Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Guild TransfersFollow

#1 Mar 23 2011 at 11:48 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
blue wrote:
We want to give everyone an early heads-up regarding our plan to implement a guild relocation service for World of Warcraft. The idea is for a guild leader to be able to transfer a guild to another realm. The guild structure remains intact, including the guild leader, guild bank, ranks, and guild name (depending on availability).

Guild members who decide to relocate with their guild may initiate their own paid character transfer. Upon a successful transfer they will automatically be part of the guild when they first log into the new realm. Their guild rank and guild reputation will be intact.

Guild leaders who do not want a change of scenery may also choose to pick a new guild name using another new service. These services are in development and we will be providing additional details at a future point in time.

As with all of the features and services we offer, we intend to incorporate the guild relocation service in a way that will not disrupt the game play experience. Please note that this feature will require extensive internal testing, so you may see bits and pieces of the service appear on the public test realms.


So beyond the fear of a guild leader stealing the guild and running off to a new server, this sounds like an interesting idea. Some of our guild has recently been throwing around the idea of swapping servers, so this would be something we'd consider. Of course I'm sure it could be a nice little cash cow for blizz as well. Nothing like making your wishes come true for a small fee. With the new guild system though, I'm not surprised this idea is making it's way onto the test servers.

Any thoughts?
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#2 Mar 23 2011 at 11:51 AM Rating: Excellent
****
4,074 posts
I'm surprised it doesn't include a faction-swap option. I'd think that would be at least as popular as realm transfer.
#3 Mar 23 2011 at 12:08 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,202 posts
It's something that people have been wanting for quite a while. With the new guild leveling, it makes even more sense for people to have the ability to move an entire guild with its established level, perks and achievements.

I am more likely to make use of the guild renaming though as I have an Alliance alt guild with a name that a friend gave it before he decided he didn't like Alliance and his enthusiasm for being a guild leader waned (short attention span really). While I like the friend, his choice in guild names was a bit uncreative and I have wished for a way to change it for a while. If it wasn't for the fact that creating a new guild would require me to go to strangers (hate being bugged for sigs so I hate to ask others for them) to get the guild signatures, I would have made a new alt guild a while ago and moved most of my alts to it.

I have so many alts covering all the crafting professions that help support my main that I really don't want to change servers but it's a bit less painful knowing that soon, if I do decide to do so, I can take all my junk in my guild banks with me. :)
#4 Mar 23 2011 at 12:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
teacake wrote:
I'm surprised it doesn't include a faction-swap option. I'd think that would be at least as popular as realm transfer.


I suddenly had this vision of a guild corpse-camping the members who didn't faction-swap. Smiley: lol
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#5 Mar 23 2011 at 3:47 PM Rating: Default
So... instead of consolidating servers that are losing population, make subscribers pay to transfer. Sound like good business!

#6 Mar 23 2011 at 11:34 PM Rating: Decent
***
3,157 posts
It's EXTREMELY good business. They're not forcing a single person to use the Guild Transfer service, but they'll be glad to make money off of it if people want to pay.
If you don't like the idea, you can always just take your guildies to a new server and buy a charter and get the XP all over again.
#7 Mar 24 2011 at 12:02 AM Rating: Default
sub-defaulted for pointing out the obvious? That's a good sign of where the community and the game are going.

I don't think the guild system was thought out any further than 'more tasks with no required additional content = profit.'

#8 Mar 24 2011 at 12:27 AM Rating: Good
***
3,157 posts
You complained about Karma.....
You were sub-defaulted because every single thing you post comes off as whiny, to put it simply. That's why I red arrowed it anyway.
Again, no one is forcing you to transfer your guild, it's a convenience. For the players.
Again, it's NOT bad business, it's very very good business, as they stand to gain a profit without alienating their reasonable customers.
Are you even a customer anymore? I could have sworn I've read you say you're quitting at least 20 times.
Rift is >>>>>> that-away bro.
#9 Mar 24 2011 at 12:57 AM Rating: Default
That was a comment, not a complaint. (I've never rated anyone either way, so don't worry about retaliation.)

and JAY,
the Wow is for 12 year olds thread is THAT way. Stamp your fists at someone there. I'm not interested.

#10 Mar 24 2011 at 1:06 AM Rating: Decent
***
3,157 posts
"Sub defaulted for pointing out the obvious?" isn't a complaint?
#11 Mar 24 2011 at 6:12 AM Rating: Excellent
****
4,074 posts
Actually I see no reason this won't be good for imbalanced/low pop servers. More people are likely to take advantage when they offer free transfers if they can do it en masse as a guild without disturbing their structure. And in those situations, when they're doing the character transfer free I don't see why they wouldn't do the same with the guild transfer.
#12 Mar 24 2011 at 8:08 AM Rating: Excellent
***
3,202 posts
It's hard to say what the effect will be on low pop or unbalanced servers. While it would be bad for those servers to lose more people, having a system in place to relocate guilds would make it easier if Blizz should later decide to merge the really poor servers together or into some of the more healthy servers.


One question I saw brought up on the o-boards yesterday was about what happens to the guildies who don't transfer with the guild. Do they just become guildless with no guild rep? This might be something that needs to be addressed as it's definitely something people will be very unhappy about if they get into that situation.
#13 Mar 24 2011 at 9:36 AM Rating: Excellent
****
5,159 posts
shammypowah wrote:
sub-defaulted for pointing out the obvious? That's a good sign of where the community and the game are going.

No, you were sub-defaulted for an idiotic post. First you implied that a lot of servers are losing population, which there's nothing to indicate that. You also made it sound like you should be able to transfer for free, which Blizzard does when it's necessary to relieve population pressures, but which is prohibitively expensive to just do willy-nilly for free. I rated your post down for sounding whiny and entitled. I then rated the second one down for being whiny yet again, not to mention because you used the classic "oh no people don't like me, guess that's a sign how everyone is a bunch of pricks" line.

In short: You got what you deserved, quit complaining.
#14REDACTED, Posted: Mar 24 2011 at 11:29 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) and the fanbois attack! (stage 3?)
#15 Mar 24 2011 at 11:45 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
shammypowah wrote:
Actually, there is indication that servers are losing population. Blizzard offers free transfers to increase low populated servers. I'm guessing most guilds will want to transfer to higher populated servers for a larger pool of recruits.

My post was an angry snarky comment, not a complaint. That's just as bad if not worse to some, but so be it. I know I'm not alone in my opinion, unpopular as it may be. Rate DOWN if you disagree. That's what that arrow is for, no?


Unpopular opinions can benefit more from evidence then from references to a silent majority.

Just a thought. Smiley: wink

Edited, Mar 24th 2011 10:52am by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#16 Mar 24 2011 at 11:56 AM Rating: Good
***
3,272 posts
I love how people with sub 1000 posts complain about karma. Once you get passed the whole "HOMGZ IMMA LOSE MY PERTY COLORZ!" you just stop giving a **** about what people think about you.

This forum board patrols its own for a good reason. Many of the people here have been here for quite some time and a large majority of us know each other so don't be surprised when people come down on you harder than kao's banhammer for posting something and sounding like a whiny *****, which I assume you are.
#17 Mar 24 2011 at 12:07 PM Rating: Default
Indeed, there are very helpful and informative long term members. The better ones tend to not gang up on a non-combative poster. That's not an assumption.

#18 Mar 24 2011 at 1:15 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
12,846 posts
shammypowah wrote:
Indeed, there are very helpful and informative long term members. The better ones tend to not gang up on a non-combative poster. That's not an assumption.



I wouldn't say better, maybe a little more patient or comfortably numb. Overtime though you will find that either you quit the boards or you end up befriending the ones you bumped heads with. Also, regardless of your karma, you can still post and if you hate karma, post in your journal, that is karmaless. (Ilia taught us old OOters about that)

I have noticed on Uther that Stormwind is much less populated on prime raiding times. Most of my guild is over playing on Rift. A handful of us have more than 1 level 85 that we raid with and it isn't that WoW is no longer fun, it's just become too much of a time sink like FFXI used to be that it isn't conducive to those of us with small children, jobs, school etc who really can't set aside the kind of time that is now required just to run a raid, pvp or instance.

The new raids are pretty neat, the mechanics are challenging but if you have a good group that works well together, it's doable.

It seems to be a natural gaming progression that after 5 or so years, games reach their peak; they don't die.
#19 Mar 24 2011 at 1:48 PM Rating: Excellent
****
5,159 posts
shammypowah wrote:
and the fanbois attack! (stage 3?)

Not at all. I don't even have a subscription to the game, and haven't for several months. You're just pretending to be a victim here, for whatever reason.

Quote:
Actually, there is indication that servers are losing population. Blizzard offers free transfers to increase low populated servers. I'm guessing most guilds will want to transfer to higher populated servers for a larger pool of recruits.

Certain servers are underpopulated. Some others are overpopulated. That's the way it's always been, and the general trend has never been that population overall is decreasing. You were saying that they should consolidate the underpopulated ones instead of offering these transfers, which is a measure usually resorted to in games that are seeing an overall decrease in their population.

Quote:
My post was an angry snarky comment, not a complaint. That's just as bad if not worse to some, but so be it. I know I'm not alone in my opinion, unpopular as it may be. Rate DOWN if you disagree. That's what that arrow is for, no?

It absolutely is what the arrow is for. If you knew that already, why did you bother making a post to complain about it?

Also, another reason I rated you down: Jay came in and very directly but politely explained why your original comment was wrong. And instead of ever addressing you, you just completely ignored what he had to say. You've also provided nothing at all except pure opinion, not even an explanation of why you think that. It's obviously not required that you back up everything you say, but if you don't want to be rated down, interjecting your opinion in an argumentative way with nothing behind it is a bad route to take.

Quote:
Indeed, there are very helpful and informative long term members. The better ones tend to not gang up on a non-combative poster. That's not an assumption.

Again, acting as though you're somehow a victim here. You made a bad post. Accept it and move on. There's not some conspiracy to attack you because everyone loves making fun of the new people. Hell, I'm the only one who's even arguing with you. But I do appreciate the implication that I'm a worse poster because I failed to let your argumentative (and, yes, whiny) post go by unnoticed.
#20 Mar 24 2011 at 11:33 PM Rating: Default
niobia wrote:
shammypowah wrote:
The better ones tend to not gang up on a non-combative poster. That's not an assumption.



I wouldn't say better, maybe a little more patient or comfortably numb. Overtime though you will find that either you quit the boards or you end up befriending the ones you bumped heads with. Also, regardless of your karma, you can still post and if you hate karma, post in your journal, that is karmaless. (Ilia taught us old OOters about that)



Let me rephrase that: The more helpful and informative ones tend to...

Protein: I never said I represented a 'silent majority.' In any case, whatever the number they are not so silent if you follow other forums at all. Cue cries of 'anecdotal data' being unreliable. Wait, maybe that's why Blizzard didn't listen to beta testers. (ba da BUM!!!)

edit:
ok, I'm being flippant. Tough to avoid when I'm being asked to prove there's an elephant in the middle of the room, when THERE'S AN ELEPHANT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROOM. It's been noticed before and is sort of boring to keep on about, sure... but it's there. The sky isn't falling Pollyanna, but please stop grinning at me. It's creeping me out!

Edited, Mar 25th 2011 2:15am by shammypowah
#21 Mar 25 2011 at 12:26 AM Rating: Excellent
***
3,157 posts
It's more like saying there's an alligator in the pool when it's clearly nothing but an anole.
#22 Mar 25 2011 at 9:48 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
shammypowah wrote:
Protein: I never said I represented a 'silent majority.' In any case, whatever the number they are not so silent if you follow other forums at all. Cue cries of 'anecdotal data' being unreliable. Wait, maybe that's why Blizzard didn't listen to beta testers. (ba da BUM!!!)


I know they're out there, I do follow other forums, and I'm not saying you're wrong. 'WoW is dying/degenerating/not fun anymore, etc.' is a relatively popular opinion. However, it's also been a relatively popular opinion for over 5 years.

What I meant by the post is this: you referenced declining numbers on servers, that sounds like something that's measurable, so I'm left wondering where you got your data. If it's just people you've talked to on forums and your impression about the game, then that's fine. Just say so and we can leave it at that, and bask in the resulting 'anecdotal data' cries. There's nothing wrong with posting an opinion, let's just not disguise it as a fact. If you do have something to reference, that's awesome. I may be more inclined to agree with you then, and I imagine there are others who would be too.

Again, I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm simply saying you've given me no reason to believe you are right.

Edited, Mar 25th 2011 9:05am by someproteinguy
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#23 Mar 25 2011 at 11:43 AM Rating: Excellent
***
2,069 posts
It is also not really needed to make a new post about getting rated down. If you feel that you want to say something,just edit the rated down post.

Edit: thanks for the rate up (see? How easy was that?)

Edited, Mar 25th 2011 3:05pm by Ailitardif
____________________________
http://www.marriageissogay.com/

Song of the day:
May 26, 2011 -- Transplants
#24 Mar 25 2011 at 1:02 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,272 posts
Quote:
It's more like saying there's an alligator in the pool when it's clearly nothing but an anole.


I can't be the only one who read this as ahole.
#25REDACTED, Posted: Mar 25 2011 at 4:45 PM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) Understood. I wasn't making a 'WoW is dying' post, but it's difficult to seperate that from a comment about population I suppose. The (snarky) suggestion was that it would be more to players' benefit if lower pop servers were consolidated instead of or in addition to offering the new transfer service. To charge everyone in light of 'that which cannot be proven but is there for all but the blind to see' just seems wrong. Who knows, maybe that will happen along with some compensation for those who don't transfer with their guild as the plans are not yet complete. In any case, I do think that the guild system in general was a mistake and has left them with a possibly irreversible mess.
#26 Mar 25 2011 at 4:52 PM Rating: Good
***
2,826 posts
shammypowah wrote:
and the fanbois attack! (stage 3?)

Actually, there is indication that servers are losing population. Blizzard offers free transfers to increase low populated servers. I'm guessing most guilds will want to transfer to higher populated servers for a larger pool of recruits.

My post was an angry snarky comment, not a complaint. That's just as bad if not worse to some, but so be it. I know I'm not alone in my opinion, unpopular as it may be. Rate DOWN if you disagree. That's what that arrow is for, no?



Blizzard offers free transfers to lessen the bured on overpopulated servers. Of course they're going to pick the servers with the lowest pop to allow you to transfer to. This why so few people actually accept the free transfers.

Jesus you're dense.
« Previous 1 2
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 333 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (333)