It finally happened!

hedna123b14_ESO

GreenhaloX wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

Disclaimer: I am a member of this guild. I'm not a part of the leadership, I don't know what words were exchanged between the OP and the guild's leaders, and everything that I say in this post is my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the guild.

1. You've complained in this thread--and in guild chat--about time zones. Brazil is UTC -3. Eastern US is UTC -5. It's not a huge gap. In addition to the bulk of US players, we have many players in the guild from Oceanic time zones (Australia, etc.) and even a number of people from Europe. It's a diverse range of time zones, and there are always people online at any given time. That doesn't necessarily mean that there are always things going on--people generally don't want to raid in the mornings, and most people make schedule accommodations so that they can be online during the various prime times. You can't expect a guild to shift their schedule for you. When I got my first vMoL clear last July, it was with the guild's Australian group, and as someone who lives in the US, it meant getting up very early--much earlier than someone in Brazil. I never found reason to complain about it--I did what I had to do.
2. You complained about the recent vMoL weeklies being formed up "in secret". They were not. They were announced in the guild's Discord server (and there were multiple in-game reminders for people to join the server) and people signed up for them in the Discord server.
3. You said, "During afternoon (here) which is when I usually play, I literally have to beg for pledges or trials for weekly and people don't even answer. I understand if people don't want to do or can't in that moment but why the silence?" I can tell you that a lot of times, when I say "LF1M DPS for all three pledges", I get complete silence too. And when someone else asks for a DPS for pledges, and I don't feel like doing them, I say... nothing. Do you really expect each online member to say, "nope, not interested"? If you're met with silence, it means nobody is interested. And you're not always met with silence--I've seen people respond to you plenty of times.
4. I don't know what DPS parses you sent to the leadership (or what they were looking for specifically). But I did see the two that you posted publicly in the old Discord server. One of them is the topside boss of vHRC, and the other was a 37s parse of the final boss of vHRC. Both are invalid--the decoys on the topside boss take inflated damage and the final 37 seconds is just Radiant Destruction execution. But the fact that you posted both of them for consideration for the DPS requirements suggests something more: that you don't really understand the game. This is further reinforced by things like your insistence on using Soulshine with Soul Assault or when you got the idea to spec your magplar into a 2-hander stamplar for PvE.
5. You recently wanted to try tanking. That's fine. The way to go about it is to get together some simple tank gear and go tank. You need to learn the role. This is what I and others told you. Instead of practicing tanking, you decided that what you needed most was to get Alkosh gear. Yes, Alkosh is an excellent set for tanking. No, you don't need to run Alkosh when tanking. I wasn't wearing Alkosh when I cleared vMoL on my tank (even though I had the Alkosh pieces available--I never got around to reworking my build for Alkosh until very recently). But more than that was how you approached it. Saying, "Nobody wants to farm nMoL with me. Don't you want me to tank for you?" in guild chat isn't the kind of thing that will win you many friends. Instead of mastering the mechanics and skills of tanking, you instead begged people for farm runs for optional tank gear. I have been on a number of runs where the stated goal was "let's help our healer get X gear and our tank get Y gear", but these are for people who are experienced healer and tanks who raid with us on a regular basis, and everyone is happy to help in situations like that. Why do you expect people to go out of their way to farm special gear for someone who hasn't fully grasped the role?
6. Ultimately, it comes down to attitude. You need to be receptive to advice. You often were not. You need to strive to improve. You often gave excuses instead. You should ask how you can contribute to the guild. Not demand that people in the guild serve your whims.

I used up two full tubs of popcorn reading this. I bow at the level of Rekt you just delivered:)

Not knowing the guild, but from what the OP has posted with his complaints and from the rebuttal of this former guildie of his, seems a guild has actually made a more formal (loosely termed) organization within ESO, i.e. "administration, officers, requirements of DPS" and such. This is when things transcend from being just a game to it being a job. Wow.. if true, demanding members to meet certain aspects, such as dps ratio/output.. nice. No longer are you to just enjoy "a game", but seemingly members are pressured to perform and meet requirements. This guild seems serious. Are there also paying positions within this game?

People keep bringing up the whole job thing but it confuses me. No one who passed the dps vheck feels like its a job. They are simply good players looking to improve. The players that did not pass the check, either could not improve or did not want to. It is their right to do so, however it is the right if administration to replace them. People keep bringing up loyalty, however what about the reverse if what you are saying? What if the vast majority are able to hit that dos requirement and they are mad that they cannot progress because they are stuck with careying people that dont try to improve or use gear that is clearly subpar? Where is this entitlement mentality coming from? The guild OP is talking about used to have slightly over 200 members. It now has 196. That means that majority have passed the test. Its not their job to carry...

Kodrac

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Its not their job to carry...

Carry. This is always the reason. Not numbers. Ego. Did the boss die? Yes Did we get loot? Yes. Then who gives a ***? But but but I did 38k deeps you only did 33k. GTFO scrub. These guilds are all about control and ego nothing more.

LadyNalcarya

Kodrac wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Its not their job to carry...

Carry. This is always the reason. Not numbers. Ego. Did the boss die? Yes Did we get loot? Yes. Then who gives a ***? But but but I did 38k deeps you only did 33k. GTFO scrub. These guilds are all about control and ego nothing more.

Wow... I can tell you've never been in any of those guilds.
You're just putting labels on people, which is quite rude considering that many of those people actually help the community (guess who makes guides for those difficult dungeons and trials?). Its very narrow-minded to think that there's only one way to have fun in game.

P.S. There's plenty of guilds for those people who "dont give a ***" about dps. Maybe you should just stick to them instead of bashing others?

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

GreenhaloX wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

Disclaimer: I am a member of this guild. I'm not a part of the leadership, I don't know what words were exchanged between the OP and the guild's leaders, and everything that I say in this post is my own and do not necessarily reflect the views of the guild.

1. You've complained in this thread--and in guild chat--about time zones. Brazil is UTC -3. Eastern US is UTC -5. It's not a huge gap. In addition to the bulk of US players, we have many players in the guild from Oceanic time zones (Australia, etc.) and even a number of people from Europe. It's a diverse range of time zones, and there are always people online at any given time. That doesn't necessarily mean that there are always things going on--people generally don't want to raid in the mornings, and most people make schedule accommodations so that they can be online during the various prime times. You can't expect a guild to shift their schedule for you. When I got my first vMoL clear last July, it was with the guild's Australian group, and as someone who lives in the US, it meant getting up very early--much earlier than someone in Brazil. I never found reason to complain about it--I did what I had to do.
2. You complained about the recent vMoL weeklies being formed up "in secret". They were not. They were announced in the guild's Discord server (and there were multiple in-game reminders for people to join the server) and people signed up for them in the Discord server.
3. You said, "During afternoon (here) which is when I usually play, I literally have to beg for pledges or trials for weekly and people don't even answer. I understand if people don't want to do or can't in that moment but why the silence?" I can tell you that a lot of times, when I say "LF1M DPS for all three pledges", I get complete silence too. And when someone else asks for a DPS for pledges, and I don't feel like doing them, I say... nothing. Do you really expect each online member to say, "nope, not interested"? If you're met with silence, it means nobody is interested. And you're not always met with silence--I've seen people respond to you plenty of times.
4. I don't know what DPS parses you sent to the leadership (or what they were looking for specifically). But I did see the two that you posted publicly in the old Discord server. One of them is the topside boss of vHRC, and the other was a 37s parse of the final boss of vHRC. Both are invalid--the decoys on the topside boss take inflated damage and the final 37 seconds is just Radiant Destruction execution. But the fact that you posted both of them for consideration for the DPS requirements suggests something more: that you don't really understand the game. This is further reinforced by things like your insistence on using Soulshine with Soul Assault or when you got the idea to spec your magplar into a 2-hander stamplar for PvE.
5. You recently wanted to try tanking. That's fine. The way to go about it is to get together some simple tank gear and go tank. You need to learn the role. This is what I and others told you. Instead of practicing tanking, you decided that what you needed most was to get Alkosh gear. Yes, Alkosh is an excellent set for tanking. No, you don't need to run Alkosh when tanking. I wasn't wearing Alkosh when I cleared vMoL on my tank (even though I had the Alkosh pieces available--I never got around to reworking my build for Alkosh until very recently). But more than that was how you approached it. Saying, "Nobody wants to farm nMoL with me. Don't you want me to tank for you?" in guild chat isn't the kind of thing that will win you many friends. Instead of mastering the mechanics and skills of tanking, you instead begged people for farm runs for optional tank gear. I have been on a number of runs where the stated goal was "let's help our healer get X gear and our tank get Y gear", but these are for people who are experienced healer and tanks who raid with us on a regular basis, and everyone is happy to help in situations like that. Why do you expect people to go out of their way to farm special gear for someone who hasn't fully grasped the role?
6. Ultimately, it comes down to attitude. You need to be receptive to advice. You often were not. You need to strive to improve. You often gave excuses instead. You should ask how you can contribute to the guild. Not demand that people in the guild serve your whims.

I used up two full tubs of popcorn reading this. I bow at the level of Rekt you just delivered:)

Not knowing the guild, but from what the OP has posted with his complaints and from the rebuttal of this former guildie of his, seems a guild has actually made a more formal (loosely termed) organization within ESO, i.e. "administration, officers, requirements of DPS" and such. This is when things transcend from being just a game to it being a job. Wow.. if true, demanding members to meet certain aspects, such as dps ratio/output.. nice. No longer are you to just enjoy "a game", but seemingly members are pressured to perform and meet requirements. This guild seems serious. Are there also paying positions within this game?

People keep bringing up the whole job thing but it confuses me. No one who passed the dps vheck feels like its a job. They are simply good players looking to improve. The players that did not pass the check, either could not improve or did not want to. It is their right to do so, however it is the right if administration to replace them. People keep bringing up loyalty, however what about the reverse if what you are saying? What if the vast majority are able to hit that dos requirement and they are mad that they cannot progress because they are stuck with careying people that dont try to improve or use gear that is clearly subpar? Where is this entitlement mentality coming from? The guild OP is talking about used to have slightly over 200 members. It now has 196. That means that majority have passed the test. Its not their job to carry...

This, pretty much.
I dont see why so many people are bashing competitive guilds. No one forces them to join after all...

anitajoneb17_ESO

KoshkaMurka wrote: »

P.S. There's plenty of guilds for those people who "dont give a ***" about dps. Maybe you should just stick to them instead of bashing others?

But that's the point ! The guild in question here used to be a casual guild. Then all of a sudden its leaders decide to go "progression" ! That's not OK.
And yes, in a casual guild, you shouldn't give a damm whether you're carrying someone or being carried as long as the content is completed, because that's what it's all about : complete content together and have fun.
If I join a casual guild I firmly expect it to stick to its principles and remain casual. If I wanted to be in a progression guild I'd join one.

Let me tell you what's going to happen to that guild : at first everyone will be hyped about the newly reached "performances". Then some people will go on improving and some won't, because they'll have reached their personal "ceiling". Then people will start to criticize each other, accuse each other of "being carried", and the guild will eventually split. This will happen again and again until there are only a handful of really good players left and they'll join truly progression guilds : those who are progressive, are managed accordingly and stick to their principles.
Along the way, many guilds get destroyed. It would be much better and more efficient if those players joined progression guilds straight away instead of trying to make their own guild "progressive" - because they can't.

hedna123b14_ESO

Kodrac wrote: »

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Its not their job to carry...

Carry. This is always the reason. Not numbers. Ego. Did the boss die? Yes Did we get loot? Yes. Then who gives a ***? But but but I did 38k deeps you only did 33k. GTFO scrub. These guilds are all about control and ego nothing more.

Lol...no carry is when you die 5 times to trash and I have to stop to rez you, wasting my time and my ability to progress on HM's...Its when you pull 25k on the first vMoL boss and we go through 5 extra curse phases which introduce extra RNG and kill more people. Its when on the twins we get to the 4 adds phase, which can wipe even the best groups due to the burst damage coming out from them...yeah...thats a carry..

Cillion3117

I would've told them to suck it a long time ago. There's better guilds out there that allow you to actually enjoy the game.

hedna123b14_ESO

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

KoshkaMurka wrote: »

P.S. There's plenty of guilds for those people who "dont give a ***" about dps. Maybe you should just stick to them instead of bashing others?

But that's the point ! The guild in question here used to be a casual guild. Then all of a sudden its leaders decide to go "progression" ! That's not OK.
And yes, in a casual guild, you shouldn't give a damm whether you're carrying someone or being carried as long as the content is completed, because that's what it's all about : complete content together and have fun.
If I join a casual guild I firmly expect it to stick to its principles and remain casual. If I wanted to be in a progression guild I'd join one.

Let me tell you what's going to happen to that guild : at first everyone will be hyped about the newly reached "performances". Then some people will go on improving and some won't, because they'll have reached their personal "ceiling". Then people will start to criticize each other, accuse each other of "being carried", and the guild will eventually split. This will happen again and again until there are only a handful of really good players left and they'll join truly progression guilds : those who are progressive, are managed accordingly and stick to their principles.
Along the way, many guilds get destroyed. It would be much better and more efficient if those players joined progression guilds straight away instead of trying to make their own guild "progressive" - because they can't.

Why isnt it ok? If they and the majority of the guild feel for a direction change, why should they not do this? The guild actually made this decision base don majority desire. It is more than OK, it is the prudent thing to do...

Also I think the guild was a bit misrepresented. It was NOT a casual guild. It was a hard to get into guild that has grown more lax on entry requirements (Ive been a member of it for years, so I know). Recently the decided to steer the guild back to its roots. I love the direction where it is heading and the slow methodical approach given to members who wish to be a part of this vision.

My own guild has a 30k dps minimum. Once the player hits this entry requirement we spend time with them to help them get better. OP's guild has the same system in place should the person express interest in it. This system has allowed me personally to take people from 20k dps to 50k dps by coaching and helping them. Those that dont wish to do so dont stay. There is no negative attitude that you speak of in either guilds. There are players who perform better, and there are players who perform worse. We specifically talk to the underperforming players and see if they need help and usually the accept it and improve. OP's guild is striving to be one of the best guilds NA and the only way to get there is through DPS checks, seeing as how the vast majority approve these changes it is the right course of action for the guild.

Cherryblossom

So you joined a Hardcore Trials Guild and are upset because you can't hit the DPS figures they want to be in the main group.

If you don't want to be in this type of Guild, may I make the suggestion you don't join one!
It's unfair that you criticise them for you failing to hit the targets, they have a duty to other members of the Guild that are working as hard as possible to hit their targets.
This is not an issue with the Guild, but with your expectations.

LadyNalcarya

[

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

KoshkaMurka wrote: »

P.S. There's plenty of guilds for those people who "dont give a ***" about dps. Maybe you should just stick to them instead of bashing others?

But that's the point ! The guild in question here used to be a casual guild. Then all of a sudden its leaders decide to go "progression" ! That's not OK.
And yes, in a casual guild, you shouldn't give a damm whether you're carrying someone or being carried as long as the content is completed, because that's what it's all about : complete content together and have fun.
If I join a casual guild I firmly expect it to stick to its principles and remain casual. If I wanted to be in a progression guild I'd join one.

Let me tell you what's going to happen to that guild : at first everyone will be hyped about the newly reached "performances". Then some people will go on improving and some won't, because they'll have reached their personal "ceiling". Then people will start to criticize each other, accuse each other of "being carried", and the guild will eventually split. This will happen again and again until there are only a handful of really good players left and they'll join truly progression guilds : those who are progressive, are managed accordingly and stick to their principles.
Along the way, many guilds get destroyed. It would be much better and more efficient if those players joined progression guilds straight away instead of trying to make their own guild "progressive" - because they can't.

Well, some people from that guild posted in this thread already, and according to them it wasnt a casual guild.
I agree that it can be a problem if there's a raid group within a casual guild... I saw this a few times, and all of them ended up separating from main guild.

Karius_Imalthar

I didn't get picked for the soccer team. Those elitist *ssholes! But seriously, consider leaving for another guild or join another guild but remain a member of this one in case they do want to include you in their reindeer games.

Wreuntzylla

KoshkaMurka wrote: »

[

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

KoshkaMurka wrote: »

P.S. There's plenty of guilds for those people who "dont give a ***" about dps. Maybe you should just stick to them instead of bashing others?

But that's the point ! The guild in question here used to be a casual guild. Then all of a sudden its leaders decide to go "progression" ! That's not OK.
And yes, in a casual guild, you shouldn't give a damm whether you're carrying someone or being carried as long as the content is completed, because that's what it's all about : complete content together and have fun.
If I join a casual guild I firmly expect it to stick to its principles and remain casual. If I wanted to be in a progression guild I'd join one.

Let me tell you what's going to happen to that guild : at first everyone will be hyped about the newly reached "performances". Then some people will go on improving and some won't, because they'll have reached their personal "ceiling". Then people will start to criticize each other, accuse each other of "being carried", and the guild will eventually split. This will happen again and again until there are only a handful of really good players left and they'll join truly progression guilds : those who are progressive, are managed accordingly and stick to their principles.
Along the way, many guilds get destroyed. It would be much better and more efficient if those players joined progression guilds straight away instead of trying to make their own guild "progressive" - because they can't.

Well, some people from that guild posted in this thread already, and according to them it wasnt a casual guild.
I agree that it can be a problem if there's a raid group within a casual guild... I saw this a few times, and all of them ended up separating from main guild.

Which is really the way to handle elitism. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the guild was initially casual. The administration could have made a separate "A" team guild and left the original, casual guild as the "B" team guild, much like major league teams have minor league farm teams. Another route would have been to simply have an "A" team within the guild. In both scenarios, given objective criteria, the "B" team has something to aspire to, other than "reapply," which is essentially a statement to not let the door hit you in the rear as you exit.

When you have 200 open slots in your guild and you boot people, you can't say it wasn't about high school politics and ego. In any situation, there is a way to treat people with courtesy and respect. Not doing so is a choice.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Wreuntzylla wrote: »

When you have 200 open slots in your guild and you boot people, you can't say it wasn't about high school politics and ego. In any situation, there is a way to treat people with courtesy and respect. Not doing so is a choice.

Well, in OP's case, I don't think the issue is specifically with "being kicked", it sounds more like the frustration to not be allowed in when he thinks he deserves it.
The problems never occur with less good players who know they are less good and are fine with it. Problems always occur with people who think they're good when they aren't actually that good, or at least not good enough. That's where problems start and no matter how the guild leaders approach it, they walk on eggshells and it ends in tears, frustration and resentment. That is why a casual guild going progressive, or a casual guild creating a progression group is more or less doomed to splitting up - with tears and wounds.

LadyNalcarya

Wreuntzylla wrote: »

KoshkaMurka wrote: »

[

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

KoshkaMurka wrote: »

P.S. There's plenty of guilds for those people who "dont give a ***" about dps. Maybe you should just stick to them instead of bashing others?

But that's the point ! The guild in question here used to be a casual guild. Then all of a sudden its leaders decide to go "progression" ! That's not OK.
And yes, in a casual guild, you shouldn't give a damm whether you're carrying someone or being carried as long as the content is completed, because that's what it's all about : complete content together and have fun.
If I join a casual guild I firmly expect it to stick to its principles and remain casual. If I wanted to be in a progression guild I'd join one.

Let me tell you what's going to happen to that guild : at first everyone will be hyped about the newly reached "performances". Then some people will go on improving and some won't, because they'll have reached their personal "ceiling". Then people will start to criticize each other, accuse each other of "being carried", and the guild will eventually split. This will happen again and again until there are only a handful of really good players left and they'll join truly progression guilds : those who are progressive, are managed accordingly and stick to their principles.
Along the way, many guilds get destroyed. It would be much better and more efficient if those players joined progression guilds straight away instead of trying to make their own guild "progressive" - because they can't.

Well, some people from that guild posted in this thread already, and according to them it wasnt a casual guild.
I agree that it can be a problem if there's a raid group within a casual guild... I saw this a few times, and all of them ended up separating from main guild.

Which is really the way to handle elitism. Let's assume, for the sake of argument, that the guild was initially casual. The administration could have made a separate "A" team guild and left the original, casual guild as the "B" team guild, much like major league teams have minor league farm teams. Another route would have been to simply have an "A" team within the guild. In both scenarios, given objective criteria, the "B" team has something to aspire to, other than "reapply," which is essentially a statement to not let the door hit you in the rear as you exit.

When you have 200 open slots in your guild and you boot people, you can't say it wasn't about high school politics and ego. In any situation, there is a way to treat people with courtesy and respect. Not doing so is a choice.

Well, the situation would've been totally different if it would've happened in casual guild. Like I said I've seen (and heard of) several similar situations. And those situations suck for both parties tbh... More casual players feel excluded, which causes drama and tension. We all play this game to have fun, one way or another, and not to get stressed, blamed, alienated etc.
In raid-focused guilds the playerbase is more... How to say that? Likeminded? And even if that raidgroup is not gonna be #1, they're still striving to become better players. It seems like the majority of OP's former guild shares this attitude, and he was kinda excluded. This is a sad situation of course, but he can just move on and have fun instead of s***talking the guild. Their ways just separated... Which might be upsetting, but its a normal life situation after all.

Artis

I think we all know what the guild is. There's a couple of things in the OP's post, though, that require clarification. It's funny, because I could open a similar thread and was mentally preparing to do so, but I passed the exam Oh and my thread would be about balancing and not being able to reach the requirement as a certain class/spec.
Can't blame guild leaders for developing the guild they see fit. It's their guild after all.

The answer I received from the "administration" through whispers is pretty much that this doesn't matter. I HAD to pull 35~40k DPS. what if I decided to not playing DPS anymore? What if I wanted to be full time tank? Nope, no way...

That is one thing that you misunderstood. It was 35k+ buffed. Otherwise almost no mNB would ever pass. 30k unbuffed and 35k+ buffed is reachable, on the other hand. Yes, the benchmark depended on the class/spec too. For example, as a stamina DPS you'd be expected to be closer to 40k buffed.

why a situational DPS Test against a dungeon boss that contributes NOTHING to anything a "raider" would do, is so important to the point of have one less good, although not excellent I admit, player available when the "top dogs" are away?

Why is an etalon of length is "meter" if almost nothing I measure has the length of 1 meter? That's how your question sounds. They just chose one boss as an etalon so they could see your DPS in the easiest conditions, i.e. one static target and no adds, to see your single target DPS and how you weave, maintain dots, etc.

They also said it was acceptable to submit screenshots from actual trial fights. That's what I did, for example. I posted the parse from that boss + a couple screenshots from Valariel in vAA and something else.



P.S.

reesenorman wrote: »

Its really tough to pull 30k.

Ahahah wtf, and I struggle to get that on a magicka NB using every tool available, keeping dots up, weaving, etc. All that in good gear - BSW, vMA staff and all that. Well okay, maybe I get a bit higher numbers, but nothing proportional to the effort I put as opposed to literally pressing 1 button.
Please, whenever someone says that RD didn't need to be nerfed, everyone link them this thread XD

anitajoneb17_ESO

Artis wrote: »

Can't blame guild leaders for developing the guild they see fit. It's their guild after all.

Yes but no.
If you share a house with 10 other roomates and pay 500$ each, your roomates aren't free to all of a sudden decide they will decorate the house with diamonds and high-end furniture and the rent becomes 800$, and if you can't afford it you're out. That's not fair.
If you take a bus to New-York and all of a sudden the driver and a few passengers (even if it is the majority) decide to go to Los Angeles instead, and if you don't agree, you're free to get off at the next stop in the middle of nowhere, that's not fair, even if the driver owns the bus.

A guild is free to position itself as they want - high level, progression, casual, pve, pvp, rp, dungeoning, soloplay, result, company, friendship, companionship, trading, with or without fees, with or without goals, with or without expectations, whatever. But once that is set and advertised as such, it shouldn't change (or only very carefully).

Players need guilds for various things but a guild needs members. Guild leaders would be nothing without guild members and there are enough dead guilds around to prove it. There is a "contract", told or untold, between a guild and its members, and it should not be changed on a one-sided basis.

The problem is that 95% of guilds have no identity whatsoever and simply claim to do everything, welcome everyone, be the nicest and most helpful people on earth, and promote friendship. And that's it. Without any particular identity and positioning, everyone tends to impose their preferences onto others or to use other people for their own purposes - and that's where all the drama comes from. Actually, leading a guild or participating actively in a guild's social structure is a perfect training ground for small-scale politics.

(EDIT : I'm not referring to OP's case anymore, it's just that it is an interesting topic to discuss in general).

rustic_potato

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Artis wrote: »

Can't blame guild leaders for developing the guild they see fit. It's their guild after all.

Yes but no.
If you share a house with 10 other roomates and pay 500$ each, your roomates aren't free to all of a sudden decide they will decorate the house with diamonds and high-end furniture and the rent becomes 800$, and if you can't afford it you're out. That's not fair.
If you take a bus to New-York and all of a sudden the driver and a few passengers (even if it is the majority) decide to go to Los Angeles instead, and if you don't agree, you're free to get off at the next stop in the middle of nowhere, that's not fair, even if the driver owns the bus.

A guild is free to position itself as they want - high level, progression, casual, pve, pvp, rp, dungeoning, soloplay, result, company, friendship, companionship, trading, with or without fees, with or without goals, with or without expectations, whatever. But once that is set and advertised as such, it shouldn't change (or only very carefully).

Players need guilds for various things but a guild needs members. Guild leaders would be nothing without guild members and there are enough dead guilds around to prove it. There is a "contract", told or untold, between a guild and its members, and it should not be changed on a one-sided basis.

The problem is that 95% of guilds have no identity whatsoever and simply claim to do everything, welcome everyone, be the nicest and most helpful people on earth, and promote friendship. And that's it. Without any particular identity and positioning, everyone tends to impose their preferences onto others or to use other people for their own purposes - and that's where all the drama comes from. Actually, leading a guild or participating actively in a guild's social structure is a perfect training ground for small-scale politics.

(EDIT : I'm not referring to OP's case anymore, it's just that it is an interesting topic to discuss in general).

I have been a part of a raiding guild that started out as a casual guild doing normal trials to one that is competing for vMoL scores and working on vMoL HM.. Every time we made a shift to be more progressive, we kicked out 60% of our members because they didn't meet new requirements.. We tried helping them to improve but they were satisfied where they were. We did lose a lot of members but we also gained a lot of better raiders with these shifts.. So a guild is ultimately going to go in the direction the leaders want it to progress.. If you can adapt you stay else you get kicked out..

This contract you talk about doesn't exist.. It can be changed on a one side basis, only the guild leader's opinions matter.. I spend close to 15 hours a week working on the guild and I don't have to listen to the opinion of someone who joins me in an hour long raid once a month.. On the other hand if it is someone who spends enough time with me on the progress of my guild their opinion is invaluable..

anitajoneb17_ESO

rustic_potato wrote: »

I have been a part of a raiding guild that started out as a casual guild doing normal trials to one that is competing for vMoL scores and working on vMoL HM.. Every time we made a shift to be more progressive, we kicked out 60% of our members because they didn't meet new requirements.. We tried helping them to improve but they were satisfied where they were. We did lose a lot of members but we also gained a lot of better raiders with these shifts.. So a guild is ultimately going to go in the direction the leaders want it to progress.. If you can adapt you stay else you get kicked out..

This contract you talk about doesn't exist.. It can be changed on a one side basis, only the guild leader's opinions matter.. I spend close to 15 hours a week working on the guild and I don't have to listen to the opinion of someone who joins me in an hour long raid once a month.. On the other hand if it is someone who spends enough time with me on the progress of my guild their opinion is invaluable..

Based on the above post I categorize you as a guild leader / guild who/which uses its members for its own purposes.
My opinion is that a guild should be a tool and a service for its members - members should use the guild, not the other way around.
And kicking members without even thinking of all the human relationships they might have woven among each other is something I do not agree with. Your guild definitely isn't for me.

usmcjdking

Bro I don't know what to tell you.

No one runs more anti-meta, backwater, southern Alabama PVE/PVP builds than I do. But even then I still have the appropriate gear for when it is required or demanded of me and I know my subsequent rotation.

This isn't a matter of not being able to play how you want. This is a matter of you not showing, as code so eloquently stated, and aptitude towards understanding endgame mechanics. If someone asks you to fulfill a slot in a trial, you are competing against the rest of the guild for that slot.

Hell, most of the time all I offer is ALL CAPS CHAT, memes and a sporty attitude when I demand that my hybrid sorc be afforded a slot. But let there be no mistake, if someone asks me to stop experimenting and to produce results, then I need to justify my spot and do just that.

If you couldn't then said guild in question, and likely all other competitive guilds are not for you.

Artis

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Artis wrote: »

Can't blame guild leaders for developing the guild they see fit. It's their guild after all.

Yes but no.
If you share a house with 10 other roomates and pay 500$ each, your roomates aren't free to all of a sudden decide they will decorate the house with diamonds and high-end furniture and the rent becomes 800$, and if you can't afford it you're out. That's not fair.
If you take a bus to New-York and all of a sudden the driver and a few passengers (even if it is the majority) decide to go to Los Angeles instead, and if you don't agree, you're free to get off at the next stop in the middle of nowhere, that's not fair, even if the driver owns the bus.

A guild is free to position itself as they want - high level, progression, casual, pve, pvp, rp, dungeoning, soloplay, result, company, friendship, companionship, trading, with or without fees, with or without goals, with or without expectations, whatever. But once that is set and advertised as such, it shouldn't change (or only very carefully).

Players need guilds for various things but a guild needs members. Guild leaders would be nothing without guild members and there are enough dead guilds around to prove it. There is a "contract", told or untold, between a guild and its members, and it should not be changed on a one-sided basis.

The problem is that 95% of guilds have no identity whatsoever and simply claim to do everything, welcome everyone, be the nicest and most helpful people on earth, and promote friendship. And that's it. Without any particular identity and positioning, everyone tends to impose their preferences onto others or to use other people for their own purposes - and that's where all the drama comes from. Actually, leading a guild or participating actively in a guild's social structure is a perfect training ground for small-scale politics.

(EDIT : I'm not referring to OP's case anymore, it's just that it is an interesting topic to discuss in general).

Guild leaders are not your roommates. They are your landlord. If the market changes, the rent will increase. And if you can't pay that - you'll have to leave, nothing personal. My rent a couple years ago increased twice. It was up to me to renew the lease or not. I can complain that it's unfair (because my scholarship didn't increase), but why? It is what it is.

Other members are your roommates and the requirements apply to them as well. It is fair, because everyone is in the same conditions. Just like you, they can agree to pay $800 or go look for another place where they can keep paying $500.

After all, the game mechanics is such, that it's a guildmaster that has the right for all decisions, kicks, rank changes etc. So he's the one who decides, in the end, the direction of the guild development. Until they add more tools for having more "democratic" guilds - it is what it is.

Metafae

I feel like I need to clarify something I said earlier

Metafae wrote: »

Over a year ago this guild was much more casual, and had a lot of members from this time.

By this I was referring to the time when trials in ESO were completely out of date, v16 was still a thing, and only SO was v14, the other two AA and HRC were only v12. Not only this, but if you made it to the leader boards for these trials when they were the weekly, you would not receive any rewards at the end of the week, that's right, none at all.

Because of this, there was very little interest in trials, and most trial based guilds were going through tough times. It was at that time I was referring to it being more casual, as you didn't have people who were serious about doing content that had no challenge and no rewards.

I can't speak for what the guild was like before that time as I didn't know of it back then. But Hedna has clarified what the guild was like in that time.

hedna123b14_ESO wrote: »

Also I think the guild was a bit misrepresented. It was NOT a casual guild. It was a hard to get into guild that has grown more lax on entry requirements (Ive been a member of it for years, so I know). Recently the decided to steer the guild back to its roots. I love the direction where it is heading and the slow methodical approach given to members who wish to be a part of this vision.

So we can be sure that the guild was never intended to be casual, but simply had some members join during the time when few people were interested in trials. A time when the entry requirements were slack, as the trials themselves were a walk in the park.

anitajoneb17_ESO

Artis wrote: »

Guild leaders are not your roommates. They are your landlord. If the market changes, the rent will increase. And if you can't pay that - you'll have to leave, nothing personal. My rent a couple years ago increased twice. It was up to me to renew the lease or not. I can complain that it's unfair (because my scholarship didn't increase), but why? It is what it is.

Other members are your roommates and the requirements apply to them as well. It is fair, because everyone is in the same conditions. Just like you, they can agree to pay $800 or go look for another place where they can keep paying $500.

After all, the game mechanics is such, that it's a guildmaster that has the right for all decisions, kicks, rank changes etc. So he's the one who decides, in the end, the direction of the guild development. Until they add more tools for having more "democratic" guilds - it is what it is.

I agree that in terms of game mechanics, guild masters can be pure dictators. But it is also very easy for anyone to create a guild. All guilds compete for members and may end up empty and dead much sooner than anyone will become guildless.
Guild masters behaving like dictators and considering their members as "numbers" or means to an end usually experience a lot of drama and turnover. Long lasting guilds are the ones where guild masters take the human factor into consideration and consider the guild as a service to their members, and not the other way around. That's my experience anyway.

LadyNalcarya

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

KoshkaMurka wrote: »

This was not the case according to other people from that guild...
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/3691314/#Comment_3691314
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/3694714/#Comment_3694714

I mentioned already that I'm discussing guild management in general, disconnected from OP's particular case. Just because I think it's an interesting topic ! Maybe I should start a new thread to avoid confusion, but I'm always reluctant to start new threads when a conversation is already going on.

Ah. ^^
Well, yeah, this is an interesting topic. Ingame society is like a real world society in minuature... Sometimes I have a feeling like I live in a small village or something lol.

rustic_potato

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

rustic_potato wrote: »

I have been a part of a raiding guild that started out as a casual guild doing normal trials to one that is competing for vMoL scores and working on vMoL HM.. Every time we made a shift to be more progressive, we kicked out 60% of our members because they didn't meet new requirements.. We tried helping them to improve but they were satisfied where they were. We did lose a lot of members but we also gained a lot of better raiders with these shifts.. So a guild is ultimately going to go in the direction the leaders want it to progress.. If you can adapt you stay else you get kicked out..

This contract you talk about doesn't exist.. It can be changed on a one side basis, only the guild leader's opinions matter.. I spend close to 15 hours a week working on the guild and I don't have to listen to the opinion of someone who joins me in an hour long raid once a month.. On the other hand if it is someone who spends enough time with me on the progress of my guild their opinion is invaluable..

Based on the above post I categorize you as a guild leader / guild who/which uses its members for its own purposes.
My opinion is that a guild should be a tool and a service for its members - members should use the guild, not the other way around.
And kicking members without even thinking of all the human relationships they might have woven among each other is something I do not agree with. Your guild definitely isn't for me.

I agree. I'm just an officer in my guild. Our GM's main goal when creating the guild was to use the guild to make us better players. People who share our ideals usually end up staying. Else they leave or end up getting kicked. It is just the nature of it.

Artis

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

I agree that in terms of game mechanics, guild masters can be pure dictators. But it is also very easy for anyone to create a guild. All guilds compete for members and may end up empty and dead much sooner than anyone will become guildless.
Guild masters behaving like dictators and considering their members as "numbers" or means to an end usually experience a lot of drama and turnover. Long lasting guilds are the ones where guild masters take the human factor into consideration and consider the guild as a service to their members, and not the other way around. That's my experience anyway.

yet, not everyone creates a guild. And yet only a few guilds are successful . Guildmasters do what they gotta do so the guild can correspond to their vision. And here we are talking about the guild whose purpose is doing vet trials and getting good in pve. Sure, they could've left the social rank and never invite those people anywhere until the dps benchmarks are hit, but why?

Also, this guild has been around since long time ago, so it is a long lasting guild. In fact, all long lasting guilds that successfully do vmol/vdsa and compete on leaderboards care about numbers more than humans. It is just what it is.

You can never say that members serve a guild - what does a "guild" get from members like OP? And the guild does serve players in this scenario. Namely: making sure that everyone you group with in the guild will have very good performance. Filtering out players IS being a service to guild's members, isn't it?

Cadbury

Artis wrote: »

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

I agree that in terms of game mechanics, guild masters can be pure dictators. But it is also very easy for anyone to create a guild. All guilds compete for members and may end up empty and dead much sooner than anyone will become guildless.
Guild masters behaving like dictators and considering their members as "numbers" or means to an end usually experience a lot of drama and turnover. Long lasting guilds are the ones where guild masters take the human factor into consideration and consider the guild as a service to their members, and not the other way around. That's my experience anyway.

yet, not everyone creates a guild. And yet only a few guilds are successful . Guildmasters do what they gotta do so the guild can correspond to their vision. And here we are talking about the guild whose purpose is doing vet trials and getting good in pve. Sure, they could've left the social rank and never invite those people anywhere until the dps benchmarks are hit, but why?

Also, this guild has been around since long time ago, so it is a long lasting guild. In fact, all long lasting guilds that successfully do vmol/vdsa and compete on leaderboards care about numbers more than humans. It is just what it is.

You can never say that members serve a guild - what does a "guild" get from members like OP? And the guild does serve players in this scenario. Namely: making sure that everyone you group with in the guild will have very good performance. Filtering out players IS being a service to guild's members, isn't it?

I think having a long term competitive guild you have to take the human element out of it. Expedience and efficiency are needed, and any suboptimal performance must be purged so that guild benefits as a whole. Those decisions should be made without emotions getting in the way. It's harsh, but sometimes necessary. I admire those GM's who make those tough calls.

Hawco10

Why go through all that crap? Should have told them to get a life and go do one.

mattgbrowneub17_ESO

I'd like to say I recently found myself in a similar situation as OP. Rather I'll say, the EXACT same position. I too was removed as a social member of this guild because I COULD NOT reach DPS benchmarks and DID NOT have the time to commit in game to prove to the guild that I could heal them through everything.

That being said they gave EVERYONE in guild at least six months to "reach" the allotted benchmarks as set forth by leadership.

Don't like it? Maybe you should've done the DPS test. Or made friends with people in guild so when you got kicked you could still LFG

Wamp wamp

-Trillphthillilam Rex

hedna123b14_ESO

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Artis wrote: »

Can't blame guild leaders for developing the guild they see fit. It's their guild after all.

Yes but no.
If you share a house with 10 other roomates and pay 500$ each, your roomates aren't free to all of a sudden decide they will decorate the house with diamonds and high-end furniture and the rent becomes 800$, and if you can't afford it you're out. That's not fair.
If you take a bus to New-York and all of a sudden the driver and a few passengers (even if it is the majority) decide to go to Los Angeles instead, and if you don't agree, you're free to get off at the next stop in the middle of nowhere, that's not fair, even if the driver owns the bus.

A guild is free to position itself as they want - high level, progression, casual, pve, pvp, rp, dungeoning, soloplay, result, company, friendship, companionship, trading, with or without fees, with or without goals, with or without expectations, whatever. But once that is set and advertised as such, it shouldn't change (or only very carefully).

Players need guilds for various things but a guild needs members. Guild leaders would be nothing without guild members and there are enough dead guilds around to prove it. There is a "contract", told or untold, between a guild and its members, and it should not be changed on a one-sided basis.

The problem is that 95% of guilds have no identity whatsoever and simply claim to do everything, welcome everyone, be the nicest and most helpful people on earth, and promote friendship. And that's it. Without any particular identity and positioning, everyone tends to impose their preferences onto others or to use other people for their own purposes - and that's where all the drama comes from. Actually, leading a guild or participating actively in a guild's social structure is a perfect training ground for small-scale politics.

(EDIT : I'm not referring to OP's case anymore, it's just that it is an interesting topic to discuss in general).

So much bad...
Analogy #1 - a false analogy since the OP did not pay rent, did not contribute to managing the guild, leading trials, etc...he was just another body...Being another body does not entitle you to things...
Analogy #2 - a false analogy since the OP can join another guild that is closer to what he requires.

A guild like an individual has the right to do how they see fit, they are not slaves to their initial choice, this is just completely illogical... especially given the fact that choices are quite bountiful...

hedna123b14_ESO

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

rustic_potato wrote: »

I have been a part of a raiding guild that started out as a casual guild doing normal trials to one that is competing for vMoL scores and working on vMoL HM.. Every time we made a shift to be more progressive, we kicked out 60% of our members because they didn't meet new requirements.. We tried helping them to improve but they were satisfied where they were. We did lose a lot of members but we also gained a lot of better raiders with these shifts.. So a guild is ultimately going to go in the direction the leaders want it to progress.. If you can adapt you stay else you get kicked out..

This contract you talk about doesn't exist.. It can be changed on a one side basis, only the guild leader's opinions matter.. I spend close to 15 hours a week working on the guild and I don't have to listen to the opinion of someone who joins me in an hour long raid once a month.. On the other hand if it is someone who spends enough time with me on the progress of my guild their opinion is invaluable..

Based on the above post I categorize you as a guild leader / guild who/which uses its members for its own purposes.
My opinion is that a guild should be a tool and a service for its members - members should use the guild, not the other way around.
And kicking members without even thinking of all the human relationships they might have woven among each other is something I do not agree with. Your guild definitely isn't for me.

A guild is there to service the majority of its members needs, if said majority wants progress policies to change, they should change...you seem to scream democracy...but only if it suits your own agenda...

hedna123b14_ESO

anitajoneb17_ESO wrote: »

Artis wrote: »

Guild leaders are not your roommates. They are your landlord. If the market changes, the rent will increase. And if you can't pay that - you'll have to leave, nothing personal. My rent a couple years ago increased twice. It was up to me to renew the lease or not. I can complain that it's unfair (because my scholarship didn't increase), but why? It is what it is.

Other members are your roommates and the requirements apply to them as well. It is fair, because everyone is in the same conditions. Just like you, they can agree to pay $800 or go look for another place where they can keep paying $500.

After all, the game mechanics is such, that it's a guildmaster that has the right for all decisions, kicks, rank changes etc. So he's the one who decides, in the end, the direction of the guild development. Until they add more tools for having more "democratic" guilds - it is what it is.

I agree that in terms of game mechanics, guild masters can be pure dictators. But it is also very easy for anyone to create a guild. All guilds compete for members and may end up empty and dead much sooner than anyone will become guildless.
Guild masters behaving like dictators and considering their members as "numbers" or means to an end usually experience a lot of drama and turnover. Long lasting guilds are the ones where guild masters take the human factor into consideration and consider the guild as a service to their members, and not the other way around. That's my experience anyway.

Yet several people in this thread are guild leaders who disagree with you and yet run successful long standing guilds...but clearly they have no idea what they are talking about...