Maintenance for the week of January 12:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – January 12

Guild Poll - Raising the limit on Guild member slots

  • xXSilverDragonXx
    xXSilverDragonXx
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    If you raise the limit it means you will have to be that much more active in recruiting as well as having that much more inactives. Ultimately it looks good but end result it would actually make more work in most cases. Also, if you don't fill it to the max, people will judge you worse for it because people do pay attn to how many members you have. So it if they were to double it, 300 members which is a pretty good amount would seem kind of like a dead beat guild to many compared to 1000. 500 would be considered only half full and lacking, but recruiting 500 people and keeping that roster full of active members is time consuming
  • Tandor
    Tandor
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    People being in up to 5 guilds each with up to 500 members is very likely part of the performance issue that some players suffer from, including the knock-on effect on the trading addons, adding another few hundred to each guild would doubtless make it even worse.
  • Kilnerdyne
    Kilnerdyne
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well, so far only 32% of people who responded to the poll want to keep the member limit to 500. 68% either don't care or would like it raised to some degree. The main reasons given to keep it the same are performance issues, trading issues & people thinking its superfluous. The game already has performance issues, trading issues & its not unnecessary anymore as more community reach this cap.
    Edited by Kilnerdyne on March 21, 2018 7:13PM
  • Dont_do_drugs
    Dont_do_drugs
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    well as someone who is quite firm with the trading system....

    at first sight it sounds nice to increase to 750 or even 1000 people per guild. it might easen the competition on the traders...thats what yo would think...

    the truth is, there is always someone thinking he needs to make another trade guild...so competition always will be

    ...and actually it would decrease the quality of the guilds on their spots and increase the gap between hardcore trading guilds and midranged trading guilds. there wont be more active players in the game, and a lot of guilds might manage to get their slots full, but only the biggest will get their slots full with active traders. the rest will be sitting on a bunch of inactives.

    ...aaaand worst of all: the amount of sold stuff gets doubled, the amount of information in guild history gets doubled, i dont see a benefit for the performance in it...actually i think it might have a really bad effect on ingame performance.

    Get Stuff like this (but not this stuff)


    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    "I have too admit. People leading trade guilds in this game are quite stupid. Not stupid like fools, but stupid like leaders.
    They can only bla-bla and waste gold on feeding their ego. I am disappointed."

    Egal, wie gut du Schach spielst, die Taube wird alle Figuren umwerfen, auf das Brett kacken und herumstolzieren, als hätte sie gewonnen.

    Arkadius Trade Tools
    Modular framework, now open for authors who want to add own tabs.

    My Donation (Arkadius' Trade Tools Addon)
    First external ATT tab contribution.

    Port to Friend's House Addon
    Check out the new Port to Friend's House library and port to contributers houses:
    Deutsch | English

  • Kilnerdyne
    Kilnerdyne
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    That's ok, the new 750-1000 member social community guilds would gladly pickup smaller traders more consistently when the larger trading guilds absorb more members. Guild history is already capped at a certain amount of data transmitted in the log, if you're running MM, AT or TTC addons then the sales per minute might adversely affect your performance client-side but if the issue is a larger download from the server when logging in & the text data coming from sales/bank deposits, ZOS have 3 billion dollars i'm sure they can afford to setup the capacity to send us a few more packets. There was never any performance benefit from this change touted, but enough performance issues exist already in the gameto make this angle null & void.
  • Dont_do_drugs
    Dont_do_drugs
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    That's ok, the new 750-1000 member social community guilds would gladly pickup smaller traders more consistently

    Well @Kilnerdyne you know it also centralizes trading and gives more advantage to the powersellers and also increases the easyness of manipulating prices. it also centralizes the "leadership" of trading to less people, which is dangerous as well - i know some of my former co-gm and neighbours inbelkarth and mournhold quite good, and kills off competition if u are really ambitious as upcoming trade guild gm.
    Edited by Dont_do_drugs on March 21, 2018 6:48PM

    Get Stuff like this (but not this stuff)


    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    "I have too admit. People leading trade guilds in this game are quite stupid. Not stupid like fools, but stupid like leaders.
    They can only bla-bla and waste gold on feeding their ego. I am disappointed."

    Egal, wie gut du Schach spielst, die Taube wird alle Figuren umwerfen, auf das Brett kacken und herumstolzieren, als hätte sie gewonnen.

    Arkadius Trade Tools
    Modular framework, now open for authors who want to add own tabs.

    My Donation (Arkadius' Trade Tools Addon)
    First external ATT tab contribution.

    Port to Friend's House Addon
    Check out the new Port to Friend's House library and port to contributers houses:
    Deutsch | English

  • Kilnerdyne
    Kilnerdyne
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Surely with larger memberships & sales per minute the ease of price manipulation is decreased; if you're fixing prices (afaik) you're looking to buy up all items on the market of a certain type say Cornflower, stockpile it over days/weeks and release it back into the market at a sharply raised price? I'm not a trading guild GM, or even a competent trader, which is partly why I made this thread, but wouldn't larger trading guilds mean more people were likely to join trading guilds overall, leading to alot more items on the market at any time, meaning the ones wanting to stockpile would have to spend larger amounts of time/money to do it?
  • Dont_do_drugs
    Dont_do_drugs
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Kilnerdyne wrote: »
    but wouldn't larger trading guilds mean more people were likely to join trading guilds overall, leading to alot more items on the market at any time

    there wont be ever more items on the market, than people have to sell and people want to buy. thats for sure :)
    Kilnerdyne wrote: »
    meaning the ones wanting to stockpile would have to spend larger amounts of time/money to do it?

    no, since the market is always limited to the people who want to buy something, and the amount which is able to be put on the market, this doesnt make any change.

    but with more centralized trading guilds and less trading-focused guilds, more social guilds on traders as u suggested, it gets easier for the focused powersellers to stock up, to buy up, since the main markets are centralized to a smaller amount of guilds and hubs. also from my experience, price pushes arent made by just 2 or 3 people, those 2 or 3 people might start it, but the focused powersellers see it happening quite fast and everyone jumps into that boat itsself.

    with less guilds/submarkets which u have to watch it is getting easier to control the listings. also the listings of those social guilds in atm less fluctuated hubs are getting more and more superfluous and even less people will go there, which also benefits the centralization-effect. after all it will become also harder as newcoming guild to compete, since the interesting trading hubs are getting more and more limited and are settled by the most powerfull guilds - and after all the established guilds will build an even stronger oligopol. this in fact also leads into less trade guild gm having more power over the whole trading system, even though i do not support the lots of mafia blanter about trade guilds, it still isnt healthy, especially when u look around and see, that people like me in the past (i lead 3 trade guilds in popular spots), some guildmasters dont only manage one trade guild, but have enough strength to go for 2, 3 or even 4 decent guilds on popular spots...

    Get Stuff like this (but not this stuff)


    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    "I have too admit. People leading trade guilds in this game are quite stupid. Not stupid like fools, but stupid like leaders.
    They can only bla-bla and waste gold on feeding their ego. I am disappointed."

    Egal, wie gut du Schach spielst, die Taube wird alle Figuren umwerfen, auf das Brett kacken und herumstolzieren, als hätte sie gewonnen.

    Arkadius Trade Tools
    Modular framework, now open for authors who want to add own tabs.

    My Donation (Arkadius' Trade Tools Addon)
    First external ATT tab contribution.

    Port to Friend's House Addon
    Check out the new Port to Friend's House library and port to contributers houses:
    Deutsch | English

  • Dont_do_drugs
    Dont_do_drugs
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    and jsut to be fair, mentioniing that its working for some people to have more decent guilds doesnt make me want them to stop it. i think its their right after all, if they are able to do it, while others dont even bring up the recruitment time to get one decent guild together. :p

    Get Stuff like this (but not this stuff)


    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    "I have too admit. People leading trade guilds in this game are quite stupid. Not stupid like fools, but stupid like leaders.
    They can only bla-bla and waste gold on feeding their ego. I am disappointed."

    Egal, wie gut du Schach spielst, die Taube wird alle Figuren umwerfen, auf das Brett kacken und herumstolzieren, als hätte sie gewonnen.

    Arkadius Trade Tools
    Modular framework, now open for authors who want to add own tabs.

    My Donation (Arkadius' Trade Tools Addon)
    First external ATT tab contribution.

    Port to Friend's House Addon
    Check out the new Port to Friend's House library and port to contributers houses:
    Deutsch | English

  • strangeradnd
    strangeradnd
    ✭✭✭✭
    Where is the option for guilds are already too big? Even at half the current size a guild would be more than large enough to run content so that isn't a factor. It would reduce the money each guild would likely be willing to spend for vendors making them more affordable for everyone or less profitable for the biggest fish . Why not make them smaller?

    edit: spelling
    Edited by strangeradnd on March 21, 2018 7:25PM
  • Dont_do_drugs
    Dont_do_drugs
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Where is the option for guilds are already to big? Even at half the current size a guild would be more than large enough to run content so that isn't a factor. It would reduce the money each guild would likely be willing to spend for vendors making them more affordable for everyone or less profitable for the biggest fish . Why not make the smaller?

    i think for social guilds its okay, but the stuff with "willing to spend" and affordable for everyone is a little bit wrong.

    * in a ideal universe a guild would bid aroundish mayb 80% of the tax income, with some stuff on the bank for weeks where they have to defend later.
    * in an ideal world people wouldnt donate or gm wouldnt put in extra gold into the bank to afford the bids but also
    * in an ideal world people wouldnt be able to afford and sustain bids over weeks by their own with crap guilds as well.

    there is already too much gold fluctuating on the market, some people can afford biddings by their own due to trading for mid ranged hubs while other guilds are working with the gold they are earning by regular trading. ur suggestion would make only one effect, looking on it from an actual situation with the actual amount of gold beeing around in game: people would be able to outbid trading guilds even more j4f with trash gilds, also those on the well fluctuated spots.

    edit: but i actually like that idea >:)
    Edited by Dont_do_drugs on March 21, 2018 7:29PM

    Get Stuff like this (but not this stuff)


    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    "I have too admit. People leading trade guilds in this game are quite stupid. Not stupid like fools, but stupid like leaders.
    They can only bla-bla and waste gold on feeding their ego. I am disappointed."

    Egal, wie gut du Schach spielst, die Taube wird alle Figuren umwerfen, auf das Brett kacken und herumstolzieren, als hätte sie gewonnen.

    Arkadius Trade Tools
    Modular framework, now open for authors who want to add own tabs.

    My Donation (Arkadius' Trade Tools Addon)
    First external ATT tab contribution.

    Port to Friend's House Addon
    Check out the new Port to Friend's House library and port to contributers houses:
    Deutsch | English

  • Kilnerdyne
    Kilnerdyne
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'd assume that after the cap was raised to 750-1000 that the top trading guilds would set about recruiting to fill the extra slots meaning more people might get into trading, leading to 22,500 or 30,000 items potentially being up for sale per guild instead of the current 15,000 slots with 500 members, which might bring us to a higher volume of items on the market in total. I certainly see your point about the already currently well-established trading guilds being able to take advantage of the extra tax to potentially rally together and abuse their power. I think this can most likely take place already at the current cap however.
  • Dont_do_drugs
    Dont_do_drugs
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'd assume that after the cap was raised to 750-1000 that the top trading guilds would set about recruiting to fill the extra slots meaning more people might get into trading

    u cant get more people into trading than which are trading. if u cant even really make rally ACTIVE trading guilds in minor hubs, where should the ones in the bigger guilds come from?

    i mean, i know what u mean, but u arent considering that trading, people, markets and items arent infinte. those are aspects which are limited to the amount of people playing, the amount of people actively trading, to the items on the market and people trying to buy items. there wont just appear more people to trade just bcs trade guilds have more slots, the people will only trasfer between guilds, in this case from mid ranged guilds to upper class guilds.

    Get Stuff like this (but not this stuff)


    ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

    "I have too admit. People leading trade guilds in this game are quite stupid. Not stupid like fools, but stupid like leaders.
    They can only bla-bla and waste gold on feeding their ego. I am disappointed."

    Egal, wie gut du Schach spielst, die Taube wird alle Figuren umwerfen, auf das Brett kacken und herumstolzieren, als hätte sie gewonnen.

    Arkadius Trade Tools
    Modular framework, now open for authors who want to add own tabs.

    My Donation (Arkadius' Trade Tools Addon)
    First external ATT tab contribution.

    Port to Friend's House Addon
    Check out the new Port to Friend's House library and port to contributers houses:
    Deutsch | English

  • Kilnerdyne
    Kilnerdyne
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Well that is part of the purpose of this thread to try to establish whether raising the cap would get more people involved in social & trading guilds in ESO. The GMs in the well-established guilds are as you say already making extra guilds (e.g. Trading Name I, II, III etc.) but this is not an efficient answer really; requiring you to have multiple accounts to continue to grow your community if you want to be leader in all the guilds to avoid problems, chat not being possible between different guilds, and that the 2nd guild never really feels as apart of the community as the original guild.

    They would much rather be able to recruit more members to their current guild than make copies and they're already experienced in how to not only recruit members but to retain them aswell, due to the policies, manner and activity of their guild. Alot of guilds don't last long or are poorly managed which leaves people with bad experiences of guilds in general. The guilds that are around for a long time are there because they're the types of communities people enjoy being apart of.

    I do think more people would get into trading & group content if the guilds that were trying the hardest to make this possible were able to at their fullest extent.

    The impact on the Trading market was one of the main reasons of conflict I imagined when creating the thread so it is very insightful to hear your thoughts on this, thank you :)
  • Avran_Sylt
    Avran_Sylt
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    While I can't say that I have much opinion on the topic of guild size, a toggle-able /global or /trade chat would be a rather interesting idea, and would require no guild to actually be formed.
  • Tasear
    Tasear
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    DoctorESO wrote: »
    But after we get to 1,000 will people demand 1,500, then 2,000, then 25,000?

    Depends on growth of the game. Assuming this truly needed then it's a sign of positive growth.

    I do think it's time guild system was looked at.
  • Tasear
    Tasear
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    exiars10 wrote: »
    There are currently almost 11k players logged via Steam. Add x2 for non-Steam players. So probably around ~33k on PC actively playing right now.

    So you rise cap to 1k. Think about it.

    Apparently there's something close to 10 million players to actively play so think about this.
  • deleted008293
    deleted008293
    ✭✭✭✭
    As much as I would like to get (me or my friends) into a large PvE guild that is currently over cap, I really think that allowing us to have super guilds in game will not be a good sign on the long run.
    - Why? Because you can just invite the top 1000 players into a guild and then strive the rest of community of opportunities such as joining some good open raids (weekly runs, score run, veteran trials) or some other really hard content that is currently not accessible to the vast majority of players unless they join some dedicated raiding guilds for example.
    - The above situation will create a serious imbalance between guilds to a point that smaller guilds might start to collapse, by having players migrating towards larger communities.
    - It also create more tension and drama within the guild when certain people don't get along with each other and have no other possibilities because the amount of end game guilds that will accept such players will be much smaller.

    - Also very important and almost forgot, without competition things will not go into the right direction.

    I would rather like to see an increase in the guilds someone could join. Reason?
    - Lets say i want to be into a large PvE community or two where I can't do much hard core things but I can often find some groups for content.
    - Then there is also PvP.
    - Then there are the trading guilds.
    - Then maybe you want to socialize and role play a bit. And this alone can be expanded into several branches such as social guild 1, 2, fishing, housing...
    - Maybe you want to be in a guild of your nationality too.
    - And maybe you want to be in 2-3 raid groups as well? To have a full schedule?
    Having so few guild spots sometimes force us to leave one of them behind for a new one.
    Edited by deleted008293 on March 27, 2018 6:59AM
  • deleted008293
    deleted008293
    ✭✭✭✭
    A really nice work around will be if by creating sister guilds you could actually have an option to merge the guild chat of all those sister guilds into one chat. Yet again this can lead to some problems.
    Edited by deleted008293 on March 27, 2018 7:06AM
  • knaveofengland
    knaveofengland
    ✭✭✭
    500 is more than enough if this is raised then the smaller guilds will have no traders , i think this is your intention wipe out the smaller traders .
  • Grabmoore
    Grabmoore
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    500 is more than enough if this is raised then the smaller guilds will have no traders , i think this is your intention wipe out the smaller traders .

    You have not read the thread then. OP stated he is aware it might conflict with the trading system and therefore asked for opinions.

    On the other side, I would agree that no new trading guilds need to be created ever again. At least this is true for PC EU. Instead of creating a new one, upcoming traders should participate in existing trade guilds. You seriously don't want to do all the stuff alone. As a leader of a nearly 4 years old 500 people trading guild, I can ensure you the small, rising guilds often fall very fast, because the trading system is such a hard business. Guilds with 200 people should not bid on traders at all. Imo, this is a part of the problem. Those guilds drive the bids up, because the big guilds want to secure the store for their 500 traders.
    EU - PC - Ebonheart Pact
    Iggy Grabmoore - Argonian Magicka Templar | Nyctasha - Redguard Stamina Nightblade
    Do-Ra'Zhar - Khajiit Stamina DK | Ashmedi - Dunmer Magicka DK
    Vanya Darchow - AD Altmer Magicka Sorc | Malek gro'Kash - Orc Stam Sorc
    GM of "Handelshaus von Riften" - Trading & PvX Community
  • jssriot
    jssriot
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Imagine the drama of a 1000 member guild.

    No one wants that.
    PC-NA since 2015. Tired and unimpressed.
  • deleted008293
    deleted008293
    ✭✭✭✭
    I still think it is not a good idea to increase guild cap. Because this will lead very fast towards super guilds, monopoly, and ultimately lack of competition and diversity (for example different strategies during trials).
    On top of that you will also force players less wanted by the community for various reasons (based on religion, politics, race, ethnicity, medical or personal problems) outside the game as they will have nowhere to go.

    Also what about those very large group of inexperienced players who might want to beat a certain content?
    Edited by deleted008293 on March 28, 2018 5:55AM
  • Tasear
    Tasear
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    How about a way for guildess to interact. Like a board for events or looking for help to complete something.
  • Enslaved
    Enslaved
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    I am more like, give us 2 more guild slots.
  • Grimm13
    Grimm13
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    More cons outweigh the pros in my book. I see greater revenues from tax and dues as creating too much of a separation from the small starting guilds.

    There are other means to achieve some advances for Guilds. The ability to have a chat channel to invite non-guild members in as well. This would have a greater effect on socialization, LFG, RP and event coordination. In effect this increases the social reach of the guilds while maintaining the gap of new to established trade guilds.
    https://sparkforautism.org/

    Season of DraggingOn
    It's your choice on how you vote with your $

    PC-NA
  • Nocturnal_Annoyance
    No. Nope. Definitely not. I manage a large trading guild... we have between 490 and 500 at all times. I spend a lot of time each week managing stuff and promotions (console guild with weekly dues). Despite what some players may believe... guild masters like to play the game as well. 500 is fine.
  • deleted008293
    deleted008293
    ✭✭✭✭
    At some point i wrote a post about guild level achievements. I think that would be something that most communities will be looking forward more than anything.
    Would you like more people in your guild or maybe less but much more active in one domain or another? :)
    Having a smaller guild that have its players specialized into several branches its far better than a guild with 1000 players.
  • Kilnerdyne
    Kilnerdyne
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    It would be wise to point out that there is someone replying to this thread that is here to disagree with this post for other reasons other than the content of the article. Why they are doing this is pretty clear though and unfortunately has nothing to do with discussing the points the poll is trying to make and has everything to do with bitterness.


    jssriot wrote: »
    Imagine the drama of a 1000 member guild.

    No one wants that.

    If this is already happening with 500 then you're not going to make a difference with 1000. If you've undesirable guild chat then that is a problem for your recruitment process.
    nordmarian wrote: »
    I still think it is not a good idea to increase guild cap. Because this will lead very fast towards super guilds, monopoly, and ultimately lack of competition and diversity (for example different strategies during trials).
    On top of that you will also force players less wanted by the community for various reasons (based on religion, politics, race, ethnicity, medical or personal problems) outside the game as they will have nowhere to go.

    Also what about those very large group of inexperienced players who might want to beat a certain content?

    500 is already a super guild. Increasing the cap won't improve your chances of joining a guild that doesn't want you to join.
    No. Nope. Definitely not. I manage a large trading guild... we have between 490 and 500 at all times. I spend a lot of time each week managing stuff and promotions (console guild with weekly dues). Despite what some players may believe... guild masters like to play the game as well. 500 is fine.

    Delegate. Unticking hide offline, sorting by offline time & kicking any outside your policy doesn't take very long. MM/ATT or whichever trading addon your using already shows sales per week in the guild roster & is also sortable for easy kicking. Not sure where all your time is going.
    nordmarian wrote: »
    A really nice work around will be if by creating sister guilds you could actually have an option to merge the guild chat of all those sister guilds into one chat. Yet again this can lead to some problems.

    Not sure you've read some of the points in the thread about this, but again this would allow people you wouldn't want in your guild to interact with your members.
  • tgrippa
    tgrippa
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I feel that as the game and the community grows larger it is only natural that guilds will need to be able to have more members. I am all for ZOS increasing the member limit.
    PCEU
    heh.
    heh.
Sign In or Register to comment.