[Question] Guild Expedition - Inactive Members

[Falconwing]

I presume it belongs to "suggestions" not "questions"... that it's been discussed, and there are arguments against it... yet, why not give a "founder" function to exclude a member from GE if (s)he was inactive in a previous GE?

Abuse mainly. If you had that function, you could just exclude any players who were weak at, or don't want to participate in, GE. Thereby not only cherry picking the best team to do GE, but allowing you to ignore the costs of the weaker/non participating members.

If you don't want to pay the costs of having inactive members, don't keep inactive members in the Guild.

 

[DeletedUser34480]

Abuse mainly.

I suspected so... but, why would anyone want to stay in guild that abuses him/her?

If you don't want to pay the costs of having inactive members, don't keep inactive members in the Guild.

It is an actual situation in my guild, one of the founders can't play now for personal reasons.
In this case, I rather support keeping him in. Yet, wouldn't it be more clean solution, if another founder could just exclude him from GE until he's back?

 

[DeletedUser34480]

Because you don’t fire the bus driver just because he doesn’t show up on time on Thursday.

First, as before, you don't even care to find out what the situation is... just like before. Do you always do it?
Second, having a gun doesn't mean shooting right and left.

 

[DeletedUser31440]

It is an actual situation in my guild, one of the founders can't play now for personal reasons.
In this case, I rather support keeping him in. Yet, wouldn't it be more clean solution, if another founder could just exclude him from GE until he's back?

The way it is now, that person will either have to leave the guild until they can play again, or the guild will be dealt a handicap in GE until they become active again. There are a few reasons why this is good imho:
Why should a game cater to an inactive user? That just seems like a silly thing to do.
Massive abuse potential in creating a few dummy accounts, getting them Arcs, camp one in each era, exclude them from GE and log in once/day to collect the goods.
This game is about making choices, and that extends to running a guild as well. Would you still enjoy this game if it's constantly watered down to give the 20 minute/day player get the same rewards as a 2 hour/day player? I personally wouldn't, you should get back what you put into it and there should be significant drawbacks for keeping inactive players in a guild.

 

[DeletedUser]

I suspected so... but, why would anyone want to stay in guild that abuses him/her?


It is an actual situation in my guild, one of the founders can't play now for personal reasons.
In this case, I rather support keeping him in. Yet, wouldn't it be more clean solution, if another founder could just exclude him from GE until he's back?

I am a founder of 3 guilds on S, V and Y. I left all three guilds just before a recent surgery for the very reason of not handicapping the guilds in GE. In one of them, I returned only missing 1 week. In another I returned after missing 2 weeks of GE. The third I missed 3 weeks of GE. I am back in all 3 and in founder status in all 3. It isn't a problem at all if you have more than one with founder rights. And if only one person has founder rights, they should give those rights to someone they trust until they come back. If there's no one they trust, then there is an issue.