Another idea for fair guild competition without guild locking

Smokin_Joe_BlowSmokin_Joe_Blow Member Posts: 97
edited December 2015 in Suggestions & Ideas
I think most players agree that cycling guild members to increase stars goes against the spirit of fair competition on the guild leaderboards, but is currently allowed by the rules (though discouraged by the player community). One problem with just locking guilds at the start of each competition is a guild could be unfairly penalized if a player starts a challenge, but opts to leave the guild mid challenge (or possibly just is unexpectedly not active). Here is an idea that could address this fairly:

The guild score is only from the stars earned by the top 20 players in the guild that challenge. If a guild member leaves or is kicked out you could replace him like usual, but the guild only gets the stars from the top 20 players. The name of the departing player would be left on the guild list along with the number of stars earned in the challenge that week, but grayed out. Once equaled or surpassed by 20 active players that week then the inactive player's name would fall off the guild list and the stars by that player would not count towards the guilds total for the challenge. If an active player is not in the top 20, his name would be on the list, but in a different color and his stars would not count to the guilds total until he was in the top 20.

This system would maintain the flexibility of the current system, but remove most of the advantages of intentional player cycling.
AysatyoPetTWD2

Comments

  • AysatyoPetAysatyoPet Member Posts: 1,168
    This might work..

    Felecia
  • I like this idea much better also, you have a beautiful mind :)
    Felecia
  • Smokin_Joe_BlowSmokin_Joe_Blow Member Posts: 97
    edited December 2015
    Thanks for the support :) An idea for a color scheme would be green for current guild members in the top 20 scores, gray for players who have left and are in the top 20 scores, and red for current members not in the top 20 scores. Obviously players who have left the guild and are outside the top 20 would fall off the list.

    Also, I guess I didn't mention...if a player left and rejoined the guild during the same challenge their color would revert to the appropriate one (green or red) and they could start adding to their stars previously earned in the guild that challenge.
    Felecia
  • shAdshAd Member Posts: 268
    Yeah this rule is intuitive... And easy.... And would solve a lot!

    @TK-421 @Overwatcher @Teeceezy
    Please take this idea to your devs!!
    Very proud first officer of "Dead Angels"
    Felecia
  • HattenatorHattenator Member Posts: 40
    It's a very simple fix. After challenge starts if anyone leaves to go to another guild that person can not compete in current challenge in new guild. If new player comes to guild during challenge that player can not contribute during that weeks challenge.

    I also believe the challenge should be shortened to 3 or 4 days to allow for more preparation time between events.
  • @Hattenator

    I'm not keen on the idea of shortening the challenge times as a longer challenge time allows more time for people with busy schedules to really dig in and get a nice amount of stars. An extra day or two of prep time in between challenges would be awesome though.
  • JenJen Member Posts: 74
    @Smokin_Joe_Blow The problem with your suggestion is that it will encourage people to kick out folks if they think they have someone who will be a higher scorer. It will exponentially increase guild cycling. If this is instituted, I will quit playing guild missions. I much prefer a team of 20 people helping each other and watching people improve each week. I don't want any changes that will increase guild shifting. @TK-421 @Overwatcher @Teeceezy
    Jenny (Ullr)
    Email/GroupMe: [email protected]

    elder/recruiter of CONQUER / THE UNINFECTED / ALEXANDRIANS
  • Smokin_Joe_BlowSmokin_Joe_Blow Member Posts: 97
    @Jen

    Please explain how this idea would increase guild cycling. There would be little to no advantage to changing players in the midst of a challenge, certainly far far less than there is currently.
  • AysatyoPetAysatyoPet Member Posts: 1,168
    You could increase the guild capacity to 30 or 40 members.. but still, only the highest 20 members stars will be counter.

  • JenJen Member Posts: 74
    @Smokin_Joe_Blow I explained it in my original post but I will explain it again. What will happen is that every guild will try to recruit the absolute highest they can during the challenge, so they will kick people out the minute they recruit someone new. The guild leaders will look at your level and star production, figure out when you've maxed out, and kick you out for new meat once they find a new recruit. It's easy to score massive points in even one day with the right survivors/gear, funds for gas, and strategy.
    Jenny (Ullr)
    Email/GroupMe: [email protected]

    elder/recruiter of CONQUER / THE UNINFECTED / ALEXANDRIANS
  • JenJen Member Posts: 74
    You can actually score up to 288 points in one day, assuming 8 hours of sleep.
    Jenny (Ullr)
    Email/GroupMe: [email protected]

    elder/recruiter of CONQUER / THE UNINFECTED / ALEXANDRIANS
  • Smokin_Joe_BlowSmokin_Joe_Blow Member Posts: 97
    @Jen I not sure you understand how my system would work. The stars the player obtained outside the guild would not count towards the guilds stars. Recruiting someone midweek who already had a bunch of stars would hinder you, not help you because it would be harder to get more at that point. The only advantage to recruiting a new player midweek would be if you thought that player would end up with more stars that week (earned in your guild) than the person who left/was kicked out would have earned. This is far, far less of an advantage than you get currently (you get the stars from both players). My system would encourage you to have your twenty best players at the start of each challenge, but would provide an avenue to still be competitive if you unexpectedly lost someone.
  • Smokin_Joe_BlowSmokin_Joe_Blow Member Posts: 97
    Jen said:

    @Smokin_Joe_Blow The problem with your suggestion is that it will encourage people to kick out folks if they think they have someone who will be a higher scorer. It will exponentially increase guild cycling. If this is instituted, I will quit playing guild missions. I much prefer a team of 20 people helping each other and watching people improve each week. I don't want any changes that will increase guild shifting. @TK-421 @Overwatcher @Teeceezy

    Please explain. There would be little to no advantage to doing this in the midst of a challenge. In between challenges yes, you want the strongest team possible if you are in a competitive guild. I don't foresee a system where guilds are permanently locked if that is what you are suggesting.
  • Smokin_Joe_BlowSmokin_Joe_Blow Member Posts: 97
    edited January 2016
    error duplicate
  • Smokin_Joe_BlowSmokin_Joe_Blow Member Posts: 97
    Bump. This is still an issue. I hope it will be addressed with either guild locking or a system like this (my preference obviously) prior to the next competitive guild event.
  • JamesJames Member Posts: 7
    *Bump* This remains a problem (current #1 guild is a major abuser of this bug) and this is the best suggested fix I've seen.
This discussion has been closed.