[Suggestion] Either Limit Clansizes Or Implement Size-Based Brackets @ Leaderboards

[Vilemike]

You're presenting a solution to a problem that does not exist, while failing to present solutions for the problems your suggestion would cause. You'll excuse us if we feel less than sympathetic for your cause.

[Marijan]

You're presenting a solution to a problem that does not exist, while failing to present solutions for the problems your suggestion would cause. You'll excuse us if we feel less than sympathetic for your cause.

 

I prefer it to prevent problems instead of waiting with solutions until you have problems. What problems would a divisions of clans by their sizes in leaderboards etc. cause, so the small ones have an actual chance to compete and to earn the same benefits as the big ones will get?

[Depsilon]

LOL Holy S#&$. That is good. Perfectly content with and proud of my clan but wow. Just wow.

Edited May 9, 2013 by Depsilon

[Vilemike]

I prefer it to prevent problems instead of waiting with solutions until you have problems. What problems would a divisions of clans by their sizes in leaderboards etc. cause, so the small ones have an actual chance to compete and to earn the same benefits as the big ones will get?

 

 

I may have misinterpreted your original post. After a second read-through, your idea for separating leaderboards sounds reasonable enough, even if it was worded quite ambiguously with the concept of diving larger clans to fit a smaller, arbitrary member limit. The thread's title also mentioned the former suggestion exclusively, leading me to assume that your entire suggestion was based around limiting clan sizes.

 

I would have no problem with ranking segmentation. It might even be a good thing, so people don't feel the need to join a larger clan just to get recognized. Might also lead to a good competitive scene cropping up, even if the chance of that is quite remote.

 

I would suggest you edit your original post to reflect only the suggestion of scoreboard segmentation, rather than making two suggestions in one go.

[Ced23Ric]

I prefer it to prevent problems instead of waiting with solutions until you have problems. What problems would a divisions of clans by their sizes in leaderboards etc. cause, so the small ones have an actual chance to compete and to earn the same benefits as the big ones will get?

 

Again, you are enforcing something on others that does not apply to you. Any expression and action is fine as long as it does not interfere with the expressions an actions of others. If that happens, a compromise has to be found or the lowest common denominator becomes the solution state.

• You want to have a clan of size X, where people know each other and share a bond.
• Others want a large clan that always has someone online, of all levels, doing all kinds of activities.

Currently both scenarios are possible. After applying your suggestion, your state is unchanged, but the state of the other interest group is completely denied. The only way to achieve a haphazard resemblance is via massive friends list, external tools, and cross-platform communication, but that is only to play with each other. Group effort would now go to waste, if the participating players are not in the same splinter clan.

 

The reason? A sense of entitlement/fairnis. You think that a small group should have the same chances as a large group. That this thought makes hardly sense from a logical observation must be clear to you. If I donate $50 and you rally your coworkers and donate $5000 to a charity cause, I full on expect you to get the spotlight. You accumulated a hundredfold of what I did. I did it alone and you did it with 200 people, but still - you donated more. Why should I be envious, or even ask that your company disbands and files their donations as individuals, so we're all at the same level? I don't gain anything from it, other than imposing limitations on you that I have no right of making.

[Marijan]

Dissecting this really quick ...

 

1.) David beats Goliath through cunning and superior application of tactics. He didn't grow in size, neither did Goliath shrink. What I am saying is, if those 30 carriers can manage to do 20 instead of 19 buckets and just one more, they'll come out on top. Regardless, the will have to invest more/apply different strategies to be victorious. The analogy holds true. And sometimes, 10 buddies playing casually are just not going to be able to keep up with 400 players, out of which 300 slack and 100 pull their weight. Because it's still 100 vs. 10 putting in work. Larger clans aren't automatically less industrious - if anything, their quantity of quality players is higher, because of empirical spread. At this point, you are asking for a larger number of players investing the same work individually as a smaller group to be denied their unified effort. Without any gain to you.

 

2.) The average guildsize of WoW, after removing outliers, is ~25, if I recall correctly. How does 25 compare to 1000? If anything, those numbers help opposing opinions, since the majority (count, quantity) of guilds are not even remotely as large as the "big" ones. Same with other games mentioned. Those limitations are almost always technical, to reduce strain of database calls. But even that has no meaning.

 

3.) Your interpretation of what clans are for are valid for you, but not for every player. You don't get to decide how a clan is right and how a clan is wrong. People can very well join a clan without knowng the entirety of it, by working in autonomous or organized cells. For example, the clan "TAW" (The Art of Warfare) is a clan that sends around 50 to 100 players into various games, and those only know each other via the tag - but they organize in fireteams, platoons and battalions, operate with hierarchies and achieve their goals. You don't have to copy this or like it, but it is a completely valid approach.

 

1) We're not talking about David and Goliath here, but growing clans. The big ones will have an advantage over the small ones, which will cause them to grow faster than the small ones and result in a vicious circle, until it's simply impossible to compete with the biggest clans.

 

2 & 3) As far as I know the maximum number of members a guild/clan/whatever in WoW was recently increased from 600 to 1000 and I doubt that they did that for no reason. Sure, there might be people who enjoy playing in small groups and have no interest in competition, but that doesn't matter currently. I never said that big clans aren't valid or anything like that, but that they currently have an exponentially growing advantage over smaller ones, which makes comparing them or competition between them basically impossible. Players can either decide whether they want to join one of those huge clans or a small one, which is kind of equal to an exclusion from the competition and the benefits.

 

That's why I suggested a limitation of the number of members a clan can have, to stop the vicious circle, or to divide the clans by their sizes, so players who prefer small clans can compete with each other and earn the same benefits as those who prefer big ones.

[Marijan]

I may have misinterpreted your original post. After a second read-through, your idea for separating leaderboards sounds reasonable enough, even if it was worded quite ambiguously with the concept of diving larger clans to fit a smaller, arbitrary member limit. The thread's title also mentioned the former suggestion exclusively, leading me to assume that your entire suggestion was based around limiting clan sizes.

 

I would have no problem with ranking segmentation. It might even be a good thing, so people don't feel the need to join a larger clan just to get recognized. Might also lead to a good competitive scene cropping up, even if the chance of that is quite remote.

 

I would suggest you edit your original post to reflect only the suggestion of scoreboard segmentation, rather than making two suggestions in one go.

 

That's exactly the point I'm trying to make, thank you for actually reading my post. I only mentioned one of my two possible suggestions regarding this topic in the title, because you can't make it as long as you want. You might be correct, but I already made the mistake of writing a long post with multiple suggestions for the same matter.

 

 

Again, you are enforcing something on others that does not apply to you. Any expression and action is fine as long as it does not interfere with the expressions an actions of others. If that happens, a compromise has to be found or the lowest common denominator becomes the solution state.

• You want to have a clan of size X, where people know each other and share a bond.
• Others want a large clan that always has someone online, of all levels, doing all kinds of activities.

Currently both scenarios are possible. After applying your suggestion, your state is unchanged, but the state of the other interest group is completely denied. The only way to achieve a haphazard resemblance is via massive friends list, external tools, and cross-platform communication, but that is only to play with each other. Group effort would now go to waste, if the participating players are not in the same splinter clan.

 

The reason? A sense of entitlement/fairnis. You think that a small group should have the same chances as a large group. That this thought makes hardly sense from a logical observation must be clear to you. If I donate $50 and you rally your coworkers and donate $5000 to a charity cause, I full on expect you to get the spotlight. You accumulated a hundredfold of what I did. I did it alone and you did it with 200 people, but still - you donated more. Why should I be envious, or even ask that your company disbands and files their donations as individuals, so we're all at the same level? I don't gain anything from it, other than imposing limitations on you that I have no right of making.

 

Nope, you didn't get what I'm trying to say at all. I'm not trying to enforce anything, but to make both preferences valid and to prevent the imbalance between big and small clans, that the current state of affair will cause eventually. Currently small clans have a disadvantage and have basically no way to earn the same benefits that the "Top Clans" will be able to earn for their Dojo. A division of clans by their sizes into multiple leaderboards would fix this and would give players the option to earn those benefits without having to join one of those huge clans.

Edited May 9, 2013 by Marijan

[Vilemike]

To prevent further confusion, instead of "division of clans in leaderboards" use the phrase "division of leaderboards by clan size". Thank you.

[Marijan]

To prevent further confusion, instead of "division of clans in leaderboards" use the phrase "division of leaderboards by clan size". Thank you.

 

I used that phrasing multiple times, but excuse me if I did it differently in one of my posts. I'm not a native speaker and appreciate it if someone points out my mistakes so I can improve myself. That doesn't change anything about the point I'm trying to make though.

Edited May 9, 2013 by Marijan

[Ced23Ric]

Paddeling back a little. Consider my posts pertaining to an enforced limit on clansizes. Bracketing does make sense to me - it's a fair enough & simple request. My apologies for the misinterpretation. I changed your topic title to make up for it.

 

<3

[Marijan]

Paddeling back a little. Consider my posts pertaining to an enforced limit on clansizes. Bracketing does make sense to me - it's a fair enough & simple request. My apologies for the misinterpretation. I changed your topic title to make up for it.

 

<3

 

Thank you. I guess the fault lies with me and I'm sorry if my bad English caused confusion. I'm just trying to say, that currently people who prefer regular-sized clans, with a small amount of members, who know each other, have a disadvantage and basically no way to compete with the really big ones, which will grow exponentially, which will exacerbate this "problem" even further in the future. So in order to make both preferences valid I made those two suggestions, which would enable small clans to either catch up or to earn the same benefits as big ones without having to compete with them - because that's barely possible without becoming one of those huge clans as well. Players should have a choice which kind of clan they prefer, without being excluded from competition and those benefits for their Dojos if they make the wrong decision.

Edited May 9, 2013 by Marijan

[Squird5]

The problems I'm seeing are that you keep talking about compitition between clans. What compitition? How many kills they got in an Op? Why does that matter?

[Ced23Ric]

The problems I'm seeing are that you keep talking about compitition between clans. What compitition? How many kills they got in an Op? Why does that matter?

 

The assumption is payout in the form of clan dojo parts and/or other clan benefits.

[Marijan]

The problems I'm seeing are that you keep talking about compitition between clans. What compitition? How many kills they got in an Op? Why does that matter?

 

There is a leaderboard for the "Top Clans" of the Fusion Moa Operation, which destroyed the most of those Fusion Moas ( https://forums.warframe.com/index.php?/topic/40537-fusion-moa-operation-leaderboards/ ). This is a quote from DE_Steve: "The following Tenno Clans contributed the most to this Operation. We expect future operations will reward these Clans with Dojo-specific objects of high esteem. For now, know that the Lotus holds these Clans and their Warlords in high regard and permits them to forgo humility (for a brief period)."

 

Here is another one:

 

Yes, hotfix coming for this! Will show up as 'Operation Kills' in profile.

 

Those two quotes indicate that there will be more of those "operations" in the future and that participating successfully in those operations is going to award clans with Dojo-specific benefits. Since only the "best" clans show up on the top of the leaderboard, it's a competition between those clans, but it's basically impossible for small clans to compete with such huge clans at the top and therefore it's impossible for people who prefer small clans to earn the same benefits, regardless of how much effort they put into those operations.

[Squird5]

There is a leaderboard for the "Top Clans" of the Fusion Moa Operation

 

Yes, and...?

 

participating successfully in those operations is going to award clans with Dojo-specific benefits

 

Oh no, you might not be able to get a fountain if your clan is less than 1218 members strong. There will probably be secondary ways to get the reward, maybe not immediately or cost free, but likely you could still get it.

[Marijan]

Yes, and...?

 

 

Oh no, you might not be able to get a fountain if your clan is less than 1218 members strong. There will probably be secondary ways to get the reward, maybe not immediately or cost free, but likely you could still get it.

 

Stop making assumptions about whether whatever the "Top Clans" are going to get can be obtained otherwise or not - we don't know it and that doesn't matter at all. People who prefer small clans are currently at a disadvantage, because they are not able to compete with the biggest ones at all and therefore have no chance to earn those objects of "high esteem" via the leaderboards. Dividing clans by their sizes in multiple brackets at the leaderboards wouldn't hurt anybody, but actually give people the option to choose a small clan over a huge one, without being excluded from competition and those "high esteem" objects for the Dojo, whether it be a fountain or a grain of rice. The competition will exclude a majority of clans in the future, which will be simply too small to compete or be compared to the biggest ones, so ambitious players either have the choice to join or create one of those huge clans as well or to be excluded from the real competition, although they might prefer a small clan, but would still like to participate.

Edited May 10, 2013 by Marijan

[Rapid99]

I'm not sure why there would be a good reason to limit people from cooperating in a cooperative game. 

[Blatantfool]

 Just a cool tidbit.

 

 Warbros hit the top of the Fusion Moa event leaderboards with 37582 kills.

 

Warframe Japan was in second place with 22265 kills.

 

Warbros is a smaller clan then Warframe Japan.

 

 It didn't save those Moa.

[Dousiq]

 Just a cool tidbit.

 

 Warbros hit the top of the Fusion Moa event leaderboards with 37582 kills.

 

Warframe Japan was in second place with 22265 kills.

 

Warbros is a smaller clan then Warframe Japan.

 

 It didn't save those Moa.

OH

OOOOOH

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOH

TOLD

[Webly]

 Just a cool tidbit.

 

 Warbros hit the top of the Fusion Moa event leaderboards with 37582 kills.

 

Warframe Japan was in second place with 22265 kills.

 

Warbros is a smaller clan then Warframe Japan.

 

 It didn't save those Moa.

Somebody's getting a burn ward named after them.

[escape123]

If rewards were given based on clan numbers, then this can become a problem.

As it stands to reward individual effort only, i think its fine

[Venarge]

Nope, David had a chance to beat Goliath. There won't be a way for the small "David"-clans to compete with clans with multiple thousand members, regardless of how much effort they put into it.

Yeah, so what. Like Ced already said. This event also had a personal leaderboard. You could have made to the top in that one. 

I dont see why small clans should be able to compete with huge clans in something like kill count. You dont want to be in a huge clan. Thats ok. Nobody is forcing you. But please, dont try to make every clan equal just because this feels unfair to you.....

They could do rewards for the different clan sizes. The best clan with 20-60 members / 60-100/ 100-150 etc.

Why do you want to restrict the whole community if a solution like this would benefit everyone and restrict nobody...

[Dousiq]

That's funny because Warbros is probably the most exclusive clan.

It is. And it's embarrassing to have pubs add me in-game and ask me for an invite. I wish people would stop doing this. Wia probably has the same problem.

[Wellthen]

It is. And it's embarrassing to have pubs add me in-game and ask me for an invite. I wish people would stop doing this. Wia probably has the same problem.

Actually, it's kinda fun. Did you see that log?

[Dousiq]

Actually, it's kinda fun. Did you see that log?

No, I didn't see it.