Destian of Bloodmoon Chosen, here, a guild currently holding Westonia and running again in SShara.

I just wanted to clarify how easy and relatively inexpensive it is to run for and to run a vanarch guild, since there seem to be some people claiming otherwise.

If your guild has 20 members, the BARE minimum for running for vanarch, that's 150g per person. I was tossing that much gold around at 35.

Odds are, your guild doesn't have 20 members. For 50 members, 60g a piece. 75, 40g each.

This is NOTHING at all and is well worth it to ride the fastest mounts in the game (FROM LEVEL 1), helping you a great deal with your questing efficiency (this is assuming you're purely mercenary and don't care about the honor of public service).

Then there's the 1% tax rate. At 1% in Westonia, BMC averages 150g per day, for an estimated total of ~3,300g for the term, more than enough to cover the cost of vanarch and almost enough to cover the market value of 100 cath awards (which are easy to acquire anyway).

So yes, 1% is perfectly sustainable and will continue to be so. Anyone who claims otherwise is either doing so with the intention of misleading you into believing they "need" to raise the tax rate or is under the belief that taking more money from everyone and giving it to a select few is somehow anything but a craptacular system of government.

Or, they're too lazy to farm up the extra gold.

I'm big on pointing out bull**** whenever I see it, especially when it has the potential to affect my enjoyment while playing Tera, so I figured it had to be said.

PS. Farming the vanarch quest BAMs to cover the entire duration of your reign (to keep all services running) is also herp-a-derp easy. BMC did it in 3 days. Vae Victus did it the same night they were elected.

I cannot fathom how people who are trying to get involved in politics are also somehow THIS incapable of doing the job they were elected for (RL parallels, lol) when all it truly involves is a basic understanding of the game...

Quote: Destian on 06/15/2012, 09:31 PM - view

Bit rude, this.

Yet I still voted for them.

They prove that the can responsibly take a seat in office. I do not care about the personality of the one in rule, so long as they are effective and improve my playing experience.

Quote: Greene on 06/16/2012, 12:03 AM - view

Nothing rude about it- that should be more of a fact than an opinion. If you're too lazy or irresponsible to sustain your zone you have no place ruining it for others...call it common courtesy.

Quote: Agilaz on 06/16/2012, 02:43 AM - view

No, it's definitely rude to make a blanket statement telling people that they're bad at a game.

I'm not sure why you and Destian get to decide who is/isn't "bad" at TERA? Did you take an EmE-sponsored certification course? Can I see your credentials?

Maybe not bad at the game. But bad at the political part of it. I voted for you guys and I agree with your statement

GM. Ctrl Alt Elite

I like BMC well enough and will likely vote for you guys, but I always do get wary whenever I see people throwing out the word "bad" or baddies like that. Half the time people who throw out the word aren't that great themselves and are wannabes. Not saying you guys are like that at all, but since you are going to be running for this position on a regular basis you might want to reconsider your wording in the future.

It's sustainable if you want to pay out of your own pockets, maybe..

I'm the GM of No Matter The Cost, I rule Lorcada - I have 1% tax rate on everything - and I'm BARELY breaking even. It's not sustainable with registration every 2 weeks, you HAVE to pay out of your pockets.

Well, I do.

So instead of cutting every zone over the same line as yourself - Just say it's sustainable for you.

Members don't want to continue paying to see the GM receive tax money, and then ask for more money at the end of their reign.

Quote: Deneeve on 06/16/2012, 04:40 AM - view

The issue I have is with people who let their services lapse and then claimed it was hard to find rare BAMs for vanarch quests when I myself was tripping over the blasted things.

It goes further with guilds who let their services slip. Nothing is more frustrating than staring at an out of service specialty vendor and needing crystals. I consider this the BARE minimum for people running for political system, and my point was that, although BMC is a relatively casual guild (there, I said it), we did it in three days. Again, it was easy.

I have no complaint about people who accidentally spent all of their policy points on the wrong service as that's a genuine accident.

But if a guild A) can't keep their services up and B) complains that the rare BAMs necessary to do that are hard to find when I can't seem to STOP finding them (I FRAPSed myself soloing a number of them, rarely did anyone ride up looking for them) they're either not very good at finding them or too lazy to do so.

And what can I call that except "bad"?

I realize this is a game, but if you're going to take on a responsibility, prepare to be called out for failing at it.

Quote: Aleniari on 06/16/2012, 06:23 AM

Are you telling me that your 299 guild members wouldn't pay ~11g each every 2 weeks to ride the fastest mount in the game? Even if half of those are alts, that's 20g each every 2 weeks.

Whatever you make in taxes would be just gravy.

I'm saying that you'll never have 299 active people within 3 weeks..

And yes - I'm saying people don't want to continue paying for the game, and in the game.

I'm not looking to milk my members - I do ask for donations once in a while when my own wallet is running short - but that's it.

I'm just telling you that it's not sustainable on your own, and the tax rate at 1% wont cut it.

I'm not trying to start a fight or another drama of any kind - I'm just telling you it's not sustainable unless you want to rely on your members, or unless you have the best zones in the game.