Guild Bank

This is where the best suggestions are moved to, so discussion can carry on with moderation and be more easily read by the volunteers and development team.

Moderator: Support Moderators

Forum rules
Opening new topics in this forum is not possible, you may only reply to existing topics.

Only users with 50 or more posts can reply to topics.

This forum is moderated, so any posts will have to be approved by a moderator before being published.
User avatar
Ferdoc
Addicted Member
Addicted Member
Posts: 13933
Joined: Wed 23 Jan, 2008 19:05
Reputation: 114
Guild: ZORAN is a GLOBAL DICTATOR!
Location: ZORAN is a GLOBAL DICTATOR!

Re: Guild Bank

Postby Ferdoc » Tue 04 Jan, 2011 00:13

Cabbage wrote:The one thing I would like to see implemented into your guild bank feature are more options to choose from (instead of Economy vs Speed).


Its not econ vs speed. You get both. Remember this is the foundation for Guild Bases and Guild Technology ideas. Its not meant to be overly expansive but offer short and medium term rewards for preparing to use the other two.


Cabbage wrote:I know they are most likely going to abusable (anything apart from Economy / Speed) but I can see many guilds forcing players to donate a % of their income.


There aren't many ideas I could put into the Guild Bank without taking away from later ideas, which again involve more time to achieve and the like. Guilds can try to force you, but seeing as they have no way to easily determine who is and who isn't donating enforcing it would become rather involved.

Cabbage wrote:It would be nice to see the % being adjustable between 1% - > 15% instead of just 10%.


Perhaps. Individual adjustment on the fleet movement screen could be useful.


Narth Vader wrote:My only qualm with this idea is that it makes the big guilds more powerful. Now where I come from, when there's a server war, that means that two massive guilds or blocs will sit on a jumpgate and blob until they can find an opportunity. In fact, most of the players are hardly active in those guilds. They'll follow fleet deployments to give the illusion of a great big blob.


Sadly, any idea that is implemented will increase the power of larger guilds. That is a fact with anything added. Unless specifically relegated to the smaller guilds, it will always increase the power of larger guilds. I don't have much of a way to prevent that. Any curtailing factor can be potentially abused and/or become abusive in and of itself towards those larger guilds.

Narth Vader wrote:And to me, this doesn't quite seem to help make big guilds any more active. And activity may not be the intended goal.


Activity is not my intended goal. Adding more purpose to guilds, rather than communication and JG sharing, is my intent.

Narth Vader wrote: But I figure that these benefits will just lead the big guilds to sim harder and blob more. Can the speed bonuses applied onto a high level JG with a high level Log commander really make enough of a difference if you're trying to raid a fortress? Or the speed bonus applied to wormholes?


If a guild blobs and sims harder they will lose out on 10% of their econ while trying to fill their queues, their growth rate will be 90%, instead of 100%, for quite some time. Just eyeballing things as they stand, a guild that greatly benefits from internal TRs will likely recover 3% or 4% of their potential growth, meaning they will have 93% or 94% instead of the 100% growth rate. The 100% growth rate is based on a null donation rate

A guild that goes out and fights to help fill their queues will always maintain their 100% growth rate even when donating 10% of their econ. Assuming that guild gains the same 3% or 4% in growth they will be able to expand and allow their potential growth rate to be higher.

Now to explain that a bit more with numbers, but not full blown calculations. [XYZ] and [123] are in a war. Both have the same total econ and production. For simplicity's sake we'll say the total econ is 100,000 and production is 100,000 for both guilds. Now, that means their 100% growth rate is when econ is equal to their production, at 100,000. Guild [XYZ] goes in to sim mode and donates 10% of their income to their bank. That means they are producing at 90% of max. Lets say they are able to recover 4% after a month of running at 90%. Again for simplicity.

30 days * 24 hours = 720 production 'ticks' at 90,000.

64,800,000 million fleet is produced.

After that every production 'tick' there will be 94,000 more fleet coming out.


Guild [123] goes another route. They go out and fight to fill the gap left by donating. So their econ is 90,000 after donating 10%. They go out and fight to fill that remaining 10,000 econ giving them 100,000 econ to put into production. After a month they recover 4% of their econ putting them back at 94%. They are, however, still getting 10,000 econ from combat. Putting them at 104% of their econ. So they are able to fully produce and still get 4% overflow. Now, in that month of donating 10% they produced the following amount of fleet.

30 days * 24 hours = 720 production 'ticks' at 100,000.

72,000,000 million fleet is produced.

After that all ticks are still at 100,000 fleet plus the ability to grow their prod cap by 4%.


Even with the fleet used in combat the guild that fights will be able to have their queues full and be able to expand. The possibility of one group causing an opening by managing their own activities better becomes more likely.



The down side is that with the disappearance of the old thread much of the analysis is also gone. So this cursory example will have to do for now.




Narth Vader wrote:While I like making trades more profitable, that certainly means a stronger economy and closes the gap between econ and prod. But after a certain point, do we particularly need that econ boost?


Yes. Its a short and medium term enticement that gives something now for investing and preparing for additional future rewards. It also creates a need, within the group, to determine what particular balance they want in rewards and from what area.

Narth Vader wrote:It doesn't really seem like the idea will contribute anything that will get players active
, and I'm playing on a giant sim server where I only see this making the simming worse. And sure, you can play the game how you want, but not when you drag half the server into your blob war.


Blob wars are already expanding, and quickly. This idea will not do anything to speed that up more so than current in game politics and player created environments have already done. Again, this idea is not designed to be a motivating factor for players to log in more and become active. This is merely a foundation for more purpose for guilds beyond the very bare bones and limited uses.

Gotta love those death threats
Soubanth wrote:you're going to help him even if it kill you.
User avatar
Griffin Vengeance
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Posts: 2843
Joined: Sat 10 Mar, 2007 21:48
Reputation: 108
Guild: [NPO]
Galaxy: Alpha
Location: United Kingdom

Re: Guild Bank

Postby Griffin Vengeance » Wed 12 Jan, 2011 18:12

The concept appears sound, at least to me. It's well laid out, and the "anonymous donation" is quite good too. It curtails possible abuse, and the numbers seem to work well. I do, however, have some quibbles, as follows:

1) The numbers are simple; the larger and richer a guild is, the larger and richer it gets. In order to attain those bonuses, guilds will merge and get larger. Then, being in a smaller guild would not seem such an attractive option, leading to less and less small guilds.

To balance it out, here's a possible solution: make the bonus requirements relative to the size of the guild. It's possibly tricky, but avoids the above problem. So instead of numbers for the tiers, it'd be percentages instead; the total value shown of the Guild Bank would still be credits, but would also have a percentage next to it.

2) There is another quibble I have, that the benefits of the GB seem fairly limited; increased econ and speed is nice, but not exactly riveting stuff. So please, keep a lookout for unique and interesting things that could serve as a balanced benefit to the GB.

I do have one suggestion in that regard; allow the GM of the guild to ability to "focus" on a benefit-for example, speed-at the expense of the other. If this can only be done once a week, then it's a tactical option, and a cute little addition. Of course, a maximum and minimum threshold would be required to maintain balance.


So, in conclusion: great FR Ferdoc. Hopefully it'll be the basis for something good in the future. :)

BEWARE THE MONKEY.

Former NPO GM
***Retired***
User avatar
Ferdoc
Addicted Member
Addicted Member
Posts: 13933
Joined: Wed 23 Jan, 2008 19:05
Reputation: 114
Guild: ZORAN is a GLOBAL DICTATOR!
Location: ZORAN is a GLOBAL DICTATOR!

Re: Guild Bank

Postby Ferdoc » Wed 12 Jan, 2011 19:32

Griffin Vengance wrote:The concept appears sound, at least to me. It's well laid out, and the "anonymous donation" is quite good too. It curtails possible abuse, and the numbers seem to work well.


You... like... something I posted? :eh: What in the world is happ


Griffin Vengance wrote:I do, however, have some quibbles, as follows:


Ahh, there we go.



Griffin Vengance wrote:1) The numbers are simple; the larger and richer a guild is, the larger and richer it gets. In order to attain those bonuses, guilds will merge and get larger. Then, being in a smaller guild would not seem such an attractive option, leading to less and less small guilds.


Again, that's how it is with any idea. All larger and richer guilds will be able to use virtually everything better and to a greater degree than smaller guilds. Now, if you did read the post you would've come across the following. It takes 4 years for 10% for the BEST POSSIBLE guild, at the time of the data collection, to reach level 20 bonuses. It would take another 4 years to go from 20 to 21. Now if I remember my number correctly it would take a medium ranked guild 5.5 to 6 years to reach level 20. That's hardly detrimental in the long run seeing as I said the following in the first post on the second page

Remember this is the foundation for Guild Bases and Guild Technology ideas. Its not meant to be overly expansive but offer short and medium term rewards for preparing to use the other two.


Now, to rehash the old argument I got in earlier in this thread, if you're going to say its going to overly empower one group over another, PLEASE do the math. Its insanely difficult to disprove a negative, if not entirely impossible. Its also a bit easier to get me to see your point if you can provide numbers. Use the guilds I provided in the first post as the top ranked and be sure to note which guilds and when you took for your numbers. I'm certain we can agree to ignore the minor annomalies within the data set to examine the idea and the content there in.

Griffin Vengance wrote:To balance it out, here's a possible solution: make the bonus requirements relative to the size of the guild. It's possibly tricky, but avoids the above problem. So instead of numbers for the tiers, it'd be percentages instead; the total value shown of the Guild Bank would still be credits, but would also have a percentage next to it.


Opens up whole new world of abuse. Depending on the bonuses larger guilds will be able to do some basic calculations to enable themselves to get higher level bonuses far quicker than smaller guilds. How? By breaking up accordingly to enhance their group bonus rate. They will still be 1 single guild, but now taking advantage of something that was intended to make it difficult for them to get similar bonuses. End result is the exact situation that you content the change will remove. To put it another way, your intended change will bring about what you want to stop.

Having mechanics that the players can use to their advantage to speed things up, in your case lowering the requirements, does not make things fair. It opens up areas to abuse and explotation by older players.


Griffin Vengance wrote:2) There is another quibble I have, that the benefits of the GB seem fairly limited; increased econ and speed is nice, but not exactly riveting stuff. So please, keep a lookout for unique and interesting things that could serve as a balanced benefit to the GB.


Remember this is the foundation for Guild Bases and Guild Technology ideas. Its not meant to be overly expansive but offer short and medium term rewards for preparing to use the other two.




Griffin Vengance wrote:So, in conclusion: great FR Ferdoc. Hopefully it'll be the basis for something good in the future. :)


I swear I'm getting a lot of milage out of this quote

Remember this is the foundation for Guild Bases and Guild Technology ideas. Its not meant to be overly expansive but offer short and medium term rewards for preparing to use the other two.

Gotta love those death threats
Soubanth wrote:you're going to help him even if it kill you.
User avatar
Hellion
Addicted Member
Addicted Member
Posts: 5462
Joined: Mon 18 Feb, 2008 15:11
Reputation: 63

Re: Guild Bank

Postby Hellion » Thu 13 Jan, 2011 00:52

Griffin Vengance wrote:1) The numbers are simple; the larger and richer a guild is, the larger and richer it gets. In order to attain those bonuses, guilds will merge and get larger. Then, being in a smaller guild would not seem such an attractive option, leading to less and less small guilds.

To balance it out, here's a possible solution: make the bonus requirements relative to the size of the guild. It's possibly tricky, but avoids the above problem. So instead of numbers for the tiers, it'd be percentages instead; the total value shown of the Guild Bank would still be credits, but would also have a percentage next to it.


Ya its a point I tried to argue earlier but the point was obviously lost :nonono . As the idea stands it will massively benefit larger guilds and be of little actual use to smaller guilds. That in turn makes the game dictate play styles a great deal and pretty much separates the ability for smaller guilds to compete with larger guilds by a much larger margin. It would have little to do with the average contribution of the members but more so has everything to do with the number of members.

As long as it doesnt give a fair yield compared to contribution then the idea is a really bad idea to add. If one guild on average per member donates 2 million and get a 10% increase as compared to another guild on average donating 5 million getting a 6% increase as the idea currently sits (amount donated was numbers tossed out but I am sure you get the idea).

Image
User avatar
Ferdoc
Addicted Member
Addicted Member
Posts: 13933
Joined: Wed 23 Jan, 2008 19:05
Reputation: 114
Guild: ZORAN is a GLOBAL DICTATOR!
Location: ZORAN is a GLOBAL DICTATOR!

Re: Guild Bank

Postby Ferdoc » Thu 13 Jan, 2011 05:16

Ok, I'm not going to rehash that entire conversation as none of us want to go there again so I'm going to say my piece and leave it be.

If you're going to make a claim that an aspect of my idea benefits someone too much, back it up with numbers. We can go back and forth, as we already did once, with words and have neither side budge. Numbers will prove if your comments are correct. This is the FR Workshop, not the general section. You don't get to just claim something is wrong and unbalanced and walk away. This is the place where we need to back up and verify what we say. If you feel a certain way, that's fine. Its unverifiable and invalid in this section. Please just take it to the regular FR.

So, if you care to show, with numbers, why this is unbalanced please go ahead. If you don't care to, please drop the issue.

Gotta love those death threats
Soubanth wrote:you're going to help him even if it kill you.
User avatar
Hellion
Addicted Member
Addicted Member
Posts: 5462
Joined: Mon 18 Feb, 2008 15:11
Reputation: 63

Re: Guild Bank

Postby Hellion » Thu 13 Jan, 2011 08:55

Ferdoc wrote:Ok, I'm not going to rehash that entire conversation as none of us want to go there again so I'm going to say my piece and leave it be.

If you're going to make a claim that an aspect of my idea benefits someone too much, back it up with numbers. We can go back and forth, as we already did once, with words and have neither side budge. Numbers will prove if your comments are correct. This is the FR Workshop, not the general section. You don't get to just claim something is wrong and unbalanced and walk away. This is the place where we need to back up and verify what we say. If you feel a certain way, that's fine. Its unverifiable and invalid in this section. Please just take it to the regular FR.

So, if you care to show, with numbers, why this is unbalanced please go ahead. If you don't care to, please drop the issue.


Ferdoc wrote:Problem 1. It would require 350 million total. Not 35 million in each player's personal account. Now, this is a red herring. You're trying to use the 10 person guild as a reason why this idea is bad. A 10 person guild can not compete with a 100 person guild, with certain exceptions. Its silly to try and change an idea to be 'fair' to everyone, as you seem to be wanting to do, when that 'fairness' penalizes larger organized guilds. Why should a 10 member guild be able to garner massive benefits far quicker and with less effort than a large guild based SOLELY on the size of the guild?


I think this states it all really. Your idea would successfully put alot more power in the hands of the 100 man guilds over the 10 man guilds (more then it already has) and the same with a 250 man guild over a 100 man guild. Rather than make it a matter of donation = % its more along the lines of the more members = % as long as a decent amount of them donate.

One of the good things about AE is that it allows for several play styles and this will successfully push one type over another in one direction pretty hard. Lets say after a year everyone donates exactly 10% of their income in 2 different guilds and one walks away with a 10% increase while another a 6% increase then the idea is sort of flawed (thats taking into consideration the average member is donating about the same) then the yield for smaller guilds become less worth it then the ones in larger guilds.

Image
User avatar
CHERUB
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1234
Joined: Sat 16 Jan, 2010 05:59
Reputation: 18
Guild: [».:.«] § H A D Ø W §
Galaxy: Beta
Location: The WorldWide Banana Convention
Contact:

Re: Guild Bank

Postby CHERUB » Sat 15 Jan, 2011 01:44

If I may quote:

"You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the end of any nation.


I included the entire text just to give some context. But the important bits are in bold. Im pretty sure thats what Ferdc is saying in his posts - in a nutshell. Its not possible to make everything equal without legislating the high out of their position, which most people will figure isn't fair to the high. and this is the case because of the very system that AE is built on (to some extent). If AE were communist, then your idea might be ok. since we ARENT based on socialism, things aren't equal, and never will be.

Also, look at it this way: in capitalism, whatever benefits the most people is what gets done, therefore driving the economy forward. The same general principle can be applied here. How what percentages of AE players are in guilds of under 25 people? Not very many. Therefore, we cater to the highest amount of people, the larger guilds. As ferdoc has shown, the amount is increasingly inconsequential as well, because there is no point in getting to lvl 25 or whatever the number of this was. Keep in mind that this is the means of transport for OTHER ideas, ideas that will build on it. Those increases are not the ONLY things u get out if this idea.

» The Shadow is vast .:. it eclipses your Sun «

Stare not into the abyss, for the abyss stares also into you.
User avatar
kris
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Posts: 3067
Joined: Thu 15 Mar, 2007 21:33
Reputation: 73

Re: Guild Bank

Postby kris » Sun 16 Jan, 2011 19:25

First off speed between bases isnt that important since alot of people wont land on bases and will land next door to a base.

Secondly the econ thing. Forcing people to trade within their guild will severely limit the amount of trades available. Also some guys like to trade exclusively outside their own guild to avoid their trades getting hit. In alpha everyone does this. I can see a huge uproar from those guys if this was put in place

Thirdly giving people the option of whether or not to choose to contribute to this bank the simmers wont bother and the active guys will, eventually the actives will get fed up of paying for the simmers and will also stop contributing. This idea will reward the simmers too much so its a bad idea.
Last edited by Achilles on Mon 17 Jan, 2011 06:35, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: baiting and hijack. make a thread for that stuff if you want kris

User avatar
CHERUB
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1234
Joined: Sat 16 Jan, 2010 05:59
Reputation: 18
Guild: [».:.«] § H A D Ø W §
Galaxy: Beta
Location: The WorldWide Banana Convention
Contact:

Re: Guild Bank

Postby CHERUB » Mon 17 Jan, 2011 00:08

kris wrote:Im confused now,

since in another thread ferdoc stated that the AE servers cant handle subtracting 10% o each players fleet thats in a certain galaxy, yet here he states they can subtract 10% of everyone's income.

Don't worry about the server problems.

kris wrote:First off speed between bases isnt that important since alot of people wont land on bases and will land next door to a base.

thats a matter of opinion. Sacrifice speed for safety? or just take the faster speed? Its a matter of style of play, not a flaw in the idea itself.

kris wrote:Secondly the econ thing. Forcing people to trade within their guild will severely limit the amount of trades available. Also some guys like to trade exclusively outside their own guild to avoid their trades getting hit. In alpha everyone does this. I can see a huge uproar from those guys if this was put in place


Again, its a style of play issue, not a flaw in the plan. U get more econ if u trade in-guild, but your trades aren't safe.

kris wrote:Thirdly giving people the option of whether or not to choose to contribute to this bank the simmers wont bother and the active guys will, eventually the actives will get fed up of paying for the simmers and will also stop contributing. This idea will reward the simmers too much so its a bad idea.


Require your simmers to put some of your creds into the bank. its easy enough to se that people aren't contributing, even if you dont know WHO isnt contributing.

kris wrote:Finally there are much more important things taht could be developed such as a guild database, better gm tools and a shared guild board.


You forget that the Guild Bank thread is a means, not an end. It was made simply to facilitate other ideas that are built on top of it.

» The Shadow is vast .:. it eclipses your Sun «

Stare not into the abyss, for the abyss stares also into you.
User avatar
Ferdoc
Addicted Member
Addicted Member
Posts: 13933
Joined: Wed 23 Jan, 2008 19:05
Reputation: 114
Guild: ZORAN is a GLOBAL DICTATOR!
Location: ZORAN is a GLOBAL DICTATOR!

Re: Guild Bank

Postby Ferdoc » Mon 17 Jan, 2011 05:40

kris wrote:As for the idea in itself its ok but has several flaws.


Oh I can't wait.


kris wrote:First off speed between bases isnt that important since alot of people wont land on bases and will land next door to a base.


Kris, please read the entire post.

increase to ship speed when traveling from base to base... within your guild only


emphasis mine.

kris wrote:Secondly the econ thing. Forcing people to trade within their guild will severely limit the amount of trades available.


Doesn't force you to do anything. Allows you a bonus for when you do. It doesn't limit anything. Those who want to maximize the bonus will trade in house. There is no requirement to have all of your trades put into your guild to get the bonus at all. Just that your trades will recieve the bonus IF they are in house.

kris wrote:Also some guys like to trade exclusively outside their own guild to avoid their trades getting hit. In alpha everyone does this. I can see a huge uproar from those guys if this was put in place.


Ok. There is always an uproar from people when something is added, see fighter nerf. Their having an issue with it is not my concern. They are upset that they can't garner the bonus from this? Oh well.

kris wrote:Thirdly giving people the option of whether or not to choose to contribute to this bank the simmers wont bother and the active guys will, eventually the actives will get fed up of paying for the simmers and will also stop contributing. This idea will reward the simmers too much so its a bad idea.


Slippery slope argument. Who is to say that the simmers will not contribute some of their econ to help increase their benefits faster and get access to more bonuses later on? It is a distinct possibility that such an event can arise. Secondly, remember what I've had to say multiple times already in this thread. This is not the end all, be all. This is the foundation for future ideas to build upon it. This is not a narrow visioned concept that pretents to be self sufficient. It is merely does what it is intended to do. Give short to medium term bonuses which incentivise giving to the guild bank as to prepare it for the later on stages.
Last edited by Achilles on Mon 17 Jan, 2011 08:41, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: removed irrelevant part

Gotta love those death threats
Soubanth wrote:you're going to help him even if it kill you.
User avatar
acemavrick
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 159
Joined: Tue 07 Apr, 2009 00:55
Reputation: 9
Guild: F:[TAG]
H:[RD]
J:[1st]

Re: Guild Bank

Postby acemavrick » Fri 25 Feb, 2011 14:08

i play in guilds that have about 60 members, usually fighting guilds that have 150+ members. if im understanding this right, the guild with 150+ members would be able to achieve alot more benefit from this than my guild. why not make the bonuses based on average percentage being donated per member or average of the per member bank size? this seems like it would balance the idea alot more, because as i understand it, it rewards blob/zerg guilds which in my opinion hurt AE. in large guilds, new player dont recieve as much 1on1 mentoring which helps develop people from "noobs" into cometent players.

User avatar
Ferdoc
Addicted Member
Addicted Member
Posts: 13933
Joined: Wed 23 Jan, 2008 19:05
Reputation: 114
Guild: ZORAN is a GLOBAL DICTATOR!
Location: ZORAN is a GLOBAL DICTATOR!

Re: Guild Bank

Postby Ferdoc » Sun 27 Feb, 2011 23:33

acemavrick wrote:if im understanding this right, the guild with 150+ members would be able to achieve alot more benefit from this than my guild.


Assuming they have a higher total econ than you and donate enough to outweigh what your guild gets at full 10%. Yes they will achieve more than you will within a set period of time. It just means they will hit the soft cap faster than you will.

acemavrick wrote:why not make the bonuses based on average percentage being donated per member or average of the per member bank size?


Of all the questions I get, this one annoys me the most. To forcibly make the system 'fair' by punishing those who create fortress guilds or amass large numbers of players for protection violates the point of the action. To make it fair. If you want to force others to work harder or longer to receive the same benefit that others get. This suggested change forces the entire idea to be revamped. Every last bit of it. All bonuses will need to be re-evaluated and tested for a wide variety of levels and status of guild banks. On top of that I'ld need to be 100% sure that no possible exploit would exist. That would be so insanely time intensive on my part it would be better to abandon the idea rather than actually go forward with it. Which would include abandoning all of the ideas that follow this one, guild bases and guild technology. It also makes me believe that you really didn't read the entire idea. Scroll down to the data portion where I examined other guilds rather than just a hypothetical high ranked guild. Four years it takes for that guild to reach the top tiers of bonuses. I even established a watermark for way points; 6 months, 12 months, 24 months, and 48 months. Based on what servers have achieved.

Its towards the end of my first post, might want to read it and examine the numbers there and ask yourself if there really is such an imbalance? A hypothetical high ranked guild takes four years to reach the soft cap. Is taking five or five and a half years that detrimental compared to the hypothetical high ranked guild?

What really gets my ire is that you make the suggestion without posing anything data wise. I understand the concept is daunting, the workload makes me pause. However when you want to change a cornerstone of an idea using 'it seems' or 'i think' or 'it could' as your justification really just screams 'dismiss my comments' to me. I know that's not something anyone wants to hear, but I respond better to data and numbers rather than words.

acemavrick wrote:this seems like it would balance the idea alot more


[citation needed]


acemavrick wrote:in large guilds, new player dont recieve as much 1on1 mentoring which helps develop people from "noobs" into cometent players.


[citation needed]

In my experience it all depends on who is in the guild and how competent your trainer are. If you have an idiot for a trainer then you need to do 1 on 1 training. If your trainer is good then you can likely get 3 or 4 people under that 1.

Gotta love those death threats
Soubanth wrote:you're going to help him even if it kill you.
Event Horizon
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 336
Joined: Fri 26 Jan, 2007 20:03
Reputation: 10
Guild: [╰▲╯] Ævikings
Galaxy: Fenix

Re: Guild Bank

Postby Event Horizon » Fri 27 May, 2011 21:24

Well, I don't think this is necessarily overpowered for larger guilds. Yes they will gain a small advantage but at any given time they will only be one or two ranks ahead of smaller guilds since the cost for successive levels rises exponentially. I do however see that this could further widen the gap between larger and smaller guilds. It may be a fairly minor increase but I do think it might be prudent to put some further restrictions on guild size (minimum and maximum) if this is implemented.

There are a couple issues I see popping up here:



1. When the most recent trade formula was introduced there was a pretty radical reorganization of the economic system in AE. Guilds and players went from trading with themselves to trading with players in other guilds placed at the furthest possible distances. The fortress building approach is partly facilitated by this so I'm just thinking that this will essentially force guilds to spread out to distant galaxies as much as possible rather than clustering in one to a few galaxies side by side. That seems like a step backwards to me. Part of the advantage for mid to smaller sized guilds is that they can hunker down in a well organized fortress and take on guilds with several times their fleet totals. I don't think it would be good for the game to effectively undermine this by forcing players to trade within their own guild and thereby be forced to situate themselves at far ends of the server. I realize the bonuses are not massive but small advantages add up a lot over time in this game and most guilds will adjust their strategies accordingly. I think this needs to accomodate both spread out, roaming guilds and more localized/fortress oriented type guilds.

Solution: Allow the unique partners bonus to apply only to each guild member without applying to their trade partners from other guilds. For the sake of calculations the guild bank bonuses only apply to the guild member's "half" of the trade. Trade route value = (Player A's Guild bonus x 1/2 distance) + (Player B's Guild Bank Bonus x 1/2 distance)

2. Following on the previous point, I need a bit of clarification on what happens with trade plunders. The distance bonus can be plundered. Where do these increased credits come from since you're not paying it when you set up the route? Are they taken out of the trading players' personal savings accounts and by extension from the guild bank? Does that then decrease the value of the guild bank? If it doesn't then I see a fairly serious exploit arising where players can set up trades for 4000 credits that automatically become worth 6000 credits from guild bank bonuses and then have their friends plunder them and vice versa. Essentially you get magical credit expansion for both sides. This could even be done by agreement between members of a guild that split into several separate guilds to accomplish this purpose. I think that the extra credits must come out of the personal bank account of the trade route owners and by extension their guild banks which of course makes for an interesting new aspect to guild warfare. Trade plundering could become a very effective way of nullifying the savings of another guild.

3. Will GM's or someone with privileges be able to access the data on how much each player has in their personal savings? I think this is kind of essential. If Guild Banks become the basis for a wider set of new game mechanics then your personal bank account will become part of your resume when applying to join guilds. Guild leaders are going to want to see how much a player is bringing to the table. Perhaps I misunderstood this but your OP seemed to suggest that this wasn't possible.

Overall, a great idea. I'm looking forward to seeing your posts about guild bases and guild technologies. I hope the guild techs will focus on organizational, communication and logistical tools for guilds rather than simply applying more bonuses to fleet or bases.

User avatar
CHERUB
Gold Member
Gold Member
Posts: 1234
Joined: Sat 16 Jan, 2010 05:59
Reputation: 18
Guild: [».:.«] § H A D Ø W §
Galaxy: Beta
Location: The WorldWide Banana Convention
Contact:

Re: Guild Bank

Postby CHERUB » Wed 15 Jun, 2011 19:52

Most of those things are for Ferdoc to answer. I CAN however put this query to rest.

Event Horizon wrote:3. Will GM's or someone with privileges be able to access the data on how much each player has in their personal savings? I think this is kind of essential. If Guild Banks become the basis for a wider set of new game mechanics then your personal bank account will become part of your resume when applying to join guilds. Guild leaders are going to want to see how much a player is bringing to the table. Perhaps I misunderstood this but your OP seemed to suggest that this wasn't possible.


Ferdoc says in his original post:

Ferdoc wrote:So what is a Guild Bank?
A Guild Bank, simply put, is a new kind of stat which will give benefits after you achieve certain ranks. The bonuses come in three flavors, TR Unique Increase, TR Distance Increase and Speed Increase. More in depth on those later. Anyone inside of the guild is able to see the total value for the Guild Bank, but not see anyone else's individual contribution aside from their own.


I think this is what you meant by "accessing the data on how much each player has in their personal savings," yes? If so, there's your answer.

» The Shadow is vast .:. it eclipses your Sun «

Stare not into the abyss, for the abyss stares also into you.
User avatar
Ferdoc
Addicted Member
Addicted Member
Posts: 13933
Joined: Wed 23 Jan, 2008 19:05
Reputation: 114
Guild: ZORAN is a GLOBAL DICTATOR!
Location: ZORAN is a GLOBAL DICTATOR!

Re: Guild Bank

Postby Ferdoc » Mon 27 Jun, 2011 18:35

Event Horizon wrote:Well, I don't think this is necessarily overpowered for larger guilds. Yes they will gain a small advantage but at any given time they will only be one or two ranks ahead of smaller guilds since the cost for successive levels rises exponentially.


Thank you for taking the time and putting the effort to examine the idea and look at it as a whole. I find too many poeple who have talked to me about this this idea have failed to realize that while the strong do grow faster than the weak, the points where the growth give new benefits are staggered out greatly giving the smaller guilds time to 'catch up' and push the increase in benefits further and further out as time goes on.



Event Horizon wrote:I do however see that this could further widen the gap between larger and smaller guilds.


Which is true with any and every idea. Tachyon Technology is a prime example of this. Nothing is does nothing more than say the game adds something that is usable by all people to the extent that their status in game grants them access. IE a new graphic pack wouldn't use this as the use of it is not dependant on account age.

Event Horizon wrote:It may be a fairly minor increase but I do think it might be prudent to put some further restrictions on guild size (minimum and maximum) if this is implemented.


No, it wouldn't be prudent nor would it be beneficial to the game at all. Other threads that have had this be the primary concern within them have explained why such a thought is meaningless on its own merits. Doubly so when you consider that the impact of this idea, and all other associated ideas, would be significantly lessened.



Event Horizon wrote:1. When the most recent trade formula was introduced there was a pretty radical reorganization of the economic system in AE. Guilds and players went from trading with themselves to trading with players in other guilds placed at the furthest possible distances. The fortress building approach is partly facilitated by this so I'm just thinking that this will essentially force guilds to spread out to distant galaxies as much as possible rather than clustering in one to a few galaxies side by side. That seems like a step backwards to me.


It will essentially force guilds to spread out? I read the idea twice over to make sure on this. No where does it say anything similar to "If you want this bonus you must be 2,000 distance away from anyone you are trading". So how does it force them to do anything? If you mean maximizing the bonus, sure people can CHOOSE to do so. However merely trading with your same galaxy neighbors will confer similar bonuses to trading with those far away. Additionally there are other benefits just from distance. The question that gets posed to players is simple. Do they want to spread out, get more benefits and increased risk. Or do they want to stay together, have far more secure Trade Routes and get less benefit from this proposed change.

I believe people will work in a way that suits their play style and server politics best. Believing any group will guaranteedly react to condition A with plan A is something that should be looked at. However acting like you are, that plan A is the reasonable event that should be examined, is short sighted and ignorant of additional conditions and plans. Even if you examined all of the plans, none of the actions after the fact should have any real bearing on this particular portion. The player community will adapt to new ideas that are worth spending their time on. The idea should not be forced to adapt to the player base.

Event Horizon wrote: Part of the advantage for mid to smaller sized guilds is that they can hunker down in a well organized fortress and take on guilds with several times their fleet totals.


If you notice the idea doesn't preclude them from doing this. See the above response, in particular the stay together and have safer trade routes portion.

Event Horizon wrote: I don't think it would be good for the game to effectively undermine this by forcing players to trade within their own guild and thereby be forced to situate themselves at far ends of the server.


The idea does not force anyone to do anything. It gives the option. That is all. Since that isn't brought up or thought about within your statement of issue or solution of said issue, I have to say you resolution is irrelevant and wasn't even looked at. Sorry.



Event Horizon wrote: Following on the previous point, I need a bit of clarification on what happens with trade plunders. The distance bonus can be plundered. Where do these increased credits come from since you're not paying it when you set up the route?


It was not stated in the OP, which does mean they come out of nowhere. Yes, it is instant credits that can be abused. However in the original thread this issue was brought up and resolved. Astro Empires has a method through which actions can be flagged. The plundering of these trade routes can cause these flags to be tossed up and have a manual review of the actions. Should the offending players seem to be involved in credit transfer both will be penalized as appropriate within the game. No protective measure is needed since taking action in a manner to abuse this is already against the ToS and doing so will result in harsh punishments.

I should have made note of it in the OP. This is the problem when you intimately know an issue you forget to put down everything just because the question does not arise in your mind.



Event Horizon wrote: 3. Will GM's or someone with privileges be able to access the data on how much each player has in their personal savings?


No.

Event Horizon wrote: I think this is kind of essential. If Guild Banks become the basis for a wider set of new game mechanics then your personal bank account will become part of your resume when applying to join guilds. Guild leaders are going to want to see how much a player is bringing to the table. Perhaps I misunderstood this but your OP seemed to suggest that this wasn't possible.


You didn't misunderstand at all. There will be no direct way, page, or method aside from asking the person or taking a bit more direct approach, to find out how much every person has in the bank. Giving out this information is unimportant. Should a Guild want it, they can ask for it or employ another method to gather that information. It will be up to the player on whether or not they want to give it out

Gotta love those death threats
Soubanth wrote:you're going to help him even if it kill you.

Return to “FR Workshop”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests