, and if you didn't sign up for one, you were shut out of much of the game. It forced people who weren't interested in that playstyle or taking part in such large groups to sign up or stop playing.


"Darken the moon and conceal the stars; our Light will never be extinguished." - The Tome of the First Flame

LW_sig_concept_7b_lighter_zpsu0zpsinn.jp


The Lantern Watch - A Crowfall-first guild. Welcome Home. Join us @ http://crowfall.shivtr.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys your looking at this the wrong way. Just look at it like this.

 

If each guild has 300 slots for players or sub-guilds and each sub guild has 300 slots for players/sub-sub-guilds, then what we really should be asking is can we get every person in the game in one massive guild then make it to where there can be no losers, and everyone gets to win.

 

#Kappa #Sarcasm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think the short answer is...

 

you can win.

 

if 5000 players hold hands and dominate, they win, they split up their 500 rubles 5000 ways, and server restarts.

 

unlike eve, these worlds are not permanently persistent, this alone reduces the incentive to blob.

 

ultimately this will boil down to player behavior, and players deciding what is an 'acceptable' number to have, how many is too many, and deciding that those that violate those norms be made homeless. 

 

or they can decide not to, and just hold hands till the server is 'won'.

 

but yeah, short answer is, the servers will restart.

Edited by dubanka

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe you're unfamiliar with the stagnation the big blobs caused in EVE for such a long time. Down to three mega-alliances, and if you didn't sign up for one, you were shut out of much of the game. It forced people who weren't interested in that playstyle or taking part in such large groups to sign up or stop playing.

EVE wasn't a game where player skill mattered as much. 

 

Basically if they make the skill curve steep and the skill ceiling high... a great group of players will be able to take on players up to the point of technical limitation... if they make the game too easy... then it emphasizes the game being about numbers. 

Edited by VIKINGNAIL

Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guys your looking at this the wrong way. Just look at it like this.

 

If each guild has 300 slots for players or sub-guilds and each sub guild has 300 slots for players/sub-sub-guilds, then what we really should be asking is can we get every person in the game in one massive guild then make it to where there can be no losers, and everyone gets to win.

 

#Kappa #Sarcasm

For full disclosure. A guild that wants to go beyond the cap buys a basic account and expands indefinitely. It is just a minor hassle.

 

My perspective was formed from the original marketing materials. There will be campaign rules for solo players,and ones for guilds. The challenge can be to win a duel or to win a war. You choose you're level of involvement. I started Serrated to win on many levels, but it comes at a great time sacrifice. Everyone has the same choice to make.


                                                     SR8DSigTemp_Tahru.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For full disclosure. A guild that wants to go beyond the cap buys a basic account and expands indefinitely. It is just a minor hassle.

 

My perspective was formed from the original marketing materials. There will be campaign rules for solo players,and ones for guilds. The challenge can be to win a duel or to win a war. You choose you're level of involvement. I started Serrated to win on many levels, but it comes at a great time sacrifice. Everyone has the same choice to make.

 

A lot of us are interested in guild v guild v guild scale war play and have work, families, social lives. We want a game that's not tailored to people with tons of free time living on SSA or in their parents homes, putting in 16 hour game days. We shouldn't have to mitigate our desire for full war, and commitment should =/= just hours played.


"Darken the moon and conceal the stars; our Light will never be extinguished." - The Tome of the First Flame

LW_sig_concept_7b_lighter_zpsu0zpsinn.jp


The Lantern Watch - A Crowfall-first guild. Welcome Home. Join us @ http://crowfall.shivtr.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading this thread makes me wonder what some of you define as fun. I have played it multiple pvp mmos and in all have been at some time outnumbered. Those have been IMO some of my favorites. I recall an instance where in warhammer my group of twenty faced fifty plus. Using terrain(cemetary)and collision detection we were able to survive for a long time. Was very fun and great seeing the forum threads calling the tanks OP.

If the thread was started because they worried guilds would Uncle Bob then isn't the game design directly challenge that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reading this thread makes me wonder what some of you define as fun. I have played it multiple pvp mmos and in all have been at some time outnumbered. Those have been IMO some of my favorites. I recall an instance where in warhammer my group of twenty faced fifty plus. Using terrain(cemetary)and collision detection we were able to survive for a long time. Was very fun and great seeing the forum threads calling the tanks OP.

If the thread was started because they worried guilds would Uncle Bob then isn't the game design directly challenge that?

Sounds like 300. This is exactly the spirit I am going for. I am not trying to build the largest guild, just the smartest with enough strength to pull it off.


                                                     SR8DSigTemp_Tahru.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In campaigns I don't think you'd have the problem of having 500 playing against a side with 20. If you claim that one guild has too much territory in EK, that doesn't affect the CW gameplay. For ranking, perhaps let each guild choose representatives for a fair fight, like a 10 vs 10 match. Something that small guilds and large guilds are both capable of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Friendly fire and player collisions are things that are greatly beneficial to the smaller groups.

 

Friendly fire is already a fairly large advantage for smaller (and especially higher skilled) groups, for rather obvious reasons I'd say.

Collision will also be an advantage to the more mobile group, let alone that you can't cram an unlimited number of players into a defensive position without them getting into each others way.

 

Lack of firehose healing is another good thing. You (hopefully) can't simply spam enough AoE heals to turn your zerg invincible to anything that is not a one-hit (I've seen that tactic used in other games).

 

I don't think we'll ever see someone beat 10 to 1 odds, but 5 to 1 should be something doable if there really is a skill discrepancy between the more elite smaller group and a mindless zerg.

 

 

Massive zerg guilds might be discouraged by the game design itself, at least in the more freeform game modes. There is just not much to gain for individual players at the end of a campaign if you have to spread the victory spoils around between 20% of the campaigns total population.

If you claim and hold a sizeable part of the game world by the mass of your guild/alliance alone in EVE or ArcheAge you gain a permanent advantage over the others, so zerg guilds are good for the individual players inside them. In Crowfall all it would do is make you spread around (and possibly lower) the stuff you earn at the end of the campaign.

And in the team/faction based rulesets this would be a rather small problem anyways.

Edited by DFDelta

Constant optimism will not solve your problems,


but it will annoy enough people to be worth the effort.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It will be hard to know one way or another until we have a better understanding of things like different worlds and their rule sets, friendly fire, targeting mechanics, and various other issues we don't even know about yet.  I wouldn't worry about the zerg mentality until we see more of the over all game play in front of us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By making player skill matter... :drops the mic:

 

Sounds great but how?

 

Talking purely small scale combat or entire game experience?

 

Have yet to see anything that leads me to believe that "skill" will matter anymore than the typical competitive design. Know yourself, your team, your enemy, make fewer mistakes than them. Don't see a ton of room for .001% top gamer of the world skill to matter currently. Not to mention large aspects outside of combat like resource gathering, capturing/holding POIs/Land, and whatever else might happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds great but how?

 

Talking purely small scale combat or entire game experience?

 

Have yet to see anything that leads me to believe that "skill" will matter anymore than the typical competitive design. Know yourself, your team, your enemy, make fewer mistakes than them. Don't see a ton of room for .001% top gamer of the world skill to matter currently. Not to mention large aspects outside of combat like resource gathering, capturing/holding POIs/Land, and whatever else might happen.

Uh.... the game has action combat + friendly fire.  At that point it's just about how fast they make the game.... if they slow it down it doesn't have a very steep skill curve and that benefits slow players/thinkers, if they speed it up it benefits faster players/thinkers.  Either way even if they kept it at their current pace, or hopefully a tad faster, the mechanical skill required (while not the highest, still relatively high compared to the games most of these people are used to) paired with hopefully a ton of tactical elements should make it so a great player can very easily distinguish themselves. 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ekMCqwIYL9U

 

This is about your average skill level in an action combat environment...


Skeggold, Skalmold, Skildir ro Klofnir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its technically impossible to stop big alliances with multiple big guilds.

Big guilds can agree outside the game to help each other, and there's nothing ACE can do about it.

 

I see the issue, since an alliance of big guilds in a campaign can basically shut a campaign down and auto-win for that alliance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...