Small guild discrimination

mmlewis67b14_ESO

[/quote]

the thread, the OP, the agruments.....all trivial, agreed sir, agreed. Yet here we are contributing [/quote]

Small guilds being treated as trivial is my whole point.

Innocente

Well, I currently have 1 character I am playing in ESO and 7 characters that are using their inventory as extra bank space. That is an extra 420 slots (and could buy much more) I have stuffed with items. I don't see how this is better than having my characters use a private guild bank. Then, I might even be able to play an alt.

Anath_Q

Since ZoS defines a guild as 2 or more players, guild amenities should become available at that level of membership and then expand on a scaled basis. Limited guild bank space and tabards to start, with guild store access and additional bank space unlocked as the guild grows in size.

Access to a guild bank, guild store, upcoming tabards...none of this is "awarded" to guilds. These are entitlements granted to guilds who have done nothing special, meaningful or useful, they have simply invited and retained enough people in to unlock and maintain the amenities.

Were amenities unlocked as a consequence of earning game achievements, questing or gold purchase, then this thread would look very different, or not exist at all...since guilds of any size could work towards the amenities they want.

mmlewis67b14_ESO

I completely agree. Thank you.

kitsinni

mmlewis67b14_ESO wrote: »

I made the statement about the bank because we are denied that already and have made due without the bank. Now they announce they are giving 10 man guilds tabards too. It is unfair to reward large guilds and ignore smaller guilds. We pay the same sub as everyone else. If small guilds are to be denied benefits, then the game should have been designed so that guilds less than 10 could not be formed.

10 man is about as far from the definition of "large guild" as you could possibly get. The only issue I see with denying guilds of less than 10 to be formed is you would have to have all 10 together at the same place at the same time to form the guild. Other than that I see no problem with making it so less than 10 can't be formed. Maybe make it so you can form a "club" and once you have 10 it can be a guild.

2% of the max size of a guild is in no way large.

Vuron

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

Vuron wrote: »

The minimum requirement for a guild in ESO is 10

Please stop posting till you know what you're talking about.

You can physically CREATE a guild with less, but you don't get the benefits, IE. BECOME a guild until you get to 10. Being able to create a guild with less than 10 is because of logistics and ease of use.

darkmadman187

I agree that smaller guilds should have some kind of privileges but I wouldn't allow it to be just a one member guild as you'd have guilds with just one person created on a mass scale so they can have 500 extra bank slots. Maybe like one of the other posters said, a gradual increase up to maybe 10 members then use guild achievements (dungeons, trials, PvP etc.) to dictate the higher rewards. After all the idea of a guild is a group of players joining together for a common goal, whether that be PvP, PvE or just a good chat. I know a lot of people will say "Well what if I don't want to group or PvP" but quite frankly there's a reason MMO's put in end game content & give players who do it the highest reward. They've worked hard to get it & deserve it plus there are plenty of other rewards for players who like to go through the game soloing as you don't need such high quality gear as the encounters are not anywhere near as difficult.

mmlewis67b14_ESO

I agree that smaller benefits are good for small guilds. I am a very active player and do participate in group activities/pvp. I just think small guilds should have some perks instead of being denied all the benefits. I would be happy with the gradual development system if it were in place. At this time, small guilds are denied all benefits and I feel that this just continues to get worse with the update. It is rather unjust to think the game revolves only around 10 man or higher guilds. Thanks!

nerevarine1138

I still cannot understand the arguments in favor of giving small guilds access to giant banks.

You are not being penalized by the new system. You clearly created a small, family-oriented guild because you didn't want to join a larger guild. We'll ignore, for the moment, that you have 4 other guild slots available and just focus on your family.

You didn't want to join a big guild? Great. That carries the advantage of having a tight-knit group of 4 players that all happen to have the same guild. You also have the disadvantage of not being able to pull on a larger group of players for trading, trials, etc. There are always going to be tradeoffs. One of the big tradeoffs is that you are giving up access to a guild bank and store because you want to keep your guild small. Which is fine. But it's also not something you get to complain about. You chose to keep your guild small. You chose to not join a larger guild. You were aware of the consequences of your choices when you made them.

And probably the most important point: 4 people don't need a guild bank. If you need to exchange gear, then mail it. You certainly don't need the extra storage space.

Vuron

mmlewis67b14_ESO wrote: »

I agree that smaller benefits are good for small guilds. I am a very active player and do participate in group activities/pvp. I just think small guilds should have some perks instead of being denied all the benefits. I would be happy with the gradual development system if it were in place. At this time, small guilds are denied all benefits and I feel that this just continues to get worse with the update. It is rather unjust to think the game revolves only around 10 man or higher guilds. Thanks!

You want 3 to be considered a guild and get benefits, the next person asks for 2 people to get the benefits and the next wants a guild of 1.

There has to be a line drawn somewhere. ZOS has decided that 10 people is considered a small guild. A 10 person guild is the minimum requirement to be considered a guild and to get benefits.

ExiledKhallisi

That's not a guild that's a group...sorry.

kitsinni

I could also see the argument that if you want to display your guild with a tabbard that the guild would have to have a minimum amount of players to get that privlege. With three people you get your own chat to be able to more easily talk to eachother but I don't see it being unreasonable to expect you to actually have a very small (10) group of people to be able to display your guild for everyone to see.

mmlewis67b14_ESO

nerevarine1138 wrote: »

I still cannot understand the arguments in favor of giving small guilds access to giant banks.

You are not being penalized by the new system. You clearly created a small, family-oriented guild because you didn't want to join a larger guild. We'll ignore, for the moment, that you have 4 other guild slots available and just focus on your family for the moment.

You didn't want to join a big guild? Great. That carries the advantage of having a tight-knit group of 4 players that all happen to have the same guild. You also have the disadvantage of not being able to pull on a larger group of players for trading, trials, etc. There are always going to be tradeoffs. One of the big tradeoffs is that you are giving up access to a guild bank and store because you want to keep your guild small. Which is fine. But it's also not something you get to complain about. You chose to keep your guild small. You chose to not join a larger guild. You were aware of the consequences of your choices when you made them.

And, probably the most important point: 4 people don't need a guild bank. If you need to exchange gear, then mail it. You certainly don't need the extra storage space.

for the 4th time....this isn't about getting a guild bank. we have made due without one since launch.

mmlewis67b14_ESO

Vuron wrote: »

mmlewis67b14_ESO wrote: »

I agree that smaller benefits are good for small guilds. I am a very active player and do participate in group activities/pvp. I just think small guilds should have some perks instead of being denied all the benefits. I would be happy with the gradual development system if it were in place. At this time, small guilds are denied all benefits and I feel that this just continues to get worse with the update. It is rather unjust to think the game revolves only around 10 man or higher guilds. Thanks!

You want 3 to be considered a guild and get benefits, the next person asks for 2 people to get the benefits and the next wants a guild of 1.

There has to be a line drawn somewhere. ZOS has decided that 10 people is considered a small guild. A 10 person guild is the minimum requirement to be considered a guild and to get benefits.

ZOS lets 2 people form a guild. We have had a guild name and tab since launch.

Zero_Tolerance

A 10 person guild is the minimum requirement to be considered a guild and to get benefits.

Let's not forget you'd have to find 9 people you can actually trust not to fleece your bank as soon as they see your stacks of legendary upgrades in it.
There are no benefits to talk about. Bigger guild = less useful its bank for everyone. Unless of course it is a big guild with only few ppl making use of the bank...

Vuron

mmlewis67b14_ESO wrote: »

Vuron wrote: »

mmlewis67b14_ESO wrote: »

I agree that smaller benefits are good for small guilds. I am a very active player and do participate in group activities/pvp. I just think small guilds should have some perks instead of being denied all the benefits. I would be happy with the gradual development system if it were in place. At this time, small guilds are denied all benefits and I feel that this just continues to get worse with the update. It is rather unjust to think the game revolves only around 10 man or higher guilds. Thanks!

You want 3 to be considered a guild and get benefits, the next person asks for 2 people to get the benefits and the next wants a guild of 1.

There has to be a line drawn somewhere. ZOS has decided that 10 people is considered a small guild. A 10 person guild is the minimum requirement to be considered a guild and to get benefits.

ZOS lets 2 people form a guild. We have had a guild name and tab since launch.

You can CREATE the guild with 2 people because the old system was horrible. Getting a huge group of people standing around having to select everyone and forcing them all to agree is inconvenient.

Creating a guild with 2 people is, technically, just reserving a guild name.

Azzuria

You do realize that you can join multiple guids, right? That you can create a guild specific channel that only you three can see and chat in? That you can join a trade guild that serves only as a way to sell your wares and never actually interact with the members?

There's absolutely nothing wrong with having a small, family guild. In fact, I'm thining about starting one for my friends and I, just so it's easier to communicate and organize stuff. But I'm still in a social guild and am looking for an active trade guild because ... I can.

radiostar

This is why in my other MMO, you're allowed to start a guild. But if you don't have 10 people within 10 days, it's auto disbanded. To allow 3 people to maintain a guild then say, oh, wait you're not really a guild is just not cool. It's the game that's trying to have it both ways.

kitsinni

I'm curious why you feel like you deserve anything more than your guild name and chat for having three people join the guild? What do you contribute to the game with this three person guild that justifies anything more? Just because you want it? Well I want to be able to start one just by myself and have my own tabard I design that no one else gets .. but I am willing to accept that a tabard designates guilds of 10 or more people.

purple-magicb16_ESO

I fail to see how letting a guild of three have bankspace is abuse of the system and why so many people care. Why people care is bcoz someone would be getting something they're not. Unfortunately, ESO has set the qualification for guild membership and so they have the final say on it. What's it to me if they bend on this for you? Nothing. Will I lose anything? No. Will it diminish my gaming experience? No. So will I sabotage your attempt? No. Go for it and good luck!

mmlewis67b14_ESO

kitsinni wrote: »

I'm curious why you feel like you deserve anything more than your guild name and chat for having three people join the guild? What do you contribute to the game with this three person guild that justifies anything more? Just because you want it? Well I want to be able to start one just by myself and have my own tabard I design that no one else gets .. but I am willing to accept that a tabard designates guilds of 10 or more people.

Gee I guess you are right. Please tell me what it is that you contribute that makes you better than a family playing together and enjoying quality time together?

kitsinni

purple-magicb16_ESO wrote: »

I fail to see how letting a guild of three have bankspace is abuse of the system and why so many people care. Why people care is bcoz someone would be getting something they're not. Unfortunately, ESO has set the qualification for guild membership and so they have the final say on it. What's it to me if they bend on this for you? Nothing. Will I lose anything? No. Will it diminish my gaming experience? No. So will I sabotage your attempt? No. Go for it and good luck!

I think it would diminish the gaming experience a bit. So what would we set the guild limit at two? So every person in the game will be in one guild and partner with four other people to have get an extra couple thousand bank slots. Not only will this make the value of everything go down because people will have so much storage, but people will be in less actual guilds because they will just abuse them for bank space. Not to mention how much more stress it would be on the database to allow every person to get a potential of 1250 additional free storage spaces. That 1250 assumes you are in 5 2 man guilds 2500 spaces and you are splitting them with the other person.

coryevans_3b14_ESO

mmlewis67b14_ESO wrote: »

Cyanhide wrote: »

mmlewis67b14_ESO wrote: »

I previously posted this in The Road Ahead discussion but am reposting here as I believe this issue needs resolution:

I am sadly disappointed about the guild changes. My fiancé and I play together with my son. We have 3 members in the guild.

That's not a guild, that's a family. Honestly a guild of 3 members? Next thing you know everyone starts a "guild" just for the extra bank space.

This type of attitude is exactly why we don't join other big guilds. There is nothing wrong with a family enjoying itself together.

Noone said there is anything wrong with it. It's just not a guild. Therefore you shouldn't get a bank.

coryevans_3b14_ESO

mmlewis67b14_ESO wrote: »

Cyanhide wrote: »

mmlewis67b14_ESO wrote: »

Discrimination..yes. If we both walk into a diner and order a meal that costs the same amount, I get steak, you get stale bread...is that fair or discrimation?

Let me help you, I am mister social welfare, here we have a family a 5 members, 2 parents 3 children, they get support for 5 people.

Here is you, you only have 1 child, yet you expect the same amount of money then the family supporting 3 children. Fair?

Sorry that's the best analogy I could come up with I should feel bad.

Your analogy is degrading. I have every right to express how I feel without condescending attitude or tone (welfare?!). Also, my sub costs the same as yours.

I think in this thread you are showing obvious reasons why I wouldn't want you in any of my guilds.

Tuttebel

The self entitlement of some people knows no boundaries it seems.
3 man isn't a guild ... it's not even a full group.

Anyway to stay in spirit.
Next vet dungeon I run I'll be needing a group-tabard and shared bankspace for the duration of the run. Because reasons. And 4 people is more then 3.
Banana

Mousmoula

Ok. It's not about bank. It's about tabards.
So, the number of tabards is finite. "There are 250 colors, 63 backgrounds, and 136 crests that can be mixed and matched to form guild heraldry". That makes thousands of tabards, but still finite number.
If every small group of 2-3 people (friends, family you name it) would be able to have a tabard, then the tabards wouldn't be so unique, would they? And then, they would lose most of their appeal, since they would become common.

The meaning of tabards is to reward the social behaviour. Please no offense, but your in game behaviour is mainly anti-social. You have a guild of 3 ppl and want to stay with this.

kitsinni

mmlewis67b14_ESO wrote: »

kitsinni wrote: »

I'm curious why you feel like you deserve anything more than your guild name and chat for having three people join the guild? What do you contribute to the game with this three person guild that justifies anything more? Just because you want it? Well I want to be able to start one just by myself and have my own tabard I design that no one else gets .. but I am willing to accept that a tabard designates guilds of 10 or more people.

Gee I guess you are right. Please tell me what it is that you contribute that makes you better than a family playing together and enjoying quality time together?

No one said anything about you or your family playing together dude take some xanax if you are that easily offended. I'm saying you don't deserve anything extra that no one else gets because you don't want to be in a guild with anyone other than your family. It is your choice so deal with it. I get it you want to play the way you want but want the benefits of playing a different way .. well you don't always get what you want. It seems like you think you are really special in a really unique situation and deserve something no one else gets because you play with your family. Everyone else that plays with their family only gets a tabard/bank if they are in a 10 person guild .. so do you .. so do your sub dollars .. so does your family .. so deal with it.

seanolan

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

seanolan wrote: »

fromtesonlineb16_ESO wrote: »

seanolan wrote: »

It's not prejudice against small guilds...it's preventing abuse of the system.

Because allowing tabbards is abusing something?

Actually, yes. It gives an individual a level of customization unavailable to those who don't stick with a tiny guild. A single player could theoretiically form a guild and create his/her own tabard, locking a design for an individual use. So, yes, this is a form of abusing the system.

And from a ZoS standpoint, why would they cater to a single or a tiny group in preference to catering to a large group? Which one brings in more money?

LOL at the asinine raising of money comment .. how to add something grotesquely absurd to a debate about something so trivial.

Right....because ZoS isn't in this to make money, but for the love of their players.

Anath_Q

Were tabards a reward for a guild working hard in a coordinated effort to achieve a goal, then yes, they should be limited to those guilds that achieve that goal.

However, tabards are not a reward for anything. They are unlocked for a guild with a minimum number of players. Period. This includes guilds whose members do nothing more social together than sell stuff to each other through a guild store.

Tabards define a group identity. That group can be large, small or something in between.

Rosveen

Zero_Tolerance wrote: »

A 10 person guild is the minimum requirement to be considered a guild and to get benefits.

Let's not forget you'd have to find 9 people you can actually trust not to fleece your bank as soon as they see your stacks of legendary upgrades in it.

No, you don't. Horrible as the guild management is, you can still deny bank withdrawal privileges based on rank. If you want to keep the guildbank all to yourself, give everyone who isn't your close friend the lowest rank with no bank access.

Back to the topic at hand, I don't see the point of giving all guild privileges to such small groups. If this were to happen, you'd have everyone forming two people guilds to get tabards and whatever else would be available (hopefully not full-sized guildbank). Well... I suppose I wouldn't mind, it's not like it harms me, but it does seem quite silly.

Out of curiousity, why did you form a guild in the first place? It doesn't give a three people group any benefits at all.