Jump to content


Photo

Next Gen MMORPG Guild Features - What do you want?


  • Please log in to reply
127 replies to this topic

#41 Pater

Pater

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 335 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 06:58 AM

Pater - how do you deal with the inverse case, that being corruption at the top? If guild officers/masters are to have more power, there needs to be a way for the members to deal with grievances.

Totally valid question - I'm not calling for complete power in the hands of guilds. And I'm certainly not saying that all guild loots are owned by the guild - just a few things that required sustained guild effort that was purely for the good of the collective. (Cores to TB rep and Atiesh shards are perfect examples, I think.)

Of course, each individual has the power to walk at any time. You lose guild-centric bennies, but the guild has no way to force you to stay other than that. That's the main source of individual power.

Now, if your question is "how do 24 honest members revolt against 1 corrupt GL holding their guild perks hostage?" then I'm not sure I know the answer. The game could have built-in democracy tools, I guess. Impeach guild leader with some kind of supermajority? As far as distributing the guild resources if the guild does explode, I guess you could have an automated auction of guild resources (guild items, rep, etc.) to other guilds and distribute the proceeds to the former members. Clearly this is all difficult to program and devs probaby don't even want to worry about the CS headaches. Not putting in resources like that means, as I said earlier, that your only power against a corrupt GL is to walk. As long as expansions come with some kind of regularity, the guild resources will not create too strong of a lock-in to keep people with a corrupt GL. Right now, going into BC, there would be no reason to stick with your guild just because it had 3 Thunderfuries, 2 Sulfuras, Exalted TB, and 30 Atiesh shards. TBC stuff will make all of that obsolete.


The idea of those tools of democracy is exciting to me, but I'd be content with the only individual power being walking (and taking any non-guild resources with you--which will include almost all of your gear).

#42 Cth

Cth

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 08:08 AM

UO implemented votes on guild leadership ~10 years ago. its also had housing and you could give certain members access on crates (2+ access rules). theres still that guild tower on my account on SP :p, but i have no idea whos playing that accout atm.

ive seen democratic ruled guilds in wow just go down the drain because of lobbyism. hive mind, common sense is the only way, that and a few good leaders. if you sense the smallest sign of people not following or disobeying rules, handle it before its too late. one spoiled bee will crack up your hive.

guild administration and tools should be outside of wow. having dkp inside and from blizzard would make it hard to have your own tool and systems that people accept. the only good way would be a basic token system on that guilds can build their own rules. e.g. bosses give tokens to everyone but maybe guild/raid leader decides who can trade it in for an item. players own their tokens and can carry them over if they change guilds ... still flawed but anyways, why do i still not have a dft after 50 bwl runs, is that fair ? 40 tokens per boss would allow to cover more things than just dkp

in fact : end game raiding affects less than 20% of the playerbase. blizzard investing more resources on raid&guild administration would not make sense.

ps: i love the idea of removing consumables and buffs when entering raid instances. would make design of encounters better. difficulty would scale more with gear and skill, not with consumables and buffs - money/time

#43 Yod

Yod

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 10:18 AM

Even a pointless guild house without even a sign on who is owning it would do for now. It would be something atleast in the right direction. Guild house heart stones, guild bank, signs on the house of who is owning it, some better tabards, herb gardens would be a nice features that could be added later. Something like upgrading your guild house to get nicer furniture could be nice even if its pointless :)

I do miss the castles from Lineage 2, even if the experience from it was really laggy (playing on a west coast server in the US and coming from europe) it was really exciting and you had something that you really wanted to defend or conquer. A feature like this would make you cooperate more with other guilds of your faction because as a raider you barely see eachother because of the instances.

Some kind of guild war would also be nice, in lineage 2 you would drop something from your inventory and could really hurt you if you died, in WoW you dont loose a thing. Let us drop a skalp or some kind of token when we die in a confirmed guild war that makes you want the other guild dead and makes it some kind for competition.

The problem with the last 2 is that the servers cant handle a large mass of players so i guess we will not see these features ever in WoW.

Another thing that i wish for is fixed matches in battle grounds. I have never been interested in playing against a random group because we already have the advantage of being on ventrilo and having a gear they dream about. What i want is that you have your random groups versus random groups and have your guild groups versus other guild groups where the guild groups can challange eachother and the challanged team can accept or deny the challange.

I am a carebear on a PvP-server because there is absolutely nothing to gain if you are not going for rank 12 or higher. A castle, guild wars or guild vs guild battle grounds would change that.

#44 Revenj

Revenj

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 183 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 10:32 AM

Gentlemen, I am going to go ahead and critisize some of the suggestions listed in this thread. I think people are missing the point of what a "next gen MMO" should be. Some of the suggestions almost sound like people want the game to be played for them. More importantly, some people are tackling this question using only WoW as their perspective, without a broader know-how of what other MMORPGs are offering in the public.



1) .. allowing for serving forums for guilds and maybe even options like TeamSpeak / Ventrilo
While you are at it, why not ask them to host your guild website and make your guild webpage?
I would much rather prefer an MMORPG developer focus on making a kick-ass game, instead of trying to re-invent wheels. Theres a reason why vBulletin, Ventrilo, TeamSpeak, etc are such popular peices of software. Because they are very good at what they do. For example, technically speaking the WoW forums are crap compared to Vbulletin and other forum softwares... the Search feature is still unusable after 2 years. This is what you get when you try to develop unscalable in-house software (no matter how simple).
Bottom line: Let MMO creators worry about making a GOOD stable game. Dont ask them to make something they arent passionate about

2) I'd like a system, much like Allakhazam, but instead something that is run and developed by the developers of the game.

This will never work out in reality. Besides, this is a detrimental business move on part of the developers. Sites like thottbot, allakhazam, Vault, etc are breeding grounds for community interest. You want to encourage people to make fansites for your game.

3) A per-person incurred repaircost is tracked and after a raid is finished you can choose to refund a % of that and the system will automatically reimburse all raiders %

This is not a feature that a developer of a "next-gen" MMO should concern themselves with. This kind of suggestion belongs in the "Little features you would like to have in the next WoW patch". heck, with a lot of hacking a round, maybe even a mod writer could write this - maybe.

4) grindless endgame
Thats an oxymoron.
Many MMO developers in the past have tried to create grindless MMOs. The reason why they continue to fail is because players conquer content much faster than developers can create new content. Therefore, once players reach the "endgame" - the only thing left to do is grind. In anticipation of this, most developers intentionally add elements in the endgame that require grinding - this buys them time to offer new content.
WoW is as grindless as it gets really, whilst maintaining the quality of content.

5) How about just removing alchemy from the game?
uh, No? Alchemy has been staple crafting profession in many generations of MMO. You cant just "remove" it. Sorry I dont have a more compelling reason, the "coolness" factor of creating potions is compelling enough for many people.

6) Alt Management Features: We all play alts. Tons of them. To the point where the concept of a 'Main' is pretty foreign
I dont play any alts. I know a lot of people who hate playing alts. We prefer to focus on one character. I dont see how this "problem" cant be curtailed by a peice of pen and paper. Again, not a "next-gen" MMO feature.

7) - "Guild leaders and guild members can influence each other through soft factors, but there's no way to create binding agreements. You gear someone up and he guildhops or whatever, then you're just screwed."
- "how do you deal with the inverse case, that being corruption at the top? If guild officers/masters are to have more power, there needs to be a way for the members to deal with grievances"

You gotta be kidding me. People people... you cannot ask game developers to worry about the social aspects of running a guild or playing an MMO. I used to play this game called Shattered Galaxy that allowed players to vote for their president, that was a pretty cool feature. But I sure as hell dont want to be burdened with stuff judicial bureaurocritical crap while playing an MMO. I do understand that in-game politics are an intigral part of an MMO, but asking the game-devs to implement technical features that cultivate this phenomenon is absurb. Let players worry about these things! Thats what makes these games soo fun.


After reading some more of the postsin this thread, most of the suggestions are concerning little nuances and quirks with current WoW system. Moreover, the kind of automation people are demanding dilutes the social aspect of being in a guild. I want to have a "guild enchanter" and a "guild blacksmith" and a "thorium brotherhood guy" and a "flask guy". Sure, at times its annoying when these people arent online - but it adds to the essence of being in a guild where each person shares certain unique traits and responsibilities. Please dont take this away from us. And I dont want no bloody in-game judiciary system.

#45 Cth

Cth

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 11:42 AM

Gentlemen, I am going to go ahead and critisize some of the suggestions listed in this thread. I think people are missing the point of what a "next gen MMO" should be. Some of the suggestions almost sound like people want the game to be played for them. More importantly, some people are tackling this question using only WoW as their perspective, without a broader know-how of what other MMORPGs are offering in the public.



1) .. allowing for serving forums for guilds and maybe even options like TeamSpeak / Ventrilo
While you are at it, why not ask them to host your guild website and make your guild webpage?
I would much rather prefer an MMORPG developer to focus on making a kick-ass game, instead of trying to re-invent wheels. Theres a reason why vBulletin, Ventrilo, TeamSpeak, etc are such popular peices of software. Because they are very good at what they do. For example, technically speaking the WoW forums are crap compared to Vbulletin and other forum softwares... the Search feature is still unusable after 2 years. This is what you get when you try to develop unscalable in-house software (no matter how simple).
Bottom line: Let MMO creators worry about making a GOOD stable game. Dont ask them to make something they arent passionate about

2) I'd like a system, much like Allakhazam, but instead something that is run and developed by the developers of the game.

This will never work out in reality. Besides, this is a detrimental business move on part of the developers. Sites like thottbot, allakhazam, Vault, etc are breeding grounds for community interest. You want to encourage people to make fansites for your game.

3) A per-person incurred repaircost is tracked and after a raid is finished you can choose to refund a % of that and the system will automatically reimburse all raiders %

This is not a feature that a developer of a "next-gen" MMO should concern themselves with. This kind of suggestion belongs in the "Little features you would like to have in the next WoW patch". heck, with a lot of hacking a round, maybe even a mod writer could write this - maybe.

4) grindless endgame
Thats an oxymoron.
Many MMO developers in the past have tried to create grindless MMOs. The reason why they continue to fail is because players conquer content much faster than developers can create new content. Therefore, once players reach the "endgame" - the only thing left to do is grind. In anticipation of this, most developers intentionally add elements in the endgame that require grinding - this buys them time to offer new content.
WoW is as grindless as it gets really, whilst maintaining the quality of content.

5) How about just removing alchemy from the game?
uh, No? Alchemy has been staple crafting profession in many generations of MMO. You cant just "remove" it. Sorry I dont have a more compelling reason, the "coolness" factor of creating potions is compelling enough for many people.

6) Alt Management Features: We all play alts. Tons of them. To the point where the concept of a 'Main' is pretty foreign
I dont play any alts. I know a lot of people who hate playing alts. We prefer to focus on one character. I dont see how this "problem" cant be curtailed by a peice of pen and paper. Again, not a "next-gen" MMO feature.

7) - "Guild leaders and guild members can influence each other through soft factors, but there's no way to create binding agreements. You gear someone up and he guildhops or whatever, then you're just screwed."
- "how do you deal with the inverse case, that being corruption at the top? If guild officers/masters are to have more power, there needs to be a way for the members to deal with grievances"

You gotta be kidding me. People people... you cannot ask game developers to worry about the social aspects of running a guild or playing an MMO. I used to play this game called Shattered Galaxy that allowed players to vote for their president, that was a pretty cool feature. But I sure as hell dont want to be burdened with stuff judicial bureaurocritical crap while playing an MMO. I do understand that in-game politics are an intigral part of an MMO, but asking the game-devs to implement technical features that cultivate this phenomenon is absurb. Let players worry about these things! Thats what makes these games soo fun.


After reading some more of the postsin this thread, most of the suggestions are concerning little nuances and quirks with current WoW system. Moreover, the kind of automation people are demanding dilutes the social aspect of being in a guild. I want to have a "guild enchanter" and a "guild blacksmith" and a "thorium brotherhood guy" and a "flask guy". Sure, at times its annoying when these people arent online - but it adds to the essence of being in a guild where each person shares certain unique traits and responsibilities. Please dont take this away from us. And I dont want no bloody in-game judiciary system.

1) if its a vital part to have those things then why not ? its becomming key features of some upcoming games. again UO had guild info pages 10 years ago (myuo.com), AO offered xml listings. blizzard makes a crapload of money with this game, they could offer parts of this easy. does your phone company offer extra online/offline services ? if it keeps customers happy theyll offer some.

2) again not much effort for devs, they got the data allready there , theres no need for hackersquest™ etc. to build custom stuff

3) i was never a fan of repaircosts, just makes gold selling/buying worth it. people dont have time to farm resources and raid 5 days/week. i want to play, not farm

4) grindless endgame , well devs still havent figured out that. but i dont think its impossible (in info science nothing is impossible). endgame as it is in all games atm is static (5 different breaths is still static). doesnt need a genius to say that the 1st game with adaptive gameplay will win a big market share.

5) pots are a nice to have feature, should never be a requirement in any way. the difference between a raid grp investing heavy in buffs/pots (time/money) vs. a raw grp can make and break an encounter (huhuran and ZG pots). good way of boss fight and buffs is chromagus and hourglass sand (get what you need from trash).

7) those social aspects keep players paying their fees, ignoring them is stupid. the time of big socializing games ended with wow. endgame is more like a job, if you got people who cant do it right you wont progress - fire them :(

to repeat myselfes, endgame is difficult to provide. id rather lose 10% of those who conquer it too fast than losing 30-50% players who dont have a perspective after getting to 60. mmoprgs still lack adaptive gameplay mechanics. devs still make the same mistakes after 10 years of mmoprgs and will continue to make them (because its cheaper to make them).

#46 Revenj

Revenj

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 183 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 12:01 PM

1) if its a vital part to have those things then why not ? its becomming key features of some upcoming games. again UO had guild info pages 10 years ago (myuo.com), AO offered xml listings. blizzard makes a crapload of money with this game, they could offer parts of this easy. does your phone company offer extra online/offline services ? if it keeps customers happy theyll offer some.

guild info pages != guild forums, voice chat, etc. Please re-read the quote I quoted.
DaOC possibly had(has?) the best guild/server info database website. I loved that.

2) again not much effort for devs, they got the data allready there , theres no need for hackersquest™ etc. to build custom stuff

I never questioned the technical aspect of it.

3) i was never a fan of repaircosts, just makes gold selling/buying worth it. people dont have time to farm resources and raid 5 days/week. i want to play, not farm

I dont understand.

4) grindless endgame , well devs still havent figured out that. but i dont think its impossible (in info science nothing is impossible). endgame as it is in all games atm is static (5 different breaths is still static). doesnt need a genius to say that the 1st game with adaptive gameplay will win a big market share.

Cant.. find.. point..

5) pots are a nice to have feature, should never be a requirement in any way. the difference between a raid grp investing heavy in buffs/pots (time/money) vs. a raw grp can make and break an encounter (huhuran and ZG pots). good way of boss fight and buffs is chromagus and hourglass sand (get what you need from trash).

The person I quoted suggested the removal of Alchemy from the game. I countered that suggestion merely on the basis that Alchemy was an integral part of many generations of MMOs.
Nothing to do with consumables, or their impact on raiding.

7) those social aspects keep players paying their fees, ignoring them is stupid. the time of big socializing games ended with wow. endgame is more like a job, if you got people who cant do it right you wont progress - fire them :(

You made me go back and read my post 3 times. I still dont see the relevance of what you are saying.

#47 james

james

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 220 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 12:04 PM

I want democracy :P Monthly or annual elections for positions within the guild... a guild is often the end product of 40+ people's hard work and it's a real shame how poor or ineffective leaders can screw over a guild's progress and lead to their downfall. But it's not so easy to just replace them :(

Am I the only person who finds it... damn weird/interesting that we as Europeans, Americans, Aussies are lovers of democracy within real life but subscribe to benevolent dictatorships within our online world :P ?

#48 henaki

henaki

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 423 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 12:22 PM

Dictatorships work WAY WAY better when it's 80 people with a simple goal in mind.
Gur - Level 64 Undead Warlock on Hellfire

#49 Eej

Eej

    Soda Popinski

  • Allied Members
  • 4327 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 12:30 PM

After reading some more of the postsin this thread, most of the suggestions are concerning little nuances and quirks with current WoW system. Moreover, the kind of automation people are demanding dilutes the social aspect of being in a guild. I want to have a "guild enchanter" and a "guild blacksmith" and a "thorium brotherhood guy" and a "flask guy". Sure, at times its annoying when these people arent online - but it adds to the essence of being in a guild where each person shares certain unique traits and responsibilities. Please dont take this away from us. And I dont want no bloody in-game judiciary system.

I don't give a shit about "losing the social aspect of the guild", it's not really fun sitting online waiting for one person to log on because he's the only person with +4 stats to chest or Crusader. It's not like I need crafting to be friends with people in my guild. Your argument isn't that strong because I think most people could care less about the "social interaction" and "unique traits and responsibilities" of trading Grave Moss, Fade Leaf, Leaded Vial, Crystal Vial and Dreamfoil to someone else so they can make you some potions for a stupid fight.

#50 Revenj

Revenj

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 183 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 12:40 PM

most people could care less about the "social interaction" and "unique traits and responsibilities" of trading Grave Moss, Fade Leaf, Leaded Vial, Crystal Vial and Dreamfoil to someone else so they can make you some potions for a stupid fight.

I agree. But then you are asking for a re-design of the trading/crafting system. Nevertheless, Blizzard is trying to make this process less cumbersome.

However, some people suggested the complete overhaul of reputation rewards by making them "guild only" because probably, sometime in the past their guild may have gotten screwed when their "Thorium brotherhood guy" left them.
Or Got screwed over because your "Thunderfury guy" left the guild? Too bad. Next time, make a wiser decision on how to distribute loot. Or get better officers who can psychologically profile people.
Now see, thats the social aspect of the game I am referring to. This is a social game. You cant demand a failsafe mechanism for every risk.

#51 Cth

Cth

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 12:49 PM

1) if its a vital part to have those things then why not ? its becomming key features of some upcoming games. again UO had guild info pages 10 years ago (myuo.com), AO offered xml listings. blizzard makes a crapload of money with this game, they could offer parts of this easy. does your phone company offer extra online/offline services ? if it keeps customers happy theyll offer some.

guild info pages != guild forums, voice chat, etc. Please re-read the quote I quoted.
DaOC possibly had(has?) the best guild/server info database website. I loved that.

2) again not much effort for devs, they got the data allready there , theres no need for hackersquest™ etc. to build custom stuff

I never questioned the technical aspect of it.

3) i was never a fan of repaircosts, just makes gold selling/buying worth it. people dont have time to farm resources and raid 5 days/week. i want to play, not farm

I dont understand.

4) grindless endgame , well devs still havent figured out that. but i dont think its impossible (in info science nothing is impossible). endgame as it is in all games atm is static (5 different breaths is still static). doesnt need a genius to say that the 1st game with adaptive gameplay will win a big market share.

Cant.. find.. point..

5) pots are a nice to have feature, should never be a requirement in any way. the difference between a raid grp investing heavy in buffs/pots (time/money) vs. a raw grp can make and break an encounter (huhuran and ZG pots). good way of boss fight and buffs is chromagus and hourglass sand (get what you need from trash).

The person I quoted suggested the removal of Alchemy from the game. I countered that suggestion merely on the basis that Alchemy was an integral part of many generations of MMOs.
Nothing to do with consumables, or their impact on raiding.

7) those social aspects keep players paying their fees, ignoring them is stupid. the time of big socializing games ended with wow. endgame is more like a job, if you got people who cant do it right you wont progress - fire them :(

You made me go back and read my post 3 times. I still dont see the relevance of what you are saying.

im at work , still quick&dirty writing:

1) myuo.com was a start , 10 years ago. it assited guild leaders in a basic way. from hat point on no game really took that aspect as important and relied on players doing this on their own. calling this the "community aspect" is cheap imho. without guild forum etc. a guild just cant work. and if ts is a vital part of endgame they should provide it. (of course the legal aspect of content/discussions/converations on blizzard servers created by players is another point, from a legal standpoint no mmorpg could provide guild forums etc.)

3) just my opinion on reps, a mod to payback this is trivial work. but as guilds handle this in different manners its not needed, and not a good idea to enforce it with a build in mechanism

4) point is , wow is far from beeing an exception. its about endless grinding and farming.

7) game developers define the way guilds will progress (look at wow and youll see this). e.g. at some point youll just not take your best friend or wife to raids anymore because she cant learn the heigan dance. same way a MT with tf might join the next higher ranked guild if he starts to see 20 people cant learn the heigan dance, screwing people over. fun ends when people cancel accounts, thats what social dramas bring. i dont say its devs fault but if theres a way to save a guilds progress by mechanics they should do it. so asking for something like guild owned items of value is not absurd at all. remember people dont get those purples on their own effort, its 39 others helping.

ps: guild enchanter etc. i think its in eve where a guild can own patterns and people can copy them ? is this secured in any way ?

#52 Jaz

Jaz

    WAAAGH!

  • Members
  • 164 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 12:55 PM

All depends on the dictator in question, though I do agree.

I think many people are underestimating the need for personal gain that goes with raiding. Maybe this is a bad time to set an example, with many guilds having a lot of turnover due to BC, but removing personal incentives will hinder many guilds in getting 40 online at raid time.

#53 Pater

Pater

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 335 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 01:19 PM

All I'm saying is that the current in-game system completely favors the individual. The guild has no power over you except inasmuch as you remain eligible for future upgrades. Anything the guild has given you in the past is yours to dispose of as you please, and the guild has no ability to punish you.


I'm asking for some small shift toward guild power. Guild-owned legendaries and certain tradeskills are an example. Maybe being flagged for certain zones is another - such as Naxx? Or what if entering AQ40 required your guild to be AQ40-flagged by creating its own scepter? You don't have to take those, though - you could make up a whole different set of rewards. The point is to enable the guild to keep something when members leave. They currently keep nothing--they have no in-game stick.



Besides the fact that it would help guilds have a little more control over members, I also think it's a pretty cool idea from an immersion or lore perspective.

#54 henaki

henaki

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 423 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 02:06 PM

The problem is when you make guild bound items, the item is still owned by someone (or someones), those items institute a more dictatorship like power. Fewer people begin to have a monopoly over the users. The issue here isn't the fact that the person leaving or the person running the guild "owns" the items, it's the fact that such crucial items EXIST in the first place. When raiding is hindered seriously by a specific set of items not existing, or being taken away from a guild, that is an itemization issue.

Thunderfurys and difficult to craft resist sets are an issue with the game itself imo. They cause drama and become an actual problem, because content is DESIGNED around them. Items should not be "required" to raid, there should obviously be gear checkpoints within encounters (or maybe there shouldn't, who knows), but there shouldn't be "Is A B C and D here, oh shit, B C and D just gquit with our Orange Item of Irreplacableness" checkpoints. That is flawed design. There should be no item that basically has that much power in any sense. Resist fights should be removed, Thunderfury will probably not have an equivilent (especially since Imp Thunder Clap is now replacing it), and the need for "Guildbound" items should be removed entirely. Orange items should be more along the lines of Atiesh, it has a really really nice benefit, but it will A) Be outdated with gear (on your entire team of course) B) It's gimmick is just a gimmick that changes nothing about your fights, just how long it takes to get to your next Khazaran raid.
Gur - Level 64 Undead Warlock on Hellfire

#55 Cth

Cth

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 02:12 PM

The problem is when you make guild bound items, the item is still owned by someone (or someones), those items institute a more dictatorship like power. Fewer people begin to have a monopoly over the users. The issue here isn't the fact that the person leaving or the person running the guild "owns" the items, it's the fact that such crucial items EXIST in the first place. When raiding is hindered seriously by a specific set of items not existing, or being taken away from a guild, that is an itemization issue.

Thunderfurys and difficult to craft resist sets are an issue with the game itself imo. They cause drama and become an actual problem, because content is DESIGNED around them.

could all be ruled by mechanics, and has been in games allready. and btw. wow guild tabard functions in this way

#56 Pater

Pater

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 335 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 02:14 PM

I don't think any of those items are "necessary" - my guild never got Garr's binding, ever. It's just that these items represent guild effort far more than the effort of the individual who has them. And it's a shame for that one person to get 100% of the ownership rights once allocated. The blacksmith you pushed through TB rep with MC cores can leave the guild and take all of that rep with him. I think that's a shame, and would like to see some systems to keep some things attached to the guild rather than the player.

#57 henaki

henaki

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 423 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 02:22 PM

I don't think any of those items are "necessary" - my guild never got Garr's binding, ever. It's just that these items represent guild effort far more than the effort of the individual who has them. And it's a shame for that one person to get 100% of the ownership rights once allocated. The blacksmith you pushed through TB rep with MC cores can leave the guild and take all of that rep with him. I think that's a shame, and would like to see some systems to keep some things attached to the guild rather than the player.

I'm not saying they are necessary at all, (well, certain resist sets ARE). When you start handling guild bound items, how is Blizzard going to make overthrowing a leader possible? They won't, and instead of having items distributed over a few people, they're now in the hands of some other people, no real reason to change that honestly. But like I said, if they just avoid anything remotely close to Thunderfury/Resist sets, the need for guild bound items will pretty much evaporate.
Gur - Level 64 Undead Warlock on Hellfire

#58 ooj

ooj

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 46 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 03:07 PM

as a former player who's watching the expansion updates trying to figure out if there's enough positive changes to start playing again if guild democracy or guild bound items was a feature id be about 0% inclined to play. Both steps are in totally wrong directions of headaches bliz support would never want to deal with and I doubt there's even a large enough user base that would want these features over the ones who would strongly disagree with it.

Instead of guild voting they should allow their gms to be more active in changing guild control in special situations and the only one im talking about is awol leaders who put you in a bind by quitting and leaving you with no promotion demotion power within your own guild. You might think just retagging with your new leader is easy enough but depending the size and health of the guild it can pretty much mean death of the guild.

As for guild bound items to the most extreme it was mentioned of logging in naked which really isn't plausible at all for large chunks of your gear to be owned by your tag and not you. Maybe if resist sets weren't boe and could just be traded freely instead that would make much more common sense then questionable guild leaders being able to strip items off people. Instead of that tho how about no resist fights at all ever again. Now we don't need guild bound items at all problem solved.

From the original list a guild hall is still the biggest feature id love to see put in especially if as mentioned could be pvp involved. As someone already mentioned in this thread any new gameplay features that promote any interaction outside your guild is a huge plus. I found when I was in raid guilds I had 0 reason or motivation to interact with people outside the guild because my play time was either raiding or farming with very little pvp which was the only way I ever played with people outside the guild. Problem is im pretty sure this is one of the furthest features we will see put in by bliz. I don't think they are big fans of a guild owning a building within their game world.

#59 splinter

splinter

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 03:08 PM

I'm not saying they are necessary at all, (well, certain resist sets ARE). When you start handling guild bound items, how is Blizzard going to make overthrowing a leader possible? They won't, and instead of having items distributed over a few people, they're now in the hands of some other people, no real reason to change that honestly. But like I said, if they just avoid anything remotely close to Thunderfury/Resist sets, the need for guild bound items will pretty much evaporate.

Resist gear by itself isn't the problem here, rather it is the resist gear that can not be obtained by an individual player that causes guilds the most grief. One-faction dominated world dragons was a major issue for guilds hoping to progress in AQ. With the addition of easily crafted CC rep armour, it was no longer a problem.

In Naxx, the developers added another challenge with the frozen runes. Like Molten Core, a guild should have to put in enough time farming Naxx in order to defeat the final boss(es) of the zone. This system works fine in a perfect world, but guilds have to deal with people /gquitting or just not showing up for boss attempts. A previous poster indicated he felt obligated to log on just because he was entrusted with frost resist gear.

My solution to this is to store guild progress within the guild itself. Once you collect enough frozen runes to outfit a 40man group, the guild gains the ability to craft the FrR armour without frozen runes. This is working with an in-game mechanic as it currently exists, so it is probably not the best way to implement it, but the idea is there.

#60 henaki

henaki

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 423 posts

Posted 23 October 2006 - 03:14 PM

They could come up with the elegant solution of what was suggested earlier, making a guild wide faction, but another proposition is that even if you leave the guild, you keep that faction. Instead of having Frozen Runes, you have a Reputation Token for a faction, and once you hit X faction, you can create cheap, easily accessable resist gear for your entire guild, and even if you quit (because of say, your leader is a dumbass/lootwhore), you still have easy access to resist gear. This probably removes the most amount of fuckery on both parties. It's a bit more intuitive than your solution.

Or they could, you know, remove resist fights altogether.
Gur - Level 64 Undead Warlock on Hellfire




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users