We’re not getting rid of the PvE category, or the scoring system for the time being. Its been discussed how it works and why it’s good and that’s that.
I could see some very funny things out of this. Like claiming another fellowship. But I think this is overall fine. Since most members joining these other fellowships are doing so in the hopes of being part of another fellowship.
But the information is not present so there’s no way for people to tell that it is, indeed, not a fellowship, but rather an arbitrary conglomerate. Perhaps such conglomerates should be listed with an asterisk next to their name with a note explaining.
Edit:
Furthermore, the column header on PvE progression reads as: “Fellowship,” so it’s kind of deceptive.
1 Like
We can see what the formula is, but that is how far one will be able to get 
If anything we will see how complicated it will get?
As a coder wouldn’t you want to make your job easier and not think about the multiple variables and their conversions to 1 PvE unit 
So the header should be Fellowship (s)
Well, the formula is extremely simple and as such its really not as complicated as some people try to make it
Hence why I wondered what would happen with 10 man raids <.<
And if there is discussion among yourself about the factor of how time should be counted it seems to appear that what it tries to calculate is difficult.
Continue on discord =3
?
Computes makes calculating formulas simple but whether that is the right one is another question?
Ok. (20 characters…)
I don’t really like the idea of grouping separate followships. Have you combined the 2 super friends fellowships or did you only do your own? Some of the complaints on here have just been whining just to whine, but this one seems legit. The game has a size limit because the devs didn’t want very large fellowships. You would have to combine a lot of fellowships if you combined all the ones that ran together. All the top runs from some fellowships are done by members of separate fellowships running together.
We would do that if Super friends requested it. if enough people need to group fellowships (people they play with for the same reasons, with the same goal under the same name) then it may become something more prominent. For now its on a request basis.
I disagree with it, but it is your tool. Still glad to have it. 
Sure. There are some rules set (or not set yet) which we are experimenting with (such as pve progression or the idea of affiliating who you regard as your fellowship).
of course there are boundaries. Where fellowships run under the same hood (such as super friends and superfriends or ready player one and ready player two) it makes sense that if they wish to be regarded as the same team, they can. Until fellowships have some actual function in the game, we think it does not really matter as long as they are actually your team mates.
Cheers,
I think it does matter because you already have a rule in place to allow teammates from other fellowships. Theoretically, under the current setup Alphabet could get credit for for a shared run with only one person from alphabet in the group.
Who would get credit for a shared run by people from these fellowships:
Alphabet
Aiphabet
Aiphabet
Nox
Nox
The answer is alphabet even though they only had one member present.
1 Like
No by the rules we set they would have 3 members present as they play together regularly and run under the same name (names in resemblance of each other). If you had Nox and Nox 2 and wished it, we would group it the same.
Thanks,
According to the game, and the api that the armory is supposedly based on, only one member of Alphabet is present in a run.
1 Like
As I said, we combine fellowships on request. As stated in the post above.
“by the rules we set they would have 3 members present as they play together regularly and run under the same name (names in resemblance of each other). If you had Nox and Nox 2 and wished it, we would group it the same.”
The armory uses the data as a source. of course there are things we don’t care about right now, such as semantic fellowship naming. The community is small enough for us to manage requests etc.
By your arbitrary rules, not by the game’s rules. All I request is that this information is conveyed in a prominent manner, otherwise, grouping people under the term “fellowship,” when they are not in the same fellowship is deceptive.
I would like to remind everyone that we’re providing this service free of charge, nobody is forcing you to use the service we provide.
You’ve expressed before how the armory doesn’t chime well with you, and that is acceptable. You don’t have to concern yourself with it.
As stated previously, fellowships really serve very little purpose as of right now. Not much more than just a name to band people together who play with one another regularly. We happen to have more people than what the game’s arbitrary limit allows, and as such we’ve grouped the two fellowships under the same name. A deed we will do to anyone who asks for it.
Again, don’t use it if you don’t like it. Thanks
4 Likes
The fellowship cap isn’t arbitrary, it’s part of the mechanics of the game.
This discussion serves very little purpose anymore. Back to the topic at hand!
1 Like