limited guilds

[Thordin]

Well first I don't like the idea of embryonic guild with no tag, no info and so, seems very hard to me, in addition what would you do with existing guilds? Maintain them? Now, that would be unfair, indeed.

But I like the idea of making an oath, so there would be less one-man guild, let's say 5 people to give birth to a guild must be present, could be nice events around fireplaces...

[Zaer]

Oh stop trying to be elitist snobs since you already have a guild. Just get over it ... YOU ARE NOT SPECIAL or superior to anyone else just because you have been here longer.

 

Grow up and stop trying to hog the sandbox ... silly children.

 

Leave the guild structure alone. Live and let live.

 

LMFAO <3

im so much more special and superior to you. LoL pwnt by a "child"

[trollson]

Well first I don't like the idea of embryonic guild with no tag, no info and so, seems very hard to me, in addition what would you do with existing guilds? Maintain them? Now, that would be unfair, indeed.

 

Yes, establishing a new guild could be hard work; but why shouldn't it be? We have to work to develop and established characters, so why not the same with guilds? It would me much more statisfying to have earned a tag than just to pay for one.

 

Any new proposal must be compatible with the existing system, and I did hint at this in my outline.

• Existing guilds would be set at level-20, corresponding to their GuildMaster's rank.
  
• They would be awarded a notional gxp total; enough to allow a few guild members to leave without dissolving the guild. Larger guilds are more at risk from members leaving, which is offset by greater gxp earning potential.
  
• They would have 20pp to spend on Guild Perks; specifically to acquire a means to earn more gxp.
  

 

For new Guilds; it would be feasible to transfer initial costs to the sacrific required by spending that first 1-pp on a guild perk (1); which need not be limited to gold, but may include other material sacrifices (eg, 10,000 bones for a 'Bone Collectors' perk, which thereafter awards 1gxp/bone). Allows for non-wealth based guilds.

 

 

(1) All 1pp guild perks would give sources of gxp. This would prevent new guilds being created that could never advance.

[Infamous]

good idea but the Tag should be there from the start

[Arnieman]

My Thoughts:As I see it, what is the problem with having 1-2 player guilds, or on the other hand, 100 player guilds? Other than PK, what does it harm people to have guilds either as small as they want, or as large as they want?

 

Small guilds exist for a reason - generally from what I've seen/heard, the person or people don't want to be tied to a whole bunch of people, and don't want others bothering them about joining such large groups. There is the big disadvantage for playing this way, that the people you can "most trust" are few.

 

Big guilds exist for a reason - similar interests. This can play havoc in any number of areas, but deservedly so - why shouldn't a larger guild try to throw its weight around? But, you get the problem of "bad apples" - people who get into your guild and don't really try to add to it any, and in many cases try to bring down your guild for their own benefit.

 

If there is a problem with too many PKers in one guild, or all allied, the PKers need to take it on themselves to not be tied together - I mean, if all you ever do is sit around chatting and attacking the random newb, it won't be much fun - but, tell me it isn't more fun if you can attack people that make you actually work for the no-guarantee kill?

 

For the most part, I don't see these problems here, that everyone keeps saying there is - I mean, you have the tags that people know, and have been around awhile - who hasn't heard of LNX, PL, JusT, *CO*... On the other hand, you have the upstart guilds, which depend more on the reputations of their members than they benefit them.

 

Maybe a system of guild "perks" would be a good thing, but why should people have to work hard to get a guild, only to work harder to keep it AND manage it? Recruiting a member - the game only says you have to have a level of 20, but most guilds I know require more - some want specific skills, others have other criteria - one I knew of even required a specific perk be taken. Most want to try and know the people somewhat before recruiting already, and the ones that don't show it. I don't think a new system risking the destruction of a guild will change this, and even if it does, I don't think anyone should have to choose between letting an outlaw hold them over a barrel in their own guild, or risk the destruction of the guild.

 

I don't believe the current system - with some tweaking - is that harsh. We already have most of the functionality we need, if we just figure out how best to use it.

[Infamous]

hmmm maybe you would need some really rare items to start a guild.

then people could still have their 1-2 ppl guilds but the amount of guilds would be limited (no n00bs could get those items so you won't have guilds with really low lvl'ed leaders.)

+ having a guild would mean something then.. it won't be something every newb can get after spending some time at lilacs or blue lupines.

Edited June 23, 2006 by Hardcore