Multi guild membership or extension to another guild's banner/trophies for raid purposes

Discussion in 'The Veterans' Lounge' started by Tygart, Apr 27, 2021.

  1. Szilent Augur

    You've fixated on this mechanical underpinning that you envision (without substantiating, but whatever). That guild membership may be stored in some particular way has no bearing on whether a character's participation in a raid can be known, by whatever means. A character's membership in a raid IS known to a myriad of other EverQuest mechanics, and so could be known by any hypothetical new game mechanic - like a Raid Banner.
  2. Skuz I am become Wrath, the Destroyer of Worlds.

    And? I said it was known, it's in server memory (RAM).

    If the server crashes, your raid formation is lost, your guild is not, it's not rocket science, how does the Guild Banner know which guild you belong to? It reads from the database your guild's information is in.

    The point I was making is it would need a new system not use the same method the current one does...evidently you skipped that part of the discussion so you would have a reason to post. You added nothing.
  3. Vumad Augur

    It would be nice if the guild had a portal as it does now, remove the portal stone, and add a second portal that always goes to the banner.
    Coagagin likes this.
  4. MyShadower Newer Than Newest Member

    It seems completely logical that the in memory character data has, among other things, a guild identifier, fellowship identifier, raid identifier and group identifier as these would be needed in many places and their values are relatively stable. Your guild and fellowship not being lost when the server crashes does not indicate the information is not in memory. Guilds and fellowships have a life expectancy that raids and groups do not so it is logical for raids and groups to poof if the server goes down regardless of how their information is physically stored.

    It seems everyone is pointing out the same thing in different ways. The simplicity of the change is only something we can assume but at the very least, all the parts to at least make the port to raid work are in game. The desired implementation can be debated until Veeshan comes back. It seems like it would be a logical feature to encourage the MM part of the game.
    Coagagin likes this.
  5. Wyre Wintermute I'm just a butterly dreaming I'm a man

    Guild "fellowships" or Alliances should/could be a thing. Only Guild Leaders could invite, join, or disband. Not sure how many slots it should have, somewhere around 12 maybe (all slots would be Guild Leaders, so that's 12 guilds). Require 12 in raid, in zone, to plant the banner (not limited to the leaders in the alliance). The "banner" would be selected from the alliance window, not the individual guild. New banner shard added for alliance standard.

    It would take resources they may not have to spare atm. but most everything exists and would just require some tweaking (and a lot of testing).

    I think the big reason it fails, every year, is because of they way it is "asked for" or presented. It can't just be modding the existing system or reducing restrictions on current systems, etc... The only existing work around would be to have 12 people from one guild there, with a guild hall that offers access to every possible toon etc (that's a nightmare).
  6. Windance Augur

    Why not?

    I proposed a very simple modification to the existing system that I believe would allow the desire result with minimal code changes.

    No one has proposed any rational down sides except the obvious ... it DOES require a code change, but then every option purposed would require much larger changes and result in a more complex set of conditions to setup and use a banner.
  7. Wyre Wintermute I'm just a butterly dreaming I'm a man

    Because it doesn't check players in the raid with the existing system and to simply use players in a general location or raid could be exploited.
  8. Windance Augur

    How is it more exploitable?

    What is the worst that could happen?

    You have one person run who has permissions to a common spot like zland camp. You might be able to meet up with 11 other people/alts that had to get there somehow.

    So what?

    That's the point, making it easier to get around.

    If you are talking about 'Exploiters' ... they can already setup fellowships, or spin up a pocket guild with 12 members.
  9. Yimin Augur

    Make the Gathering of Banners possible ! Henceforth known as the GOB ! Must be in the raid to buy raid banner GOB stone in guild hall , just like portal to any zone ...

  10. Wyre Wintermute I'm just a butterly dreaming I'm a man

    Because you're not thinking like a cheater.

    The point of the guild standard was to allow people who log in, the ability to quickly meet up with the raid force, not for "making it easier to get around."

    The only way I can even fathom to reduce the exploitation would be to have an item that could only be clicked in the GH/Lobby/PoK type areas, with a minimum of a 4 hour cool down.
  11. MyShadower Newer Than Newest Member

    This is part of his proposed change. It would still require 12 to open the portal, just 12 in a raid as the minimum gathering.

    Wherever you are going with this, if you read about the cheating software on these very forums, they have travel covered. This should not be what stops them from making improvements to the game.

    So, easier to get around to the raid location provided you are in the same guild? How is his proposed solution just making it easier to get around if it still requires 12 people from a raid to open a portal?

    By this logic, I am able to exploit the existing feature provided I am in the same guild and we still have to ignore the cheating that happens sans guild port.

    So, could you be OK with an implementation that requires 12 raid members to be at a location to open a portal that anyone else in the raid can then port to via the GH portal? All that has done is remove the same guild requirement to assist with multi-guild raiding.

    There are still other scenarios that will be found difficult with this implementation but I think the exploiting arguments are very thin once you consider the capabilities already available to those willing to cheat.
  12. Wyre Wintermute I'm just a butterly dreaming I'm a man

    No. Absolutely not. You're not thinking broad enough.

    What? No. It allows the guild standard to work as it currently does. It would allow an additional option, similar to campfires, that would allow a guild alliance port, but with a significantly increased reuse time. What you implied is not at all what I was saying.

    Just because 3rd party software can be used to warp, does not mean they need to implement a design feature that can be severely exploited. Sheesh.
  13. MyShadower Newer Than Newest Member

    Warping is all that is done with cheating software regarding travel? If I am not thinking broad enough, explain it. Enabling players to port exactly as they can now without needing to be in the same guild, what advantage opens to cheaters that they don't already have when it comes to travel as the game exists today?

    I understand what you are saying. You propose a more complex solution needs to be developed to make a raid port work and prevent cheaters using it to their advantage. Someone else pointed out how it could be done by enhancing existing functionality and you are saying it is too exploitable, we just need to think more broadly, while you can only fathom one way to reduce exploitation.

    Is the four hour reuse timer the thing that prevents exploitation? This timer raises several questions, starting with, if we wipe twice, are we not supposed to be able to reassemble quickly? We can if we are in the same guild. Is that an exploit or working as intended?

    I am saying the cheating argument falls apart if you just look at how the cheating being reported is working already. They are not going to gain any more of an advantage than they already have as they are beyond the point of the guild portal being a shortcut of significance.
  14. Wyre Wintermute I'm just a butterly dreaming I'm a man

    I don't care if someone using a 3rd party app does or does not gain an advantage. That has nothing to do with what I'm saying. They can do it already. What I am saying is, that if this is implemented (as proposed in this thread) EVERYONE will have the possibility to use an in game system to exploit numerous things. No, I'm not going to lay it all out openly on the forums even if it is a theoretical addition to the game.
  15. Szilent Augur

    I, too, am bewildered as to what exploits you are envisioning endemic to extending a version of banner functionality to raid members. Like, could you describe one? You don't have to enumerate or specify the mechanics for "numerous things", just describe one problematic situation.
  16. MyShadower Newer Than Newest Member

    Fair enough. Cheaters gonna cheat.

    Then do not make the argument. If you are not going to explain it, at least report the exploit(s). It(they) should be doable now if the characters are in the same guild, yes?

    Your proposed solution specifies a lot of effort for nearly no gain. We can port to the raid once per what amounts to the length of most scheduled raid times. Your only reasoning seems to be the exploit(s) that may be unleashed and everyone may use.

    Are you defining the current port functionality narrowly here?
    Are you saying those that log in late and the raid already started is the intent?
    Is it OK to use it after a wipe?
    What about those that do not run to the next target (for whatever reason), are they permitted to use the port feature?
    Is it being able to hold your buffs in the GH then banner in?
    Is it using the banner as a marker?

    I'm trying to find the exploit(s) that should already exist, provided we are in the same guild.
  17. Lubianx Augur

    I have mentioned raid banners in the past on these forums.

    It was also brought up with Devs at one of the old Fan Faires by a few people who I raid with. At the time the Devs said it was a very good idea.

    A lot of things have changed with EQ since but it would still be a worthwhile thing to look at.
    Ozon, Coagagin, Elyssanda and 2 others like this.
  18. Accipiter Old Timer

    Isn't that the same thing?