119961-wildstar-the-guildbreaker

== Content ==
			
TLDR: Wildstar lacks challenging group content that a guild can progress through between mastering 5 man Dungeons and reaching 20-man GA.Long story:
 
I started playing another MMO in about 2005. I joined a guild with some RL mates on a PvE server, and another guild at level 60 on a PvP server. Here we are in 2014, and both guilds are still going. Many of the same old faces unsubbed and then returned over the years.Yes, plenty of dramah. Plenty of emo rage quits. There was a couple of times (in both guilds) where the active group pretty much reset down to a handful of members and grew again, but really the same community and ethos prevailed. The only content we’ve really missed was Nax in vanilla and some of the 25-man and heroic versions of raid bosses in recent expansions.I started playing Wildstar at launch (having played the Beta since last December). I had planned to join the two communities I was part of together, as the ethos in each was pretty similar, grow the community and raid. The explosion of EU PvP servers at launch ruined that idea as each group of players landed on a different server...However, since then I have been in no less than 7 guilds, each of which was dedicated to growing a community and raiding GA and ultimately DS. Each guild had a Guild Website, active officers, rosters, signups, forums, TS/Mumble server etc etc. But in the end each guild felt that it needed to progress by merging with other guilds.5 man dungeons are simply awesome. They feel like 5 man raids. You need a guild that can sustain 5 people on concurrently for an hour or two a few nights a week to run these. No complaints here, this content is sublime.The 20-man content is also awesome. You need a guild that can field 20 people (plus a few subs to cover emergencies) at least 2 nights (probably 3) a week, for at least 3 hours.So a guild has to grow to four times the size it reached to run dungeons before it can head into GA. That means growing fast enough to stop the people at the top (best gear, most experience) getting bored and joining a guild that is already raiding. Good luck with that :(With some challenging 10-man content to bridge this gap, communities might stand a better chance of surviving. I’ve known people leave Wildstar just because raiding seems so far away. They were wanting to progress through raids, not join in with another group that already had it on farm. I'm sure they'll be back when we get some new Dungeons, but I'd rather they were playing now.	
----
			
No,
 
the problem is everyone out there wants to form his own guild and be the next big thing on the server.
We honestly have way too many small guilds of 10-12 people around.
I can totally understand that people want to run their own guild at some points, but having too many guilds at the moment is really not in anyones benefit.
I merged my guild into another guild as well, and both guilds came out way stronger. we now have a fixed core raiding 4x a week, an alliance we can call upon to join us in the fun.
 
it's not the game killing guilds, it's people killing their own guilds.	
----
			
You realize that one of the things that made this game popular in it's developement was it's return to Vanilla the other MMO you started playing in about 2005.
And also consider that if any of the recent MMORPGs that have "failed" had the 12 mil subscriptions and lost the same % of people that they would all still be doing fine.
The only thing really separating WoW and all the other games is the timing when it came out, and the popularity of the franchise.
And its only that mass of people that keep it going.
Just forget it, let it die, so gaming can once again blossom.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
That means growing fast enough to stop the people at the top (best gear, most experience) getting bored and joining a guild that is already raiding. Good luck with that :(
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
No,
 
the problem is everyone out there wants to form his own guild and be the next big thing on the server.
We honestly have way too many small guilds of 10-12 people around.
I can totally understand that people want to run their own guild at some points, but having too many guilds at the moment is really not in anyones benefit.
I merged my guild into another guild as well, and both guilds came out way stronger. we now have a fixed core raiding 4x a week, an alliance we can call upon to join us in the fun.
 
it's not the game killing guilds, it's people killing their own guilds.
----
			
Isn't this essentially the same thread you posted last time you asked for 10-person content, Rakaposhi?
 
Regardless, anyone who wants their guild to be successful needs to stop thinking about their guild's numbers, and start thinking about their guild's reputation.  The truth of it is that we are ALL in competition for members.  Sure, you can go dangle your hook in the waters of zone chat and hope you pick up a few people that you don't have to throw back.  OR, you can focus on making a name for your guild - so that people recognize that tag and say "wow, those are awesome people".  Maybe this means you do community events.  Maybe it means you take time out to help newbies.  Maybe you get your folks to all queue up separately to help show everyone else how cool you are.  Whatever you do, the point is - build your reputation.  Do that well and you will never lack for numbers - whether it's people wanting to join your guild because it's awesome, or other guilds that will happily come help you out when you need to fill out that GA raid.
 
On the other hand, if your guild members never talk to anyone, never interact with anyone, and never do anything that gets any positive attention - well, good luck fishing.
 
And just to be clear, I support the idea of 10-person content in the future.  But the argument that 20-person content is too hard for most guilds just doesn't hold water.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
No,
 
the problem is everyone out there wants to form his own guild and be the next big thing on the server.
We honestly have way too many small guilds of 10-12 people around.
I can totally understand that people want to run their own guild at some points, but having too many guilds at the moment is really not in anyones benefit.
I merged my guild into another guild as well, and both guilds came out way stronger. we now have a fixed core raiding 4x a week, an alliance we can call upon to join us in the fun.
 
it's not the game killing guilds, it's people killing their own guilds.
----
			
The very visible trend in MMORPG gaming, which can and IMO should be primarily judged by WoW as it is the prototype of many MMOs and has the largest player/raider population, goes like this:  40 was too much, 20 was too much, 10 was too much. That's how it's gone and there's good reason for it, mainly that as stated, it's not about the number, it's just about organizing X players every damn time.
 
Now WoW has reached the ideal that will likely remain standard for years to come, flex raiding and premade flex raiding. If Wildstar wants to appeal to more players and increase subscribers, they should go to flex. If they don't want raids to be a primary draw, or want to remain a niche game, then they can keep it at 20. But there's really no good argument against flex raiding that I've ever seen, because when 9 people can raid and 20 people can raid, everyone's happy.
 
To the OP, I don't think it's fair to blame Wildstar, the players of these guilds joined knowing what it was. This isn't something quite as clear as "oops we fudged runes". I also think blaming the players/community doesn't make a lot of sense, especially the idea that guild fragmentation is just about some people wanting to have their own guild. Sounds like oversimplification. And sure, people could pour tons of effort into community-building, but there should never be an expectation of that effort just to enjoy an MMO and get some stability out of it.
 
Anyway, flex raiding. I don't understand why the discussion of static numbers continues in the offices of devs, but oh well.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
This is 100% the absolute truth.  People are being their own hurdles to the game because they let their own egos get in the way of joining under someone else's umbrella.
----
			NepheleVG, do you really think guilds have rep?	
----
			
They do indeed.  As much as we like to pretend that they're not, MMORPGs are still a social game.  That's why it's such a big deal, for example, when new players don't see other people in the lower-level zones.
 
People remember when they meet someone that's really awesome, or really bad.  And they remember guild tags the same way.
 
We get applicants to the Daggers who find us *because* they recognized our tag and associated it with positive things.  Speaking personally, I can also say that I routinely point people looking for guilds who wouldn't really be happy in the Daggers to five or so other guilds on Entity that I know primarily based on reputation.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Do you guys have anything whatsoever to support this claim? I don't understand why this argument is being supported by people here. It's a terrible argument, it's too macro and it doesn't account for itself at all.
----
			
IMO, I think a lot of people find themselves surprised by the amount of effort it takes to run a successful guild. (I know I was!) How you run your guild really depends on your goals in the game. However, for the majority of players, what gets you involved in a guild is making friends there. You need to build a community that functions somewhat as a big crazy family. Or...maybe a college fraternity (they are more alike than you may think!)
 
Some folks join a game with friends, start a guild, realize they want to do bigger things but don't want to recruit for it, and they merge with another guild with a similar personality. Some leaders realize they don't have the time to devote to build their guild up, so they merge. Some leaders quit in frustration, and the next in line guildie takes up the mantle of GM that they never wanted - and they may look to merge. It has very little to do with the game. It happens in all games. It was just a bit more obvious here because people wanted to raid NOW and the raid sizes were so different that you needed MORE MORE MORE players to be able to have a chance to see it all. Or, you had to decide to forgo certain content because you didn't want to try and recruit that hard. Also, people lack patience. If you want it NOW, then you can't really wait to build your raid team.
 
As an example of choices guild leaders have to make at times: I had half my raid team quit the game less than a month into raiding. We were 2/6 in GA and solidly working towards 3/6 (raiding less than 8 hours/week). We had a choice to make - rebuild or merge. My guildies felt we could rebuild. We only missed one raid, but we spent about 2 weeks PUGing a few spots each time. Then, we spent about 3 weeks training 15 new raiders in cycles how to do the first floor. Two weeks ago, we actually began raiding again in earnest with our new raid team, and we are now 3/6 in GA. To the credit of my amazing guildies, I did not lose a single raider to another guild during this time. It's been a long road, but I think my guild is much stronger for it. I'm really proud at how our community came together and stuck together. If they hadn't been willing to work with me to train everyone and keep my spirits up as the leader, I don't know that I could have done it.
 
My point with this story is just to say that a guild is much more than just bodies to accomplish a goal with. It's important to join a guild that meshes with your ideas of what a guild should provide. It's also important, as a leader or potential leader, to be realistic about how much time and energy you are willing to devote to being successful.
 
I think the raid size settling at 20 is awesome. I believe it will give guilds will have a much better chance at being successful with the new raid size. Combined with the Drop 3 and Drop 4 QOL improvements and content updates, I believe Wildstar is heading for a very bright future.	
----
			10 man is not a raid, it's an over sized dungeon. WoW started this BS of 10 mans and its just led to smaller and smaller guilds. As the number of raid members decreases, the size of the guilds decrease. Why have 30 when you only need 12?	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
It's supported by the evidence used in contrary. 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
They do indeed. As much as we like to pretend that they're not, MMORPGs are still a social game. That's why it's such a big deal, for example, when new players don't see other people in the lower-level zones.
 
People remember when they meet someone that's really awesome, or really bad. And they remember guild tags the same way.
 
We get applicants to the Daggers who find us *because* they recognized our tag and associated it with positive things. Speaking personally, I can also say that I routinely point people looking for guilds who wouldn't really be happy in the Daggers to five or so other guilds on Entity that I know primarily based on reputation.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
No,
 
the problem is everyone out there wants to form his own guild and be the next big thing on the server.
We honestly have way too many small guilds of 10-12 people around.
I can totally understand that people want to run their own guild at some points, but having too many guilds at the moment is really not in anyones benefit.
I merged my guild into another guild as well, and both guilds came out way stronger. we now have a fixed core raiding 4x a week, an alliance we can call upon to join us in the fun.
 
it's not the game killing guilds, it's people killing their own guilds.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Now WoW has reached the ideal that will likely remain standard for years to come, flex raiding and premade flex raiding. If Wildstar wants to appeal to more players and increase subscribers, they should go to flex. If they don't want raids to be a primary draw, or want to remain a niche game, then they can keep it at 20. But there's really no good argument against flex raiding that I've ever seen, because when 9 people can raid and 20 people can raid, everyone's happy.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I don't think so, there really aren't that many guilds (from what I've seen on Entity). 
 
What I see mostly:
 
1. Small group of friends, not raiders/not serious about trying- meh
 
2. Small/medium close knit guild that's trying hard to raid, they have 15-30 active people, roster fluctuates, recruiting is hard thanks to being a smaller guild- these guilds are the ones dying, the ones moving back to WoW/other games, the people that would benefit from 10-15man/flex content. Not wanting to merge isn't an ego thing, it's not wanting to lose their sense of community and everything they've worked for for the promise of maybe being on some mega guilds 4th GA team. 
 
3. Large accomplished guilds, most likely brought in a core team from other games. Big names like Enigma. These are the people with the 6/6 GA x/9DS under their belts thanks to being able to rapidly progress from the start, they take most of the available recruits.
 
I really don't understand why so many of you hulk out when people suggest raid sizes for multiple group types, you don't like 10/15/flex? Good for you, do your 20 mans. Telling people to merge, or that "well, this game was popular before release due to the promise of large scale raiding, why are you crying" isn't the healthy response. Turns out what people think would be neat/cool/retro doesn't always translate into something that works in the here and now. Small/medium guilds are the lifeblood of MMOs, and pushing them away can be disastrous. 
----
			
Previous i was all for 10 man content. Now i would say that there are many more problems than this, which keeps ppl away from game. I hope Drop 4 solves many of them so ppl get back and then we can discuss about more dungeon/raid variations.
Anyway i think that with the disappearing of 40man raiding, there isnt much need for more versions. 20 is fine. Maybe only instead of strictly 20, a flex like style of ~18-22 but this is something that can wait. Just fix things and cross fingers Drop 4 would be awesome.	
----
			
What people fail to realize and utilize is the circle system present in the game. If you have a small group of close friends that like to hang out, make a circle. 
 
Join a guild for what you need a guild for, like raiding and progressing in game.
 
Create a circle for friends that only you can see the chat of, and you can organize yourselves from there. 
 
I have a couple friends that game hop with me, we started playing WoW together many moons ago. Back in the day 2 of our "clan" wanted more out of PvP and joined a guild more appropriate to fill their needs. The rest of us stayed in our PvE progression guild. The split didn't limit our interactions with eachother and we remained friends regardless.
Fast forward a couple years and we were in SWToR together. We kept in contact, played together, were in separate guilds due to our different availability, schedules, and desires. 
Now there is WildStar and we finally have a system to be together again. We've grown up and have many different lives now, but our circle keeps us friends. 	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
So raiding wasn't a draw in WoW before LFR. I wonder how it even survived till MoP, I'm guessing people just really enjoyed dailies? All I know is WoW lost subs when they introduced it, maybe it was just their attempt to keep uninterested casuals longer and not the new "standard".
 
I think WS going on the path of annoying their dedicated raider player base to grab unidentified casuals that have no intent to raid much to begin with usually is a bit of a bad idea.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
1. Loss of identity (some guilds have long histories that they cherish, so this can be an important one)
2. Trouble finding timezone/raid time synch
3. Trouble finding social fit
4. Trouble finding guild with similar attitude toward raids (casual, hardcore, loot system, etc)
5. Inactive or incompetent leadership (much different from ego)
6. Possibly they've already tried merging and it lead to problems/didn't fix the issue (seen this myself)
7. Guild members disagree on which guild to join
8.  Language barriers, less so NA but still possible with Quebecois players, Spanish-speaking players, etc
 
 
I'm hoping that my ability to come up with eight clear non-GM-ego related reasons in under five minutes makes an impression.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
As a group, I'd say small guilds have to decide what the want and compromise, at times, if what they want is to enjoy the "bigger" content. 
----
			
Non-LFR flex is such a great idea.  I can't count the number of times my guild has faced the not-quite-enough and one-or-two-too-many situations.  (More the latter than the former).
 
It's shocking how hard it is to find a "close-enough" blend of social fit and raid attitude.  After three bad to horrific mergers and two failed alliances, mergers just weren't on the table.  Circles/Custom channels sorta work, but in our experience that was only marginally better than spamming the faction gathering points.
 
Calling 8/10 man "not a raid" is semantic malarkey.  I don't care what you call it, it's the group size I'm most comfortable with.  Every larger group event has been either a zerg-fest or a drama furball.  Insisting that under-20 man or flex content should never happen is ignoring how popular that format is.  A rather naive attitude considering this game's population issues.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
What evidence is that?
 
The claim my post referred to :
 
 
 
To clarify my problem with this, using your words from another thread:
 
 
 
Most likely there are a number of reasons why organizing a static number of raiders is problematic. Turning it into a player thing, and a specific player thing like ego, isn't a very good rebuttal to the OP.
 
For your opinions on flex raiding's challenge, that's cool, but raiding doesn't represent anything set in stone— it's exactly what the developers want it to be. Otherwise you're putting artificial boundaries on growth. Carbine have done a good job tuning coop PVE overall and I think they'd be able to handle the transition.
 
 
 :rolleyes:
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Flex raiding simply isn't the best idea here if we're considering guild logistics being an issue.  20 seems a perfectly applicable number to me to meet for a guild engaged in large group content.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
No, flex raiding simply isn't the best idea for you, because it doesn't serve your bias and the bias you project on Wildstar.
 
Have you played flex Heroic content in WoW? This is my test to see if you have any idea whatsoever of the system you're talking about. You seem to think it's jokingly easy, kid gloves, right? So why don't you tell me how much flex content you've played.
 
 
 
 
You think it's a good rebuttal yet you write nothing to support why you think that way. Your post doesn't touch on the issue of GM ego at all. Your post in fact has almost nothing to do with the criticism I launched at Olivar, a reductive post which you and several others decided to Like.
 
As to your bench idea, that's probably one of the worst suggestions I've ever read from a raider who isn't hardcore elitist (and actually, you don't raid in Wildstar, right?) You want smaller, struggling guilds to take 3-5 members along and ask these players to spend their night watching guildies have fun?
 
I've been in that situation as a swap-in tank and healer, and it's the the most boring thing I've ever done in an MMO game. It also leads to drama very quickly. It's a terrible idea.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
words
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
"It's too hard to do, so Carbine shouldn't do it"
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I've actually completed Highmaul on my brother's account.  On his warlock.  Having not played WoW since Wildstar's release.  I literally spent five minutes looking up a rotation, read the boss fights, and waxed it in flex.  It's so easy that a former warrior who hasn't touched the game since Wildstar's release can do it on a completely different class after about fifteen minutes of reading.  Then again, yes, I've been in GA.  I also played FFXI in a HNMLS, and I was in a nullsec merc corp in EVE.  Just because I took over a RP guild from Tex and don't focus on it anymore doesn't mean I haven't done large group content, and in games that required a lot more logistics than Wildstar ever will.  I'd thank you not to sneer at my resume.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I asked specifically if you've done heroic flex raiding in WoW. Have you done heroic flex raiding in WoW, or have you compled normal Highmaul with a full crew in WoW? Let's be clear about what's asked and what's answered. I asked because you're trying to make assertions about the grade of difficulty in WoW's flex raiding, and that necessarily has to include reference to heroic mode flex.
 
 
 
 
This suggests to me that you really don't take the time to read the posts you're interacting with. Olivar is the one who suggested GMs were at fault, not me, in a post which you and others Liked. Did you understand his post when you liked it, the implications of what he was arguing? I don't even know how you managed to come up with this paragraph as a response, it starts off in folly then dips into irrelevance to its initial point.
 
 
 
 
No, my theory as clearly stated in this thread is that both sides are accountable but that, and as stated in another thread, Carbine will be the one to pay for it when people just give up and leave. My criticism upon entering this thread was that Olivar's post (and those who support it) are putting the fault solely on the player, which is just as bad as putting it solely on Carbine.
 
 
 
And at the very best, you're talking about a move that countless guilds have employed over the last 7+ years. Bench isn't a good solution or even remotely original. Being benched is itself a problem, I've experienced and seen the effects firsthand, and it's certainly not a solution worthy of a developer's time.
 
 
 
 
I disparage the narrow opinions I see here because they warrant being called out. White-knighting is real and it's just as stupid and annoying as baseless accusations put to Carbine.
----
			
I think a lot of it is in what Carbine designed VS player perception. Dungeons and Adventures for mass consumption, raiding for those who want more of a challenge. Key words there are "more challenge" - its harder to do. Raiding requires more effort - time, skill, call it whatever you like. Holding a guild together to raid is also more difficult.
 
I think many players want to raid, but just don't want to invest the time necessary. I'd love to get back into the raiding life. I miss it terribly. But I don't have the time to invest, so I recognize that I can't do that at this time.
 
If there were some mid-level stuff.. 10 man events, more world bosses, Rift-style events - I think it would go a long way towards fulfilling some of these player wants. These things need to be built up pyramid style. A strong base of smaller events capping up to raids is definitely called for.
 
I loved my time in WOW - and I do have fond memories of those days - but as Blizzard progressed to reach out to more and more users to feed the corporate machine, they spoon fed into a devolving culture. It became too easy to grab the brass ring, and hence here we are.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I think a lot of it is in what Carbine designed VS player perception. Dungeons and Adventures for mass consumption, raiding for those who want more of a challenge. Key words there are "more challenge" - its harder to do. Raiding requires more effort - time, skill, call it whatever you like. Holding a guild together to raid is also more difficult.
 
I think many players want to raid, but just don't want to invest the time necessary. I'd love to get back into the raiding life. I miss it terribly. But I don't have the time to invest, so I recognize that I can't do that at this time.
 
If there were some mid-level stuff.. 10 man events, more world bosses, Rift-style events - I think it would go a long way towards fulfilling some of these player wants. These things need to be built up pyramid style. A strong base of smaller events capping up to raids is definitely called for.
 
I loved my time in WOW - and I do have fond memories of those days - but as Blizzard progressed to reach out to more and more users to feed the corporate machine, they spoon fed into a devolving culture. It became too easy to grab the brass ring, and hence here we are.
----
			
I'm not going to bother arguing the points about flex raiding anymore. Once again we're not going to agree on this point, as I think benching players (whether you reward them or not) is one of the most useless solutions I've ever seen from raiders (not just you), and is contrary to the entire purpose of playing a game (gameplay). If you've got enough free time to sit in an instance not playing, on top of committing 9+ hours a week, that's all you.
 
 
As to the Olivar comment, this actually pisses me off. He clearly made several core statements, including the opening one:
 
No,
 
the problem is everyone out there wants to form his own guild and be the next big thing on the server.
 
 
My patience is thin because it seems you're jumping through hoops to revitalize his comment as something it wasn't. So I'm going to put this simply: 
I don't care about your interpretation of what Olivar's intention was behind the words he used. I care for the words Olivar used in the context he used them.  
"The problem is everyone out there wants to form his own guild and be the next big thing on the server"
 
This is an INCREDIBLY SPECIFIC ASSERTION. He is saying that the problem is specifically with GMs who want to be cool. End of story. 
 
That is a stupid assertion. I've already pointed out eight different possibilities for guild merger dysfunction that have nothing to do with GMs wanting to be cool. 
 
As addressing that was my first and main purpose for entering this thread, I'm going to step away now because I'm tired of having to dance around clearly stated points.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I'm not going to bother arguing the points about flex raiding anymore. Once again we're not going to agree on this point, as I think benching players (whether you reward them or not) is one of the most useless solutions I've ever seen from raiders (not just you), and is contrary to the entire purpose of playing a game (gameplay). If you've got enough free time to sit in an instance not playing, on top of committing 9+ hours a week, that's all you.
 
 
As to the Olivar comment, this actually pisses me off. He clearly made several core statements, including the opening one:
 
No,
 
the problem is everyone out there wants to form his own guild and be the next big thing on the server.
 
 
My patience is thin because it seems you're jumping through hoops to revitalize his comment as something it wasn't. So I'm going to put this simply:
 
I don't care about your interpretation of what Olivar's intention was behind the words he used. I care for the words Olivar used in the context he used them. 
 
"The problem is everyone out there wants to form his own guild and be the next big thing on the server"
 
This is an INCREDIBLY SPECIFIC ASSERTION. He is saying that the problem is specifically with GMs who want to be cool. End of story. 
 
That is a stupid assertion. I've already pointed out eight different possibilities for guild merger dysfunction that have nothing to do with GMs wanting to be cool. 
 
As addressing that was my first and main purpose for entering this thread, I'm going to step away now because I'm tired of having to dance around clearly stated points.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I didn't bother to ask whether it was heroic or normal.  I assumed it was heroic since that was the tier he'd cleared with his guild, so I couldn't imagine they were running normal after that, but I can ask if it's important to be specific.
 
You asked me to address egotistic GMs.  In fact, I did.  Your assertion, if I understood it correctly (so correct me if I'm wrong) is that GMs of small guilds shouldn't be held accountable for not being able to put together an a full raid, and that Carbine should institute a system whereby whatever amount of people the GM does bring should alter the difficulty (as opposed to just entering the raid with less people).  Olivar was saying, essentially, that there are a lot of guilds that can't field 20 players, and that if they're really interested in raiding then they should merge with other guilds.  Yes, I liked that; I think that a GM (and his/her officers) has the onus to either make his guild raid viable (if that's the guild's focus) or to not call his guild a raiding guild.  If raiding is the main goal of a player, they should join a raiding guild or merge enough guilds to field a raiding team.  I agree wholeheartedly with that sentiment.  I wasn't the one that said it was egotism, and Olivar's initial post certainly said...
 
 
 
 
I was intentionally not going to bring it up in lieu of discussing your actual suggestion, its ramifications, and my personal rationale.  But you wanted me to address it, and there it is.  I agree with Olivar that if your GM can't manage to put together a viable raid team or even if you're not getting into the raids he runs and you'd like to raid right now, find another raiding guild. Yes, I did read it all, and my "like" was entirely meant to be a sign of support for that idea.  I do not believe that the raids quota should be made elastic because a guild cannot field enough people and the guild does not want to merge.  Hell, that's not even the end of it.  If my guild was attuning and really looking to raid, I'd hook up with the BDS on Blacklight and see if they had any slots.  You don't even necessarily have to leave your guild to raid.  What Olivar is saying isn't a "get over yourself" post, it's "you can't have your cake and eat it too, you want to be GM of a raiding guild, you need to field a raid team, and if you can't, you need to join up with someone who can."  I don't have a problem at all with that sentiment.
 
Which is why I assumed your theory on game design was that it was.  Carbine has already put into motion reducing DS to a 20 man so they have one standardized raid size.  They've done a lot already.  You're asking them to do a huge and fundamental rewrite to all existing raids and a vast increase in complexity to all future raids so that the guild has next to no responsibility to have a raid party together.  If your assertion is actually that you believe both parties have a fundamental purpose, and after the attunement changes, raid reduction, and guild changes, you still believe Carbine hasn't been holding up their end of the bargain, then I simply don't think you mean what you say.  Carbine's done quite a bit to make raids easier to get into and run and are doing more; I think the least a guild should be expected to do is field enough people to accomplish the exact same task that every other guild is accomplishing.
 
The bench system I'm talking about isn't a player logistical structure, I was talking about an implementation whereby you actually take people with you on standby that share the lockout, the chance at gear, et al.  If you feel that system is terrible because you wouldn't want to sit on the bench, even a game-integrated one, I can understand that point,  but I feel that's a far more effective solution that does not lower the guild's expectations, but does give them a tool so that they aren't having the B-team sitting outside the door.  I have far more sympathy for the raid team that has backups ready to jump in than for raid teams that cannot meet the 20 man quota.  In fact, I really have none for the latter.  I don't mean any disrespect by it, but if night after night you can only field 17 attuned players, I think that lays on the shoulders of the guild to sort out.  I, in fact, do have sympathy for teams that have more than 20 players, but that team simply sits outside, not learning nor having a chance at improving gear.  Odd as it sounds, the Steelers wouldn't have won Super Bowls without Charlie Batch.
 
That's why I'm against flex raiding, but I'm completely open to changes for overages and backups.  One simply accounts for logistical failure; it's not like those guilds were trying to get 17 players together.  The latter accounts for excellence in logistics that simply isn't present in most, if any MMORPGs, but represents the state of a good raiding guild.  To take all that time to account for the former seems to contradict your stated theory, while accounting for overage seems to be more in line with Carbine improving the situation for raid guilds who are doing their bit.
 
That's not a "narrow" opinion simply because it differs from yours, it's simply one from a far different perspective.  I, in fact, do feel guilds and their officers have a responsibility to at least rise to the challenge.  I'm much more interested in Carbine helping those that do with improvements, rather than writing exceptionally large handicaps into the game for those that do not.  The guild that has 25 people show up to raid night deserves all that time to solve a fundamental problem, the guild that has 18 show up when they expected 20 has a fundamental problem to solve for themselves.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
You know you could get your point across far more effectively and succinctly if you cut about 90% of the flowery BS.  :P
 
----
			These forums could really use an ignore feature. Carbine please.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
These forums could really use an ignore feature. Carbine please.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
These forums could really use an ignore feature. Carbine please.
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
This is what's been frustrating me during my communications with Vic the last while. I've chalked it up to a conflict of personalities, he uses the same style and length in non-argumentative posts.
 
 
 
 
I'll do my best with one last attempt to salvage an understanding.
 
 
 
This is how I interpret the post. He makes an argument, makes some general statements regarding that argument that aren't supportive to the specific position but rather add to it, repeats the argument, gives self as anecdotal single evidence, then makes conclusion that the game isn't at fault. The people are killing their own guilds.
 
All I get from this post is the argument, which I feel is weak and white-knight. Explain to me using his post as I did, how my understanding is disproved.
 
 
edit: If you Liked his post for reasons other than what I feel is his only argument, like the general statements, then that's cool and nothing I would argue with. I assumed that you agree with the argument because you quoted the post as truth.
----
			
Esper,
 
the post I made is perhaps a bit too straight cutting the corners, but the idea behind it stands.
We should not delude ourselves that WildStar could definitly use more players. 
I agree with some of the statements across the thread, especialls the one about recruiting people: It's hard in this game.
 
We get applications now and then, but not as much as I'd like to be honest.
The more of these small guilds pop up, the harder it becomes to recruit people. As an example, I saw last on Jabbit a brand new guild formed with about 6 people.
While I do wish them their fun in the game and success with their guild, I believe it would have made a lot more sense if those 6 players joined an existing guild and strengthen the guild they joined.
Pretty sure there is a guild on the server that suits their needs.
 
The problem described above is that many people form these small guilds, and do not wish to leave and try to recruit as well, reducing the pool of potential people.
In the end you'll end up with a bunch of fragmented small guilds waiting on each other to collapse and then scoop up the remainders.
This not only is bad for these guilds, it's bad for the community as it presents a negative spiral that only ends up destroying the game, since people perceive the game as dead and more people will leave cause their guild keeps dying.
That's what I wanted to bring across.
 
I definitly agree with the points you made.
People often band together in a small guild cause they're friends and want to play together.
Which on it's own is fine, IF the game has the population to support this, which I think is not currently the case in WildStar.
Hope this comes across better.	
----
			
Olivar and Vic, I really appreciate the last posts you both made. For my part, I tend to over-analyze (or specifically, treat things more literally than they are perhaps intended), and became argumentative along the way. I suspect this is six years of Arts education at work.  :ph34r:
 
On topic, I would prefer flex raiding for the game's health, but agree that there are other ways. I guess that my personal stake in this is that I can't raid in Wildstar primarily because I can't find a casual guild that only raids 6ish hours a week. Even though I have the time to go higher, I just plain refuse to give anywhere near 9+ hours a week anymore... in particular, I've decided that I would rather build in this MMO than raid. But I still really, really want to raid, especially because it's challenging and the glowy blue armour is the coolest shit I've ever seen in an MMO. The thing is, I'm OK with not achieving all the heights, not getting that armour or clearing the last boss; obviously we can't have it all. But as a person who enjoys Wildstar's gameplay and needs a break from building now and then, in spirit with the OP, I would love to see some content made for the mid rangers, possibly 10 person stuff, that goes a bit beyond 5s for epicness/level of reward.
 
So I guess that although I think flex is the ideal for population gain (which doesn't have to be the goal, either), my personal preference would be to keep the top content at 20 players, but introduce 10 man dungeons with inferior rewards (possibly tuned more to vanity than gear progression) for players who need content that has some longevity, but will never keep up with the current demands of raid guilds.
 
The only other possibility I can think of is to reuse raid instance designs to save time, but populate them with unique bosses for 10p versions of content.
 
 
 	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Olivar and Vic, I really appreciate the last posts you both made. For my part, I tend to over-analyze (or specifically, treat things more literally than they are perhaps intended), and became argumentative along the way. I suspect this is six years of Arts education at work.  :ph34r:
 
On topic, I would prefer flex raiding for the game's health, but agree that there are other ways. I guess that my personal stake in this is that I can't raid in Wildstar primarily because I can't find a casual guild that only raids 6ish hours a week. Even though I have the time to go higher, I just plain refuse to give anywhere near 9+ hours a week anymore... in particular, I've decided that I would rather build in this MMO than raid. But I still really, really want to raid, especially because it's challenging and the glowy blue armour is the coolest shit I've ever seen in an MMO. The thing is, I'm OK with not achieving all the heights, not getting that armour or clearing the last boss; obviously we can't have it all. But as a person who enjoys Wildstar's gameplay and needs a break from building now and then, in spirit with the OP, I would love to see some content made for the mid rangers, possibly 10 person stuff, that goes a bit beyond 5s for epicness/level of reward.
 
So I guess that although I think flex is the ideal for population gain (which doesn't have to be the goal, either), my personal preference would be to keep the top content at 20 players, but introduce 10 man dungeons with inferior rewards (possibly tuned more to vanity than gear progression) for players who need content that has some longevity, but will never keep up with the current demands of raid guilds.
 
The only other possibility I can think of is to reuse raid instance designs to save time, but populate them with unique bosses for 10p versions of content.
----
			
I actually feel like the game encourages guilds and circles.
 
If there is any issue I feel like circles being capped at 100 is part of it.
 
However the major issue to me player side is what people expect to get out of the guilds they're in and the communication of that between its members and leader(s). For me personally I've been in large and small guilds and it all depends on how the people within interact with each other. The guild I currently run which has like 5-6 people has a clear understanding of what we do and when to expect activities and such while reaching out to the community when we can. I've also introduced my guild mates to circles, friend, etc that help them with outside interests too.
 
Speaking from my own point of view as a person who started a new guild and has lead guilds in the past it's very important to have a clear foundation and communication with people you form up with. The previous guild that I took over after the previous leader stepped down lost a lot of it's core people that founded it and it was quite a struggle trying to get people together and deal with the already set in stone reputation. By this I mean people that would approach would ask if the original leader was in charge and when I said no they looked elsewhere despite anything I said. We had some success, but it didn't feel right for the active members and so we reformed into what we have now, which has been quite a happy change for us.
 
We looked around and talked to a couple of guilds we felt were ideal for either merging or transferring into, but nothing quite felt right for us and we proceeded to go through with the reform instead, which resulted in a happier place for us. If we get more awesome, but we know that will take time.
 
The idea of a flex isn't necessarily a bad one, but I would will admit that I'd be concerned about the reward scale. I feel that it would just take a big step for Carbine to introduce this that at least for now would be something I'd put off for later as they get the foundational things more set. However I can see this working as a reverse shiphand kind of work around.
 
I can see how raid lockouts can contribute to difficulty of arranging a raid or picking up people and I'm inclined to agree that some mechanical "hard" gates may have a negative impact on content. PvP I feel suffers the greatest from the locks of such as Warplots not having a complete PUG options, factional restrictions, and as much as I am cringing about this the potential gear level gate that is being adjusted(i cringe because i worry for fresh players coming into the fold against some nasty gear hehe)
 
Basically to sum it up for me I feel like there is potential for accessibility expansion in Wildstar on Carbines side. However on the player side I genuinely feel it is a mix with the lack of communication, patience, willingness to be genuine with oneself, and taking the initiative with others to. I do not feel like people get to know each other or themselves as they should and it leads to disappointment.
 
 
Also it's quite hilarious to me that wildstar keeps auto correcting to wildcatter...which oddly seems fitting.	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
No,
 
the problem is everyone out there wants to form his own guild and be the next big thing on the server.
We honestly have way too many small guilds of 10-12 people around.
I can totally understand that people want to run their own guild at some points, but having too many guilds at the moment is really not in anyones benefit.
I merged my guild into another guild as well, and both guilds came out way stronger. we now have a fixed core raiding 4x a week, an alliance we can call upon to join us in the fun.
 
it's not the game killing guilds, it's people killing their own guilds.
----
			
Increase Boss casting time of all spells/abilities game wide by 20% and reduce the damage of all specials slightly. Basically make the game more forgiving so that the average player can win especially at the low levels.
 
I read a post the other day of a level 20 noob who went into STL with a group. After 2 hours they got to Stormtalon but could not down him and finally gave up. How many of them thought "Well this game's not for me.. Back to WoW I go".. This is the initial, lvl 20 normal mode dungeon that's suppose to introduce dungeon mechanics to new people trying the game for the first time.
 
If you need a guideline of difficulty, imagine you let your girlfriend play and you said "hun, get to the end of this dungeon in less than an hour" She should be able to do it with relatively few wipes in that time frame.
 
There's a fine line between challenging and frustrating. Carbine, you've been walking on the "frustrating" side for too long. 	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
Increase Boss casting time of all spells/abilities game wide by 20% and reduce the damage of all specials slightly. Basically make the game more forgiving so that the average player can win especially at the low levels.
 
I read a post the other day of a level 20 noob who went into STL with a group. After 2 hours they got to Stormtalon but could not down him and finally gave up. How many of them thought "Well this game's not for me.. Back to WoW I go".. This is the initial, lvl 20 normal mode dungeon that's suppose to introduce dungeon mechanics to new people trying the game for the first time.
 
If you need a guideline of difficulty, imagine you let your girlfriend play and you said "hun, get to the end of this dungeon in less than an hour" She should be able to do it with relatively few wipes in that time frame.
 
There's a fine line between challenging and frustrating. Carbine, you've been walking on the "frustrating" side for too long. 
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
I absolutely don't agree with this.  I think dungeon difficulty is perfect for what Wildstar is doing.
 
For the record, my wife heals like a boss.
----
			
To be fair...there are particular monsters with incredibly hard to catch casts/telegraphs and best advice I can give is to take note of them and or ask people which monster and ability gave them problems. WE had that discussion a bit in the pve forums(dungeons subsection).
 
There is also a bit of a stutter with the  default UI cast bar that is known too, which has become more noticeable with the new cast bar in drop 4 for some people.  I do think some abilities may need tweaking here and there but not a flat out 20% increase on cast times on everything. It's in a nice place, but could be poked a little here and there to make it nicer	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
New system for measuring difficulty: can Vics wife (who we know nothing about) do it?
 
 :lol:
 
I personally love the difficulty, but I won't deny its turned many people away.
----
			
Think in part the problem was caused by Carbine, joking or not, the hardcore message they put out stopped lots I know from even joining a instance....never mind a guild!
Hopefully the training academy in drop 4 will give these and many more players confidence, remove the fear of being frowned upon and give them the ability to go forth.      	
----
			
{| class="blockquote"
 
Think in part the problem was caused by Carbine, joking or not, the hardcore message they put out stopped lots I know from even joining a instance....never mind a guild!
Hopefully the training academy in drop 4 will give these and many more players confidence, remove the fear of being frowned upon and give them the ability to go forth.      
 
----
			
Where did I see it?
 
*** pokes around his keyboard ***
 
AHA!!!
 
http://kaossverige.se/2014/07/12/i-finally-understand-these-penny-arcade-comics-about-wildstar/
 
True story I am telling you!
 
 ;)  :D	
----