Please consider having the game count the members in a guild and only require that many raid tickets to unlock the raids.
If a 25 member guild earns 600 daily raid tickets from all 25 members, then they should unlock the raids just as fast as a 50 member guild getting 600 a day per member.
This will not hurt the larger guilds due to how fast and easily they would finish the raids compared to the smaller guilds.
If you are worried about the smaller guilds having the tickets again before the raid is completed, then don't start counting the tickets for that raid until the raid is completed. This will put the same amount of time between each raid finish and start for everyone.
This is the fair thing to do for all players. It will still punish those with inactive players and require that all work together to unlock the raid.
I've spent a lot of time, effort and money on this game. I shouldn't have to lean on 49 other players to unlock the raids at a decent amount of time. If all players in the guild are active, then that is all you should be asking for.
This is the fair thing to do. More players would feel better about the game and this would stop a lot of the turmoil that is happening with the guilds.
Please, stop beating on the smaller guilds.
How is it fair that 25 players all put in just as much as you do individually and you think you deserve more just because you have 49 other people to lean on???
No, i deserve more because i need 49 others to do their part just like i do my part if i want to raid as often as possible instead of only needing 24 others to do their part.
So how is exactly fair when 25 players earn just as many total tickets per day as 50?
Spoken like a true selfish person. Your numbers in a guild mean nothing as an individual player. You think that because you have more people in your guild that you deserve more!! You are a misguided person. If you want to "earn" more, then earn it!! Don't use your buddies as a means to deserving more.
If you truly deserve more, then let your roster prove it. Not your buddies.
You shouldn't need 50 members just to unlock the raid. Your guild mates will make the difference in the raid itself. That's where you're numbers should shine.
And if I have the roster to do the raid and we put in the daily grinds, then we should have that access as well.
You can get your advantage on the battlefield. Not in trying to get there.
What are you even talking about? You're the one asking for more, not me, yet i'm the selfish one because you don't want to be in a guild with 49 ohters?
I'm saying it's more difficult to depend on 49 others than it is to depend on only 24 others. Obviously that also means 49 others depend on me earning my tickets daily.
Not sure how that makes me misguided to be honest. Maybe you misunderstood what i meant?
You still haven't awnsered my question either, why do you think you and 24 others deserver to earn just as much as any other 50 member guild? Talk about selfish..
the 49 others in my guild are just competition in the raid itself... Only having 25 members in the raid itself is definetely an advantage. Less competition and no one gets #26 - #50 rewards.
Raids are guild events - not individual events. Complete guilds have an advantage over half complete guilds. Just as in TB.
If a guild of 25 members could run as many raids as a guild of 50 members how would it be fair that the small guild receives rank 1-25 rewards while the complete guild receives rank 1-50 rewards and hence far worse rewards on average? Why on earth should the smaller guild have far better rewards on average? What would justify this?
Just a thought:
Whar does it make you when you think the small guild should have far better rewards on average from raids than the larger guild?
Or you could just do like the rest of us do and form 50 player guilds... Seriously, what's stopping you?
And no, that is not the point of guilds.
Don't ask for the goal post to be moved if you can't reach it as often as the others.
If you can't see the logic in the original post, then you care more about your personal gains in your larger guild than you do of the overall health of the game. There's nothing else I can say to you on this.
In your proposed change You seem to think that the advantage for a larger guild is that they can complete the raid faster. Heroic rancor is a full on sim, or 5min auto no matter how many members in the guild. Haat is a 15min full auto, even if you only have 25people in the guild. So how exactly is a larger guild completing a raid faster to start a new one sooner? The game was designed and balanced with 50 people guilds in mind. Either be in a guild with 50, or suffer the consequences. You don't think it takes alot of work for officers to recruit/manage 50 people??
Have you seen all the different posts complaining about this exact thing you mentioned? It's pretty staggering.
As for fair, isnt it more work to get and keep 50 players working together than it is to keep less?
Sure the individual effort is the same, but guilds work very hard to keep themselves full (at 50) with active participating members, and as a "reward" they get to raid at maximum efficiency. That seems fair, and thinking it should be that way doesnt seem selfish.
Raids are guild events - not individual events.
What advantage? How fast you complete the raid has nothing to do with the amount of members in a guild, now that single players can complete the raids. Small guilds will do just as many raids as large guilds - and have the advantage of better rewards.
Then change it. Recruit 25 new members, merge with another small guild or leave your guild for a larger one.
I know it takes a lot of work. And the game forces 50 member guilds too much. I'm only asking for the access to raids. Not the completion. You seem to think that all guilds who have access will be able to finish these raids as fast as your guild does. That is the mistake here. And if a smaller guild does have the roster to do so, then they've earned that right. I don't understand why you would think any differently. There is plenty of other things smaller guilds are locked from. Raids don't need to be one of them.
Because I know how it would be abused. A high tier guild could split into say 10 5 person guilds, immediately clear haat/sith/rancor, then rejoin back as the 50 person guild for tb/tw and maximize everyones rewards. No need for them to try and get 110k tickets in those small guilds.
All guilds have access to all the raids, they are not restricting access, just lowering the frequency.
There is no such thing as a small guild, just incomplete ones (or not full).
The only thing guilds are locked out of are thing where they do not meet the prerequisites, just like events. This is a development game with a progress to it, if you dont make the progress, then yes you are locked out.
So why aren't you in a 50 player guild?
“What advantage? How fast you complete the raid has nothing to do with the amount of members in a guild, now that single players can complete the raids.”
There are guilds the do not have a member that can solo a raid, there are guilds that still can’t even complete a high level Sith raid. The number of members definitely has a bearing on how fast some guilds complete a given raid.
Not leaning one way or the other on the fairness of the guild system, just clarifying some of the arguments.
Edit: took out one of my points as the context seemed wrong.
DISCLAIMER: Post is subject to change.
You might counter and then say "well, you need at least 25 members", to which I would then use your own argument to counter your own point.
Guilds are 50 people. That's the design of the game. There are many many guilds that are looking for players. There are many midsize guilds that could merge into full guilds.
All it takes is one member, who can. It's got nothing to do with how many members a guild has.
But many young guilds still don’t have that person so it most definitely has something to do with the number of members.
DISCLAIMER: Post is subject to change.
There are also many young guilds that are full (50/50) but still can't clear the HSR, so maybe it has more to do with the age of the guild than the amount of members..
Wouldn't be fair.