Why Having a B team hurts your guild

March 7, 2010

I found this excellent Q&A on the Lexington Guild Forums. It illustrates better than I could (being so emotionally close to the matter and all) why sitting some members more frequently than others is a bad idea for the health of a progression guild.

Why not bring the best 25 people online every night?

Carefully consider the effects: True, we might kill a particular boss slightly earlier. The best players would see slightly more invites than they do under our current system, and might gear up slightly faster.

However… The ‘lesser performing’ players would receive greatly reduced invites. They would then be demoralized, under-geared, less experienced, and less prepared. They would have less opportunity to improve and practice. They would be much more likely to quit. Then, when any of the ‘better players’ are out, we’d be bringing a poor substitute instead of another strong player. Or we might not have anyone available because they all quit.

Furthermore, a merit-based invite system has these effects:

  • unhealthy and miserable competition to see who is “good enough” to make the invite list
  • focus on pointing out other people’s mistakes instead of cooperating
  • focuses raiders on meters instead of on killing bosses
  • officers have to decide who is better than who. This would cause us endless arguments and drama.

Anyway, that sums it up pretty well how damaging sitting good people over other people can be for a guild. If you want to have a guild that doesn’t falter and stumble when things get tight, you don’t play favorites and you rotate people fairly.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: