PDA

View Full Version : Nerf Heritage Quest Status?


Dejah
07-15-2005, 10:54 PM
<DIV>That's a eye catching subject line if I've ever seen one.  There's been a lot of discussion about the possible abuse that could results from the recent changes on test.  The basic problem is: </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG>If guilds can de-patron someone without losing status, then you can make anyone a patron when they hand in Heritage Quests; thus earning massive status for the guild.</STRONG></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>There's been a lot of creative solutions proposed.  Many of these solutions are an attempt to avoid the situation where patrons are hot-swapped to maximize Heritage Quest status points.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Are the godly status rewards from Heritage Quests--which are so beloved by the players--the root of this problem?</STRONG></DIV> <DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG>If Heritage Quests didn't give uber status, would people still think that hot-swapping patrons would be a problem?</STRONG></DIV> <DIV><STRONG></STRONG> </DIV> <DIV><STRONG>Should SOE just Nerf the status reward from Heritage Quests?</STRONG></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I'm not trying to suggest that they do or don't.  All I ask is that you try to give reasoning for your opinion.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thanks!</DIV>

z2xm
07-15-2005, 11:15 PM
but then you are changing an already established game mechanic so that it fits in better with a new system that has lotsof other flaws in it.  It would seem there are simply better solutions out there that cause lots of people a lot less headaches. 

Brutus2
07-15-2005, 11:30 PM
<P>My guild has been discussing this on our own fourms and although this may seem like a good thing for guilds I think when you really think about it this is very bad for a number of reasons:</P> <P>First, the "hot-swapping" of patrons allows for easier power leveling of guilds.  Being a patron has been a commitment where both the player and the guild leaders have to carefully weigh the need to make each person a patron.  Now, its an unimportant decision.</P> <P>Second, with the change that guilds do not loose levels from people leaving that means once a guild gains level 30 all the members but one could quit and you would still have a level 30 guild.  The whole point of the guild system was to ensure  that guilds activly serve their city and that their reputation (status) could rise or fall according to their accomplishments.  This is no longer true.</P> <P>What is to stop people from power leveling a guild and then selling it off?  You could have level 10 people just buying a level 30 guild.  </P> <P>This is bad for guilds.  If you want to be a level 30 guild you should be expected to continue to contribute to your city's needs to keep favor with  your city leader.  Its not right that people can get to level 30 and then just sit back and do nothing, having people come and go as they please, never having to do writs or anything to maintain your level 30 status.</P>

some_perso
07-15-2005, 11:54 PM
<DIV>I've had this idea too.  I haven't been readin up on the other threads about the patron change to much (I just had time to skim them to read Moor's posts) but this does seem like it could be an adiquate solution.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Seeing as the massive majority of guild xp comes from heritage quests the name of the game for lvlin' your guild currently is who would do enough heritage to warrent adding them as a patron, and whats the probability that they'll quit the game or guilds in the forseeable future?</DIV> <DIV>This makes it so guilds that lvl faster are those who choose patrons wisely and even then does not go far over 20 patrons, which makes it so zerg style guilds do not gain an advantage.  If they just get rid of status loss all together now, zerg guilds can take advantage of the change to give them a massive benefit.</DIV> <DIV>However the current system of guild lvls is the worse aspect of this game in my opinion.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now if hertiages quest produced less guild xp it would make guild xp more based on writs, and killing the occasional contested mob.  However writs could still be tooken advantage of with this patron change and a zerg guild would still have an advantage since they would have more ppl that can do more writs.  Also a big variable with this is I'm still not sure about how exactly guild lvl and status works.  From what I've gathered so far is the amount of status contributed is tha amount earned divided by the number of patrons or 12 (which ever is higher).  However I've noticed several instances where my guild has been higher lvl than other guilds even though my guild has less guild status than them, which means # of patrons has something to do with guild status needed to lvl as well.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Hmmm I'm inclined to agree with the first response here that nerfing heritage gain would be ineffecient and just creat as many problems as it would solve.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

RoseWhi
07-16-2005, 12:03 AM
If the Heritage quests do not give status comensurate with their difficulty, there is no point in doing most of the Heritage quests, as most classes will never really be able to use the rewards.

Brutus2
07-16-2005, 12:04 AM
Ah, I disagree.  Heritage quests are far more fun and rewarding then writs, I like that they are the main source of guild XP as it provides extra incentive to wait out those long boring camps or to complete heritage quests for items your character doesnt need.  They are also far more difficult and time consuming and therefore should have far greater guild XP reward.  I think it would be wrong to nerf heritage quests just to make them fit in to a poorly planned new guild system.  Just get rid of  this idea that you can take away patrons at will and the problem is solved.  As I mentioned before, I dont think its fair that a level 30 guild could loose all its members and still remain a level 30 guild.  There needs to be a consiquence to having players not want to be a part of your guild anymore.

Meryddian
07-16-2005, 12:12 AM
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT></DIV> <P><FONT color=#ffffcc><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2><EM>If the Heritage quests do not give status comensurate with their difficulty, there is no point in doing most of the Heritage quests, as most classes will never really be able to use the rewards.</EM> </FONT></FONT></FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT></P> <HR> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Not true.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Many heritage quest items are multi-class usable (bag of evil eye, anyone?) - plus if you can't use it directly on your character then you can at least have a cool item to put in your room, or sell it to an NPC from 20-60g. Not all people are even guilded when they complete their HQs, even - which would be a "waste" of status in some people's eyes.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Also at level 50, when writs = 4K status, it takes 9 writs - and a lot less time - to complete as many writs as it takes to equal one HQ (with avg return of approx 35K/HQ)</FONT></P><p>Message Edited by Meryddian on <span class=date_text>07-15-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:16 PM</span>

Kirotaan
07-16-2005, 01:22 AM
I can't use the SBH on my Necro.  Why should I get it for a "place on my wall".  I did do it for those who want to ask and I am a patron and the reward to the guild was nice; however, were it not worth the large boost even though I was a patron I never would have done this quest.  Of course now it has also taken up a place on my wall with the other HQs I have done that I don't really need but did FOR THE GUILD.  The boots I did were useless to me when my boots were better and I am looking at buying a better necklace now to replace my Greater Lightstone.  Also by the logic that 9writs = 1HQ at lvl 50 ... Almost all the HQs can be started 40 or lower.  I don't know off hand of any that start higher than 40 right now.  So at lvl 50 they arn't going to impact as much as a quest that is 10 lvls higher.  I think you would be hard pressed to find people who would do them for fun if they wern't worth so much.  Especially the annoying ones that take mining x thing in x region which is rare etc.  Honestly I think the rewards are well set right now. <div></div>

Auron_ff10
07-16-2005, 06:23 PM
Dont try to implement any changes like these that give advantages to guilds that have ALREADY hit 30. This just makes it harder for other guilds to catch up. This game has had too many changes so far that disadvantage the players that didnt race their way to the end, dont add any more.

Dorma
07-16-2005, 07:48 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Brutus2 wrote:<BR>Ah, I disagree.  Heritage quests are far more fun and rewarding then writs, <FONT color=#ff0000>I like that they are the main source of guild XP</FONT> as it provides extra incentive to wait out those long boring camps or to complete heritage quests for items your character doesnt need.  They are also far more difficult and time consuming and therefore should have far greater guild XP reward.  I think it would be wrong to nerf heritage quests just to make them fit in to a poorly planned new guild system.  Just get rid of  this idea that you can take away patrons at will and the problem is solved.  As I mentioned before, I dont think its fair that a level 30 guild could loose all its members and still remain a level 30 guild.  There needs to be a consiquence to having players not want to be a part of your guild anymore. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Heritages do give a lot of status, but they only go half way currently.  It takes 12 patrons approximately 208,000 status to acheive guild level 30.  I have done 21 heritages so far and IIRC i got about 85,000 guild status from them.  I imagine if our numbers had always been 12 patrons though, i'd have gotten closer to 100,000 status from doing them.  With all the threads on the issues of patrons prior to their test server notes,  i am sure SOE has thought of these possible abuses.  It seems more then likely that there will be some sort of penalty,  we just don't know what that is yet.  But if there isn't ,  it would seem that SOE Intends for these abuses to happen and make leveling the guilds trivial.  IMHO if they removed the status from heritages,  people would do a lot less of them.  </P> <P>Just my 2 cents.<BR></P>

Icewolf99
07-16-2005, 08:04 PM
This is an easy fix.  Simply make it where you can't be repatronized for 30 days after being unpatroned.  Simple. <div></div>

BloodSmo
07-16-2005, 08:13 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Meryddian wrote:<BR> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT></DIV> <P><FONT color=#ffffcc><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2><EM>If the Heritage quests do not give status comensurate with their difficulty, there is no point in doing most of the Heritage quests, as most classes will never really be able to use the rewards.</EM> </FONT></FONT></FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT></P> <HR> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Not true.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Many heritage quest items are multi-class usable (bag of evil eye, anyone?) - plus if you can't use it directly on your character then you can at least have a cool item to put in your room, or sell it to an NPC from 20-60g. Not all people are even guilded when they complete their HQs, even - which would be a "waste" of status in some people's eyes.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Also at level 50, when writs = 4K status, it takes 9 writs - and a lot less time - to complete as many writs as it takes to equal one HQ (with avg return of approx 35K/HQ)</FONT></P> <P>Message Edited by Meryddian on <SPAN class=date_text>07-15-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:16 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Actually its very true in most cases, i have done 11 HQs thus far, 5 of which i can use the item, 6 of which i never can.  I didnt do the other 6 to hang the crap on my walls, i didnt do them for the coin(time would have been better spent harvesting), and i deffinatly didnt do them becase they were fun(waiting hours for crap to spawn isnt my idea of fun), i did them 1 very simple reason, Status points(and a spiffy Lore Seeker tag :smileyhappy<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />.  </P> <P>Also your math on writs makes little to no sense......Writs scale per lvl and the lvl of your guild.  IF you have a lvl 50 guy in a lvl 5 guild his writs wont do crap, however the HQs are still worth the same smount of Status, also most HQs are 40k-50+K.  Saying 9 writs = 1 HQ maybe under the right circumstances.  Hqs are still the prefered means of increasing Guild lvl, makeing them trivial would just make less people do them.</P>

mochl
07-16-2005, 09:47 PM
<DIV>Contributed points given for the completion of heritage quests isn't the problem, the proposed guild changes that trivialize guild levels is. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I love the idea of not losing levels when a patron leaves. Let's say my guild is lvl 10 and we are 50% towards 11, why don't they set it up so that when we lose a patron, their status goes away but not the level? That way we would lose progress in our current level but never have to worry about losing our currently level entirely. This might also stem some of the ideas people are having about power leveling when combined with some of the 30 day patrons ideas ive been reading about.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Guild level 30 shouldnt be as easy as it sounds like it is going to be.</DIV>

Nature
07-17-2005, 12:11 AM
There should be a lockout timer of say, 7 days, when you depatron someone then make another person patron. That would discourage people hot swapping or whatever just for heritage status knowing they only have this ability in a limit capacity.

Kizee
07-17-2005, 12:50 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nature wrote:<BR>There should be a lockout timer of say, 7 days, when you depatron someone then make another person patron. That would discourage people hot swapping or whatever just for heritage status knowing they only have this ability in a limit capacity. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Just 7 days? I was thinking at least a month or even permanently.

RavenFeather
07-17-2005, 01:01 AM
<div></div>Once I read the test update notes I knew this was going to be a hotly contested issue, and it already has sparked debate within my own guild and our sister freeport guild. But to chime in on the O.P's idea I still believe that there should be no penalty for depatroning a member but this should be combined with a timer for when that person can be repatroned, 30 days or so would seem reasonable.  However I do feel there still should be a penatly for patroned members leaving the guild, deleting their toons or having them deleted from subscription expiration.  However I feel the penalty for losing a patroned member should not be complete removal of that patrons guild xp but a system of accrued guild experience debt at a percentage of the total xp earned by that particular patron.  This debt would be just the same as personal experience debt that can be 'payed down' and have a wear off timer, though that would need to be a much longer timer than the personal debt wear-off as a guild is never essentially 'logged off'. This way the guild isnt quite as penalized as they are now for loss of patrons and yet still has to work harder to begin gaining experience at its previous rate.  Guild experience debt combined with the timer for re-patroning would prevent guilds power-leveling to 30 in a matter of days or weeks and would still carry out the intent of this patch which is to help mitigate the loss of a guilds progress as the system is currently configured. <div></div><p>Message Edited by Ravenfeather75 on <span class=date_text>07-16-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:02 PM</span>

Nature
07-17-2005, 01:14 AM
My only concern is this, in my guild which i know there are others in this same situation(has to be others out there as well) we have people in the armed services(army, navy, air force, or marines) that have been sent to iraq or else where. We have 2 in our guild that are now over seas that are patrons. It may be a year be fore they return. Should they be permantly banned from being patrons again in our guild because they had to serve their country? Why should they be punished or the guild be punished when they return and leave the guild because they were depatroned and can no longer be a patron in the guild? Make it 2 months for all i care. It will at least make it possible to switch patrons without losing a crap load of guild experience and levels and be able to keep an active patron list instead of the current way where you have to leave someone as patron even though they are inactive.

Feaw
07-17-2005, 09:18 PM
<DIV>The problem with this is that its not just patrons who benefit from the status of heritages.  There are many many players who would never be able to have a horse if it werent for the heritage quest that earn them personal status.   So if they were to nerf the status points gained by heritages they would need to keep the high level personal status that doesnt effect guild level or there would be a serious backlash.   Heritages are a lot of fun despite them being long and demanding partly because of the points you earn.   Also consider the items that have value on the market because they are needed for some heritages.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

Dazzler_Twodir
07-17-2005, 11:04 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> BloodSmoke wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Meryddian wrote:<BR> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT></DIV> <P><FONT color=#ffffcc><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2><EM>If the Heritage quests do not give status comensurate with their difficulty, there is no point in doing most of the Heritage quests, as most classes will never really be able to use the rewards.</EM> </FONT></FONT></FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT></P> <HR> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Not true.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Many heritage quest items are multi-class usable (bag of evil eye, anyone?) - plus if you can't use it directly on your character then you can at least have a cool item to put in your room, or sell it to an NPC from 20-60g. Not all people are even guilded when they complete their HQs, even - which would be a "waste" of status in some people's eyes.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Also at level 50, when writs = 4K status, it takes 9 writs - and a lot less time - to complete as many writs as it takes to equal one HQ (with avg return of approx 35K/HQ)</FONT></P> <P>Message Edited by Meryddian on <SPAN class=date_text>07-15-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:16 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Actually its very true in most cases, i have done 11 HQs thus far, 5 of which i can use the item, 6 of which i never can.  I didnt do the other 6 to hang the crap on my walls, i didnt do them for the coin(time would have been better spent harvesting), and i deffinatly didnt do them becase they were fun(waiting hours for crap to spawn isnt my idea of fun), i did them 1 very simple reason, Status points(and a spiffy Lore Seeker tag :smileyhappy<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />.  </P> <P>Also your math on writs makes little to no sense......Writs scale per lvl and the lvl of your guild.  IF you have a lvl 50 guy in a lvl 5 guild his writs wont do crap, however the HQs are still worth the same smount of Status, also most HQs are 40k-50+K.  Saying 9 writs = 1 HQ maybe under the right circumstances.  Hqs are still the prefered means of increasing Guild lvl, makeing them trivial would just make less people do them.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Writs are per char level not guild level.</P> <P>Level 50 player will get over 4k personal status for writs.</P>

Dazzler_Twodir
07-17-2005, 11:06 PM
<DIV>Bah double post said server not responding...</DIV> <P>Message Edited by Dazzler_Twodirks on <SPAN class=date_text>07-17-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>12:06 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by Dazzler_Twodirks on <span class=date_text>07-17-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:07 PM</span>

WuphonsReach
07-18-2005, 07:17 PM
<blockquote><hr>Icewolf99 wrote:This is an easy fix. Simply make it where you can't be repatronized for 30 days after being unpatroned. Simple. <div></div><hr></blockquote>Easily abused by larger guilds.In a larger guild, have your members prep HQs and save up status loot. Every week, make 1/4 of them patrons, do the turn-ins, de-patron for a month. With enough bodies, you're still going to be completing numerous HQs and status turn-ins on a weekly basis. IOW, larger guilds now have a huge leveling advantage over a smaller, more focused guild.The "can't re-patron for a month" only fixes the issue so that it becomes non-useful to play with the patron flag for individual writs.

Margen
07-18-2005, 07:36 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nature wrote:<BR>My only concern is this, in my guild which i know there are others in this same situation(has to be others out there as well) we have people in the armed services(army, navy, air force, or marines) that have been sent to iraq or else where. We have 2 in our guild that are now over seas that are patrons. It may be a year be fore they return. Should they be permantly banned from being patrons again in our guild because they had to serve their country? Why should they be punished or the guild be punished when they return and leave the guild because they were depatroned and can no longer be a patron in the guild? Make it 2 months for all i care. It will at least make it possible to switch patrons without losing a crap load of guild experience and levels and be able to keep an active patron list instead of the current way where you have to leave someone as patron even though they are inactive. <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Totally agree both me and my RL brother are in the same guild and are both in the Service, he is in the Army and I am in the Airforce.  He just got sent on an 8 month deployment, through no fault of his own he now is not contributing to the guild and he has gained over 18,000 xp for the guild.  So a month long timer on repatroning sound reasonible and would avoid abuse, but to permently depatron someone in that situation is wrong IMHO.</P> <P>As for the hertige question, I personnely think they should remain the same.  Most are time consuming and take a lot of effort, and many provide no upgrade for certain classes.  But now they have reasons to complete these quest for helping the guild advance, it increases the concept of the guild, and most of them are doable by the smaller guilds.</P> <P>I've completed 3 of the hertige quest so far (tried doing empore Fyst last night for SBS, but we couldn't get areana to spawn, different issue though LOL), some where nice equipment upgrades, but some of them really won't do much for me also, or I out grow them quickly.</P> <P>Just my 2cp</P> <P>V/R</P> <P>Blackoath</P> <p>Message Edited by Margen on <span class=date_text>07-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>10:22 AM</span>

Naughtesn
07-18-2005, 09:17 PM
<P>It's not just HQs that are ripe for abuse - at level 50, the solo writs give 4200-4250 SPs each.  An HQ gives between 35-60k (most around 50Kish).  That equals - on average - 12 writs - that's 3 round trips.  The smart patrons have realized that it is more efficient to do 3 writ runs than it is to do a long HQ.  How many HQs can you finish in 3-4 hrs....EE bag? (maybe if all goes your way with Chomper), Mask? (In order to make finding Billy easier, you have to wait 18 hrs after your first trip to NC),  etc. etc.  There are many, many that unless you are the luckiest person on earth would take you at least 6hrs and some days longer than that.</P> <P>HQs are just impressive big chunks that could be used to abuse the system if a non patron had a bunch set to pop then was patroned.  But, the same amount of SPs, over time, could be more easily abused, just by toggling writ-completers.</P> <P>I beseech whoever is making the decision on implementation to look close and hard at the issues, exploits, and suggestions posted in the many threads on this subject. </P>

KindredHeart
07-18-2005, 11:09 PM
<P>"Are the godly status rewards from Heritage Quests--which are so beloved by the players--the root of this problem?"</P> <P>Nope.</P> <P><BR> <BR>"If Heritage Quests didn't give uber status, would people still think that hot-swapping patrons would be a problem?"</P> <P>Yep</P> <P><BR> <BR>"Should SOE just Nerf the status reward from Heritage Quests?"</P> <P>Nope</P> <P> </P> <P>I don't think it's possible for the OP to be more off-base.  The solution isn't to make things more unequal.  What you suggest would let guilds who have already had patrons complete all the HQs (and thus earn status) keep the credit.  However, you suggest that guilds which are newly formed or have not yet had all their patrons complete the HQs should not get the credit.  That is not a solution - not even close to a solution.</P> <P>I don't have a problem with SOE fixing something if it is truly broken.  What I do have a problem with is when they establish a finish line and a set of rules.  We are all given the same initial tools to begin the race and told how to get to the finish line.  Then once a few hard workers actually manage to cross that finsih line they decide to change the race and the rules.  Undermining the hard work and accomplishments of your players will never win any fans.  Making it easier for those who aren't willing to put in the effort - while punishing those who did seems to be the motto of the day.</P> <P>The ONLY problem I ever saw with the guild level / status system was that individuals could not participate in their home city's factions unless they were a part of a guild.  I really think that the whole concept of patrons / non-patrons etc is pretty stupid.  If you want to have a measure of a guild's worth it should reflect the guild as a whole - not just 12 people in it.  I don't think that measure of worth should be tied to anything other than perhaps a title.  It makes sense to me that a player can be truly great in or outside of a guild.  If a player earns status and the right to the rewards that come with that status then they should be able to do so inside or outside a guild.  The current guild level / status system has forced / encouraged a great many players who have little or no interest in being a part of a guild to join guilds.  All so they can accumilate their status, buy their stuff, and take a hike.  If it was ever SOE's intention to foster guild development then the guild level / status system they have set up currently accomplishes exactly the opposite.</P><p>Message Edited by KindredHeart on <span class=date_text>07-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:28 PM</span>

Ashlian
07-18-2005, 11:27 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> WuphonsReach wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Icewolf99 wrote:<BR>This is an easy fix. Simply make it where you can't be repatronized for 30 days after being unpatroned. Simple.<BR> <BR> <HR> <BR>Easily abused by larger guilds.<BR><BR>In a larger guild, have your members prep HQs and save up status loot. Every week, make 1/4 of them patrons, do the turn-ins, de-patron for a month. With enough bodies, you're still going to be completing numerous HQs and status turn-ins on a weekly basis. IOW, larger guilds now have a huge leveling advantage over a smaller, more focused guild.<BR><BR>The "can't re-patron for a month" only fixes the issue so that it becomes non-useful to play with the patron flag for individual writs.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE> <P>But a vesting system would fix this. If the first quarter set of patrons had to remain patrons one week for each 10% of vested status (starting with nothing vested until you've been a patron a week) then it would require ten weeks of them REMAINING patrons to get the full status benefit of anything they did while a patron. And once you dropped them for the next quarter set, then they would require that same ten weeks for accrued status to count fully. So it would require you nearly a year to get through 48 patrons with fully vested status. Vesting times could be adjusted once they see how well it works, either up or down, once the system was set up. If keeping someone a patron for one week and switching them out is only going to net you 10% of the guild status they earn that week, that would seem to be a poor reward compared to waiting the full or most of the vesting period to squeeze as much as you can out of their efforts. Nor would it penalize guilds who already have that low turnover in patrons.</P> <P>Ashlian Liadan, 42 Fury, 32 Tailor of Mistmoore<BR></P>

BloodSmo
07-19-2005, 12:34 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dazzler_Twodirks wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> BloodSmoke wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Meryddian wrote:<BR> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT></DIV> <P><FONT color=#ffffcc><FONT face=Verdana><FONT size=2><EM>If the Heritage quests do not give status comensurate with their difficulty, there is no point in doing most of the Heritage quests, as most classes will never really be able to use the rewards.</EM> </FONT></FONT></FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT></P> <HR> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Not true.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Many heritage quest items are multi-class usable (bag of evil eye, anyone?) - plus if you can't use it directly on your character then you can at least have a cool item to put in your room, or sell it to an NPC from 20-60g. Not all people are even guilded when they complete their HQs, even - which would be a "waste" of status in some people's eyes.</FONT></P> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Also at level 50, when writs = 4K status, it takes 9 writs - and a lot less time - to complete as many writs as it takes to equal one HQ (with avg return of approx 35K/HQ)</FONT></P> <P>Message Edited by Meryddian on <SPAN class=date_text>07-15-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>03:16 PM</SPAN><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Actually its very true in most cases, i have done 11 HQs thus far, 5 of which i can use the item, 6 of which i never can.  I didnt do the other 6 to hang the crap on my walls, i didnt do them for the coin(time would have been better spent harvesting), and i deffinatly didnt do them becase they were fun(waiting hours for crap to spawn isnt my idea of fun), i did them 1 very simple reason, Status points(and a spiffy Lore Seeker tag :smileyhappy<img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />.  </P> <P>Also your math on writs makes little to no sense......Writs scale per lvl and the lvl of your guild.  IF you have a lvl 50 guy in a lvl 5 guild his writs wont do crap, however the HQs are still worth the same smount of Status, also most HQs are 40k-50+K.  Saying 9 writs = 1 HQ maybe under the right circumstances.  Hqs are still the prefered means of increasing Guild lvl, makeing them trivial would just make less people do them.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Writs are per char level not guild level.</P> <P>Level 50 player will get over 4k personal status for writs.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>This is just not true, when my guild was lvl 7 and i did a lvl 50 writ with my Armorer i got 2200-2500, now my guild is 18 and i get 2800-3250.............</DIV>

Dejah
07-19-2005, 12:42 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> KindredHeart wrote:<BR> <P>I don't think it's possible for the OP to be more off-base.  The solution isn't to make things more unequal.  What you suggest would let guilds who have already had patrons complete all the HQs (and thus earn status) keep the credit.  However, you suggest that guilds which are newly formed or have not yet had all their patrons complete the HQs should not get the credit.  That is not a solution - not even close to a solution.</P> <P>Message Edited by KindredHeart on <SPAN class=date_text>07-18-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>02:28 PM</SPAN></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Sorry, I wasn't trying to suggest anything with my original post.  What I did was think up of an interesting scenario that SOE could take and started a discussion around it since there wasn't one yet.  I asked three questions and asked for people to supply their reasoning for their responses. </P> <P>KindredHeart, you pointed out that it would be unfair that guilds who already have had patrons complete HQs would still get to keep that status, and that is a valid point, and I thank you for your contribution to this discussion.</P> <P>It's been nice discussion so far, and a lot of good points have showed up.  It'll be interesting to see what additional changes come to test before this update goes live.</P>

Naughtesn
07-19-2005, 01:20 AM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> BloodSmoke wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Dazzler_Twodirks wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2></FONT></DIV> <P><FONT face=Verdana size=2>Also at level 50, when writs = 4K status, it takes 9 writs - and a lot less time - to complete as many writs as it takes to equal one HQ (with avg return of approx 35K/HQ)</FONT></P> <P>Message Edited by Meryddian on <SPAN class=date_text>07-15-2005</SPAN><SPAN class=time_text>03:16 PM</SPAN><BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Also your math on writs makes little to no sense......Writs scale per lvl and the lvl of your guild.  IF you have a lvl 50 guy in a lvl 5 guild his writs wont do crap, however the HQs are still worth the same smount of Status, also most HQs are 40k-50+K.  Saying 9 writs = 1 HQ maybe under the right circumstances.  Hqs are still the prefered means of increasing Guild lvl, makeing them trivial would just make less people do them.<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Writs are per char level not guild level.</P> <P>Level 50 player will get over 4k personal status for writs.</P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>This is just not true, when my guild was lvl 7 and i did a lvl 50 writ with my Armorer i got 2200-2500, now my guild is 18 and i get 2800-3250.............</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Are you talking TS or Adv writs - level 45+ adventure writs (which are the only ones you can do en masse to be be more efficient than HQs) give 4200+ for a level 50 player.  TS writs give less - plus you can choose the level of your adv writ, unlike TS writs - probably accounting for the range you note (2800-3250).<BR> <p>Message Edited by Naughtesnec on <span class=date_text>07-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:21 PM</span>

KindredHeart
07-20-2005, 07:07 PM
<DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV>Dejah:  It's been nice discussion so far, and a lot of good points have showed up.  It'll be interesting to see what additional changes come to test before this update goes live.</DIV> <DIV> <HR> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Let's hope that there are changes, and that the currently proposed "system" doesn't go forward *fingers crossed*.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <P> </P>