Officers' Quarters: Scorched by raider burnout
by Scott Andrews 
Oct 25th 2010 at 3:00PM
It's been more than 10 months since Blizzard introduced major endgame content to World of Warcraft, and raider burnout is at an all-time high. In times like this, hardcore players often look to casual guilds as a refuge from the demands of more serious organizations. It's not always a bad thing, as I'll discuss, but sometimes taking in these hardcore refugees can lead to major problems. This week, an anonymous officer tells his tale:
Hi Scott,
I'm currently an officer in a guild that started as a social/leveling guild, but toward the beginning of this past summer, we had some level-capped players who decided to take on raiding content. We were having a lot of fun at first whether or not we successfully downed bosses because we were finding a way to stay socially active in our social guild.
During this period, one guildie and I became de facto raid leaders because we were always there on raid night and always the two who got the groups organized. This was when I also got promoted to an officer position. The problem I'm facing now is that we ended up recruiting a couple of new members who had burned out on hardcore progression raiding and wanted to take a more casual approach to raiding.
At first, they were a big help in fine-tuning our raiding style, but they quickly grew impatient with the fact that sometimes we have to pug some slots because we're lax on attendance, that we might have to pug a tank who wants to do a fight slightly differently than what they are used to, or because we're happy with just downing Marrowgar and Lady Deathwhisper and calling it a week. Basically, their idea of casual raiding and our idea just don't match.
Apparently, one day when I wasn't online, this tension came to a head, causing the loss of three of our oldest and dearest members and apparently our GM having to take one these guys into a private chat channel to discuss his attitude. He refuses to leave, since he has a relative in our guild. Raiding started to die off as this player's attitude made people not want to participate, and the more and more people we had to pug, the worse his attitude got. It was a never-ending spiral.
The other raid leader and I don't know what to do about this guy who refuses to find a new guild. Should we jump ship or not? I've also been thinking about waiting to see what happens when Cataclysm drops, but I don't know if in the meantime I've gotten myself in a position where I'm not seen as an effective leader. Your help is appreciated.
Anonymous
As I mentioned earlier, Anonymous, these situations tend to crop up toward the end of expansions when current content becomes stale and most people have all the gear they want. Hardcore players think that by joining a casual guild, they can enjoy raiding in a more relaxed environment. In many cases, this situation works out just fine for everyone. The burned-out raiders get to step off the hardcore treadmill, and the casual guild gets the benefit of their expertise and skill.
Sometimes, however, it becomes a situation like the one you're facing now. Instead of going with the flow, these fresh recruits try to reshape their new casual guild into a proxy of their former one. They're like retired Navy SEALs attempting to turn a paintball match into a military mission. This type of behavior makes me wonder why they ever leave their old guild in the first place.
The most common result, if the officers don't intervene effectively, is exactly what you've experienced: drama leading to decreased interest in raiding, and then eventually gquits.
In hindsight
Let's look at what you could have done to prevent this from happening. You could have been more firm with these players and told them that you're going to run raids the way your guild always has, and they can either get on board with it or sit.
As the raid leader, it's your job to manage everyone's expectations, and theirs were far too high for the type of raids you were running. It should have been made clear to them exactly how things work in your guild before they stepped into your raids. Unfortunately, one of these players decided to take out his frustrations on some of your other raiders, and you lost them as a result.
The guild leader's response to this incident was too weak. A scolding doesn't fix what happened. A player can't refuse to leave if you don't give him a choice, and it sounds like what this player said was reason enough to kick him. At the very least, your GL should have asked him to apologize to the people who were caught in the crossfire. By taking stronger action, the GL might have brought those three players back and salvaged your raiding as it once was.
Three options
What's done is done, but the question remains: What are you going to do about it? The easy solution, as you propose, is to leave the guild. You can always keep in touch with friends after you leave, and if you do it before the expansion, then at least your former GL with have some time to sort things out before Dec. 7. I'm sure people will be disappointed, but it's your $15 a month, after all.
If you stay and you want to get the guild back to raiding, you'll have to confront these players. Hopefully, your GL and the other officers will back you up. Obviously, this is the more difficult path, but it's also potentially the more rewarding one. You didn't stand up for yourself before, and certainly your players' opinion of you has suffered as a result. However, you can make this right, regain some credibility and get back to enjoying the guild.
There is a third option, as you point out. You could stick around for Cataclysm and see what happens. In all likelihood, these hardcore players will either leave for serious raiding guilds or quit the game. I don't see them sticking with your relaxed pace for very long at 85. You won't fix your members' perception of you quite as quickly this way, but if you can get people raiding again -- and having fun at it -- you can gradually overcome the fallout from your current problems.
So, there you have it: three options. I can't tell you which choice is best. It's a decision you'll have to make on your own.
/salute
Send Scott your guild-related questions, conundrums, ideas and suggestions at scott@wow.com. You may find your question the subject of next week's Officers' Quarters! Filed under: Officers' Quarters (Guild Leadership)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
jfofla Oct 25th 2010 3:07PM
You can take the Elitist Jerk out of the Hardcore Guild, but you can't take the Jerk out of him.
Kurly Oct 25th 2010 3:18PM
Wow. That guild leader need to grow a pair and /gkick the troublemaker. He refuses to leave? I'm an Officer in out guild and when we have a troublemaker and it's obvious we are better off without him, I give him two options... leave the guild now on your own, or I'm kicking you.
matthewggrammer Oct 28th 2010 2:25AM
On the flip side, Storming the Citadel can be done naked, so you have to feel their frustration.
matthewggrammer Oct 25th 2010 3:47PM
Wait, why'd I get darkened out? I mean, obviously these guys shouldn't be berating everyone, but, seriously? 2 bosses? They gotta be frustrated.
Aedilhild Oct 25th 2010 3:54PM
So I *did* read that correctly.
The problem isn't ennui; it's poor guild leadership.
Zanathos Oct 25th 2010 4:44PM
If they're frustrated, maybe they should be reconsidering their decision to join a casual guild, rather than morphing the one they joined to suit them (and failing) . This definitely sounds like a failure of leadership though. If two new guys are destroying your raids, you don't ask them to leave, you boot them out.
Shadda Oct 28th 2010 3:21PM
Maybe call a guild meeting and figure out what your guild's priorities are. If everyone is content to down a few bosses and call it a week, then let the hardcore raiders know that your guild isn't what they're looking for and ask them to move on. If they refuse, kick them. It may be that others would like to see more raiding as well, not just the few "elite" players. If this is the case, you have two options:
1. Approach the two hardcore players with the suggestion that they break off to form a second guild that will be associated with your current one, but not actually part of it. Individuals who are interested in taking on more than a couple of bosses could be encouraged to join this second guild. Emphasise to the rest of your guild mates that this won't be seen as abandonment or jumping ship, and that should they choose to return to your guild that option will be available. You could create a chat channel to speak back and forth between guilds so that people don't feel as separated from their friends. This way, the people who are content to take out one or two bosses a week can continue to do so and people who enjoy the challenge of taking on new bosses get to see new content.
2. Suggest that the "hardcore" raiders stay within the guild but create their own raid team. Let them take on the challenge of organizing raids and give them the option of letting people outside the guild be part of their team. People who are willing to commit to the raid team can be encouraged to join, but emphasize the fact that the hardcore players will be in charge, and that ultimately it will be the hardcore players who decide whether a player comes to the raid or not. This may very well lead to the hardcore group breaking off to form their own guild anyway, in which case you get them out of your hair. :)
Hoof Oct 26th 2010 8:33AM
I have to agree with Kurly and not with the blog. There's no three solutions, there's one really simple solution to this. If he won't leave willingly, it's to type "Everyone get in your goodbyes to so-and-so" followed by /gkick so-and-so
If he's got a relative in the guild, tell them if they cause any drama because of it, they're free to go or can be kicked. Likewise for anyone who supported the turd. This honestly belongs to the drama mama's, not the officers' quarters.
After the gkick, inform the 3 members you lost and try to get your good thing going again. Grow a pair and gkick these people.
If your guild leader won't have the courage to fix the problem, then yes, it's time to start a new guild and invite over everyone who wants things to go back to the way they were under new, stronger leadership... You. You HAD a good thing. People WERE happy. It's time to make those two sentences be present tense instead of past tense.
DavidC Oct 26th 2010 1:06PM
There is a world of difference between "hardcore" and "casual", but in this case, to stop after Lady and not do Lootship? That brings casual to a WHOLE new level considering lootship is easier then Marrow or Lady.
Even though the guild is supposedly _casual_, I would venture to guess that more then the new guy want to go farther then 2/12 in ICC at this stage of the game. I think that's the real problem ... defining exactly what _casual_ is.
Is _casual_ doing 2/12? is it doing 6/12? is it not raiding at all? is it doing doing 10's instead of 25's?
Does _causal_ mean you don't bother with fish feasts or flasks? Does _casual_ mean you can bring a PvP spec to the raid? Does _casual_ mean that if you wipe more then twice your calling it cause it's just not really that important?
Casual vs Hardcore ... I think those are just PC terms used when you don't want to take responsibility for your actions ... or you want to disparage another group.
Oakraven Oct 25th 2010 3:25PM
To be honest they should have been told to sit out the next raid untill they got there 'tude in check the FIRST time it happend.
Frankly your probably better off leaving than staying with the way things are now. Honestly if the GM is willing to let 2 wanabeUberraiders drive off members of the guild than deal with it then hes probably going to wake up and find that his guild consists of himself, the two Uberraiders and the "relative" they will not leave without. at least then he gets to deal with them himself.
who knows, maybee the GM wants to be the GM of an Uberraidgild himself. nows his chance. and since thats not the kind of guild you want to be in then perhaps its time for you to leave anyway.
Blacksheep Oct 25th 2010 3:28PM
I'm a raid leader and one of two second ranking officers in my guild and we had one of these people once as well in addition to an allotment of other trouble makers. We are an odd placed guild, definitely the casual pace, but we like to clear content, even if it takes months and months longer. We deliberately avoid the "must raid 5 nights a week for 4 hours or you get benched" kind of stuff of the hardcores, but we are still up working on the LK now (way late I know, but we are there and that's all that matters to us).
In any event, I don't understand this "he refuses to leave" thing? When we had trouble makers in the past they were warned, then if we felt forgiving warned again, then finally we g/kicked them if it continued, and changed vent passwords. Some people we have warned took such great offense at being told of their misbehavior that they left, yet others had to be g/kicked and we did not hesitate to do so.
I think the person that Anon should have talked to first was the guild leader and inform him that the warning was not enough and that the individual should simply be removed from the guild. If the guild leader asked "why?" the response would be, "if you don't remove him you will lose half the guild and I'm not sure I can stay here either." A GM faced with removing a solitary trouble maker or losing 8 raiders will usually remove the one.
Aidan Oct 25th 2010 3:29PM
A member who is destroying the guild does not get to "refuse to leave".
A guild is there to support group play, what ever that means to the particular guild. If a member is critically disrupting that, they need to be kicked.
Lissanna Oct 25th 2010 4:20PM
It's hard sometimes when you have Real Life family & friendships involved in the mix. Mostly, it looks like the guild is headed for one of those end-of-expansion breakups that is oh so common.
Kuro Oct 25th 2010 4:37PM
Smells like the trouble maker is the relative of (maybe several) someone(s) within the position of leadership in the guild. Maybe GM or another officer or long time player who the GM doesn't want to lose.
One thing here -- the HC troublemaker guy is in this position of being the best in this group of mediocre players. Perhaps that's really what he's seeking and why he doesn't raid with people more to his skill level.
Priestess Oct 25th 2010 5:00PM
I've had to demote a real life friend of our GM, and remove a friend of one of our officers. For the guy I had to boot, he felt like personally knowing someone in a position of power gave him all the right in the world to do and say whatever he wanted. Before kicking him, I talked it over with the officer he knew, and explained why what I was doing was necessary (although it was blatantly obvious), and offered my support to them. I talked through with them what they could say in real life to this person so as to minimize the real life drama, and I reminded them to say as much as necessary that I was the "bad guy". I'm a more senior officer, so it would be very easy for this guy to explain to the offending friend that he was just one of a large team of officers and he got out-voted, and the "higher ups" did it and he couldn't change that. It worked out all right on his end, and the guild as a whole appreciated the prompt removal of a problem person.
This doesn't work so well if the offender is a relative of the GM, but I've told off our GM's brother (our former GM, to boot) for going over the line, and I'm still an officer. Overall, if you are standing up for what is right or for the goals and good of the majority of the guild, either you will succeed in working out the issue or the guild will naturally collapse because the leadership is not doing its job. Either way, you have done the best that you can, and others will always look up to you for that.
transientmind Oct 25th 2010 5:58PM
Definitely sounds like the relative was the key issue. My casual guild is almost exclusively friends and family with only a handful of folks who we don't know from RL... and RL friends/family get an auto-in. Apart from the fact that they're all good guys, I suspect the RL connection keeps people more civil than they might otherwise be on points of contention with regards to guild direction. But because relatives can be different in their attitudes and preferences, it means you're going to get differences of opinion on raid approach.
We also found ourselves at level cap and raiding (because at the time - pre-OS - it was the only way to get anything better than what we already had). Our pace inadvertently picked up to 2-3 nights a week as we found out that we were actually pretty good at this, and we did get a bit of burn-out, and a few recruits purely to 'fill up the roster'. There was also some rage-quit, but this was resolved. We had some guys who were only there for gear... It was suggested to them that this may not be the best fit for them. They took the hint and left. The key to this hint was making it clear that it was ONLY a courtesy for them to save face, NOT a request.
The solution to getting our quitters back was very, very clear communication and some well-defined rules and boundaries. And mutual acknowledgement that playstyle and raiding ability were personal preferences, that there were no values judgements attached.
People usually quit over feelings of disrespect. If you can address that respect, and ensure that there is mutual love everywhere, regardless of where people want to take their character's 'career' (yes - a video game 'career' should serve to heighten the inanity of this whole exercise), at least people moving on to other guilds can do so without hard feelings.
Eisengel Oct 26th 2010 1:20AM
I've seen this a lot. A lot of people are afraid to be the 'bad guy' when they take a leadership position. I'd say the best solution is to circulate a list of rules amoung the senior officers, open it up for comments from the guild at large, resolve any conflicts, then apply them to everyone dispassionately. If you break rule #5 and the punishment is a gkick, it may make me feel bad if I know you well, but you'll still get the gkick.
Tim Oct 25th 2010 3:31PM
Pretty much anyone who drives three long-term and good-standing guild members away from the guild should be /gkicked. You know that the issues that resulted in those players leaving occured as a rot over a long time, with just the final argument weakening the bonds enough for them to slip away. Driving three of them away, this guy really crossed a line. You might be able to get your old guildies back if you explain that the offending member is no longer in the guild.
However, if you don't take action, this could easily become just another sinking ship of a guild like so many that occur around expansion releases.
Clarence Rubin Oct 25th 2010 3:37PM
As a member of a hardcore raiding guild, I would expect the reverse situation to result in a gkick. Casual player, content with poor performance because it's just a game and that's how you have your fun? Sure, but go have your fun elsewhere, where you won't get in the way of our style of fun.
It's really no different when you put the hardcore player in a casual guild rather than a casual player in a hardcore guild. Simply put, they don't belong there, they're not having fun, they're not contributing to other people having fun, and they're causing drama that is hurting the guild. If this player can't realize on their own that they're in the wrong place, then they need some help in the form of a gkick. In the end they'll benefit as much as you will, because nobody is benefiting from the status quo.
Zanathos Oct 25th 2010 5:55PM
Well said