In its original form, accumulated guild status (and consequently levels) would decay over time. The idea was that a guild with a certain level of status could not become an asset created by a few, or just one player which then lasted the duration of the game, with no further inputs.
The idea is that a guild has high-status and levels because it is actively engaged in advancing the interests of its home city. In other words, "what have you done for me lately?"
This idea proved unpopular with the players, primarily since the rate of decay was quite fast, and people didn't want to spend their whole time online doing writs. Rather than tweak the decay rate, they changed the system to not have explicit decay whatsoever, which is where it stands today.
Let's review the basics of that system. First of all, there's personal status. This is gained by completing heritage quests and by doing guild writs, which any member of a guild at any rank, including initiate may perform. Writs are special quests handed out by one of 5 factions within each city, roughly corresponding to guilds for mages, priests, fighters, scouts, and tradeskillers. Tradeskill writs usually involve making something rather than killing things as the others do. Completion of the writ awards status points, which can be viewed on your personal info window.
Heritage quests may be done by anyone, but writs can only be done by characters that are a member of a guild. Personal status can be used to purchase specialty items, typically decorations for residences, decorative armor or clothing, and reduced prices on houses and clothing. However most of these items are only available to guild members.
A guild member can become a patron for his guild, pledging to contribute a fraction of his earned status to the guild in order to level up the guild. What fraction? Well, that's where the interesting math begins. The simple answer is that the status gained is divided by the number of patrons, and the result is the number of status points that are contributed to the guild. However the number of patrons in the guild is considered, for the purposes of the calculation described is considered to always be at least 12.
So, if 5 patrons each do a writ worth 1200 points, the status gain for the guild is 5*(1200/12) = 500. If we add a sixth patron, who does the same writs for the same value, the contribution to the guild is now 6*(1200/12) = 600. Adding that patron helped.
Now consider the situation where you have 18 patrons who are doing writs/heritage to the tune of about X status per week. The status contribution is now divided by 18, since there are more than 12 patrons, and the total contribution to the guild is 18*(X/18) = X. So let's add another patron, who does the same amount of writs as all the other patrons. This should help, right? It doesn't. The formula now is 19*(X/19) = X. To my mind, this is a big problem with the system. Adding new patrons doesn't help unless they accumulate MORE status than the average patron.
First off, heritage quests pay status at a much better rate of return for time invested than writs do. So they are the key to leveling up ones guild. And besides, people find them fun, not a grind. But there's a problem lurking there. Actually, a couple problems.
Once you've done all the heritage quests, there's nothing that a patron can then do to add to the level of the guild at the rate that they have been, and that the other patrons still working on heritage quests can maintain. So effectively, they cap out their contribution level and slow everyone else down.
Let me explain this. Suppose Alfred does all his heritage quests, worth a total of 1,000,000 status points while the guild is still kind of small, and there are only 12 patrons. Alfreds guild status contribution for those quests is 1 million divided by 12, which is 83,333. Now Allyson comes along and is added as a new patron and does the same number of heritage quests for the same amount of status. But since there are now, say, 20 patrons, Allysons contribution to the guild is 1 million divided by 20, not 12, which is 50,000. It doesn't really seem fair, does it?
Let's suppose that Alfred has, after finishing all the heritage quests and gaining level 50, becomes bored with the game and ceases to do anything that gains status. He now becomes a drag on the further leveling of the guild, but his status contribution is such that removing his patron attribute would probably result in the loss of several levels of the guild. So they don't really want to do that. Eventually, though, Alfred will cancel his account. I don't know how SOE will manage this but let's assume Alfred will be deleted and the levels will be lost.
In a sense, this is status decay. Though it would still function if a fixed fraction of status were contributed to the guild, rather than dividing by the number of patrons.
But there's another perverse incentive to this system. It's debatable whether it's a good idea to have more than 12 patrons, but it's downright inefficient to have lower level guild members become patrons. Level 10 characters can do writs, but they aren't worth much status. And they can't do heritage quests.
This feels wrong to me. Even though they are not able to contribute as much, it seems like wide participation is a good thing, not a bad thing. I'd like to see all contributions to leveling the guild welcomed and encouraged. That's a critical step in building a guild and a community, and I'm inclined to think that the best policy in the long run is to welcome regular contributors, even if their current ability to contribute is small.
People whose lives or inclinations do not permit for regular contributions to leveling the guild need to recognize that they are holding the guild back, and bow out when the resulting status loss won't be too great. But I'd like to welcome any regular commitment to growing the guild, no matter how small. But the math doesn't support it, and that's a shame.
