Proposed Removal of Guild Leader Unfair Theft!

Ubisoft should not cave in to the clamor for automatic removal of absentee guild leaders.
(1) How can the game take away an asset bought and paid for by a player i.e. the guild leader. Gems for guild house; gems for memberships.
(2) Best moments of the game have been the two periods where we have had to leave our guild because a leader went missing! Drama! stress! Who goes ? who stays. it was awesome.
(3) Let non-leaders simply break away and form their own guilds and invest their own gems and currency.
(4) Otherwise, players get to stay in a guild for nothing and get control for nothing?
(5) Those remaining players - if they are all that cozy with one another - will have no trouble breaking away and forming their own guild!
(6) And in those guilds where there was a 'buy-in" well, the current Ubisoft rules cover that" caveat emptor! what ever the buy-in was it was for the benefit of being in THAT specific guild for that specific period of time. Fee paid ; benefit received.

IF Ubisoft is going to cave in to the clamoring masses - they should allow for TWO different forms of guilds; Independent and Communal. Removal of an absentee guild leader should ONLY be allowed in communal guilds and Ubisoft should ESTABLISH a guild fee paid for by the members. Only when sufficient funds have been pooled should the communal guild be allowed to form. Independent guilds should continue as is. Guild leader foots the bill - no automatic:mad: removal. Period.

Domesday, you need help :o

Ok let me count the ways...

1. You do not have to pay by gems, in fact many do not.
2. Stress? Drama? While they have their place, not everyone wants it, the leader inactivity kick helps with that.
3. Correction, Let Leaders who don't want to lead step down and be a valuable member instead, let the person who is good at leading, lead.
4. There is nothing wrong with controlling nothing. I am a very important member in my guild, and i don't have to lift a finger if i didn't want to.
5. If its not broke don't fix it. Well, Guilds, they are broke, so we fixed(ing) it.
6. i have no idea what this buy-in is. Can you please expound?

Your Final statement.

Blue Byte caved in to the players requests?

lol my blood is boiling over this statement. one sec.

*sigh*

Ok better :o sorry :D

1. You are in the right to make the suggestion "they should allow for TWO different forms of guilds; Independent and Communal. "
Infact i have that same suggestion myself (different wording of course :) )

But you are suggesting that members should submit to a player WHO DOESN'T EVEN PLAY THE GAME! i'm sorry if i am raging, but what you are saying is totally maddening.

Why not (and this is what the BB's have done) save the price of making a new guild and use the old one. The old inactive leader is gone anyway, and even if that old leader used gems for his guild house and membership(s) its not a total loss.

I get that you don't like that a old leader gets the boot and someone else gets all the stuff that leader worked for, for free. Real life buddy. But there is hope, Be active, be nice to your members, which are your teammates after all. (Yes i did say teammates, like you know, guild coins, and adventures?) And you can keep your guild.

You may not like that your lifeless leader is gone, don't worry. the closet was cleaned. No more bones. You like hanging around bones? np, G-1 should suffice. (OK Edit time, Thanks to all the great BB's who have been watching G-1, its much cleaner now)

(Ok before a BB decides i used to much rage sauce, please take this correctly. I hate it when guilds are mistreated, and what you just said was definitely upsetting :( And for the BB(s) that read this, i will be happy to take this down if necessary. (also improvement suggestions about rages would be helpful ))

Sincerely,

Michael Nelson, T_D

I was enraged by this post. So i blew my real name XD

I think that as the Guild Leader, I need to decide who (if anyone) would be able to continue to run the guild in the event that something happens. This I view remains completely under the control of the current Guild Leader. Otherwise, yes, folks can leave and form their own guilds if they want to. It shouldn't be a take over business.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Domesday

IF Ubisoft is going to cave in to the clamoring masses - they should allow for TWO different forms of guilds; Independent and Communal. Removal of an absentee guild leader should ONLY be allowed in communal guilds and Ubisoft should ESTABLISH a guild fee paid for by the members. Only when sufficient funds have been pooled should the communal guild be allowed to form. Independent guilds should continue as is. Guild leader foots the bill - no automatic:mad: removal. Period.

---

I agree with this part.

It should also send an email alert to the guild leader telling him he needs to take action or get removed.

This problem is something Blizzard has dealt with before.

Blizzard tried to add this automatic dethrone inactive guild leader after 30days before. A lot of people were pissed about this because they felt if they want to be inactive that's their deal. You guys could just leave the guild and go build another. People complained.

So they changed the policy so that only the 4th 'rank down can dethrone the guild and if you wanted to disable the dethrone option, you simply demote all your ranks so that the 2-3 ranks are empty.

Anyways- the guild leader should be given an option if he wants this feature or not. It should not be automatic. If people don't like the option disabled, they can leave and form their own guild.

WOW rightback at you Director. I don't really like wasting my time on the Forum but I have certainly noticed that you contribute solid insight and advice on almost every post that has ever caught my fancy. So I guess you were enraged as your post seems somewhat out of character for you. I have to say that I prefer RonEmpire's more modest post below.

As Shakespeare had Capulet's men do to the Montagues in the opening scene - I (Blue) Byte my thumb at you sir. I believe I have amassed a very decent reputation for fairness and generosity in the game (albeit on the younger Ares server) and don't need any lectures from you. Maybe you better open an account on Ares so we can line each other up for pvp when the day comes! LOL

You do not need to fear about Sammy's Lost Legion. Our guild is active and intentionally maintained in the 20-25 membership completing GQ daily. I have been playing since the Halloween event in 2012. Ironically, we agree on most points. At the end of the day I am laissez-faire; I do not think the guild leadership issue needs a Ubisoft solution. If the leader is noble, he will let his members know. If he is ignorant and just walks away, the others need to figure it out and come up with a solution (like we have done twice before.) EITHER WAY- other players should not get the leader's guildhouse and or paid memberships, without his consent and action.

Your point about gems is ridiculous. It does not matter how the guild leader paid for the guild house and memberships; gold, gems -- they are still the leader's assets not the guilds. THAT is the central issue and why I propose two differnt kinds of guilds based upon whose assets are used to FOUND and EXPAND the guild. Regardless of how the guild leader behaves - these are his property rights. Guild members can always just click the quit button.

A built-in - automatic take away of these assets is simply not right. and those who clamor for this ability - are lazy and greedy - in my opinion.

You don't have to worry about MY staying power Director. I will be here long after you have quit the game.

Domes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Director

Domesday, you need help :o

Ok let me count the ways...

1. You do not have to pay by gems, in fact many do not.
2. Stress? Drama? While they have their place, not everyone wants it, the leader inactivity kick helps with that.
3. Correction, Let Leaders who don't want to lead step down and be a valuable member instead, let the person who is good at leading, lead.
4. There is nothing wrong with controlling nothing. I am a very important member in my guild, and i don't have to lift a finger if i didn't want to.
5. If its not broke don't fix it. Well, Guilds, they are broke, so we fixed(ing) it.
6. i have no idea what this buy-in is. Can you please expound?

Your Final statement.

Blue Byte caved in to the players requests?

lol my blood is boiling over this statement. one sec.

*sigh*

Ok better :o sorry :D

1. You are in the right to make the suggestion "they should allow for TWO different forms of guilds; Independent and Communal. "
Infact i have that same suggestion myself (different wording of course :) )

But you are suggesting that members should submit to a player WHO DOESN'T EVEN PLAY THE GAME! i'm sorry if i am raging, but what you are saying is totally maddening.

Why not (and this is what the BB's have done) save the price of making a new guild and use the old one. The old inactive leader is gone anyway, and even if that old leader used gems for his guild house and membership(s) its not a total loss.

I get that you don't like that a old leader gets the boot and someone else gets all the stuff that leader worked for, for free. Real life buddy. But there is hope, Be active, be nice to your members, which are your teammates after all. (Yes i did say teammates, like you know, guild coins, and adventures?) And you can keep your guild.

You may not like that your lifeless leader is gone, don't worry. the closet was cleaned. No more bones. You like hanging around bones? np, G-1 should suffice. (OK Edit time, Thanks to all the great BB's who have been watching G-1, its much cleaner now)

(Ok before a BB decides i used to much rage sauce, please take this correctly. I hate it when guilds are mistreated, and what you just said was definitely upsetting :( And for the BB(s) that read this, i will be happy to take this down if necessary. (also improvement suggestions about rages would be helpful ))

Sincerely,

Michael Nelson, T_D

I was enraged by this post. So i blew my real name XD

---

guild leader has the obligation to be active for his players, if hes not, too bad :)

simple solution to all this..

1) most members help buy player slots in a guild so that guild is a community, not singly owned by 1 player.
2) allow ALL members to vote in a true leader.
-do not allow one player to decide the fate of a entire guild.
- do not go through a line process, to see who is active and wanting to lead..

thanks,
Ser

Good Morning everyone.

lol Dooms, lets restart shall we?

1. Thanks for the compliment, i always try to be current with my news, and the advice and tips i share i do my best to be correct in every way, even if it hurts. (then i say something like :o )

There is something i forgot, vital you can say for this issue. The Leader ISN't kicked! he only steps down. That means if he was a good leader, then his old members can restore his leadership back. (huzza)

Finally, there is one more point, this fact is the pointest of all, Blue Byte is the one who made this game, the majority of players wanted this option to be included, including me. So why wouldn't BB want to add it? everyone else wants it.

Of course there are exceptions, but at this time its a mute point to say no.

I respect Ares, and the players there, i have very good friends like Aisastrings that plays there. I also respect the guilds on both sides, Zeus and Ares alike. Its also why i am "fighting" for these changes, since they will improve them all.

Is it a shame the old leader will lose his gems/resources? yes. and i respect that loss. but if he went offline than thats his own fault, why should anyone expect 100 members to go leaderless for even one day when they could replace them? Drama is worthless and cheap. Go play Command & Conquer Tiberium Alliances if you are so desperate for drama.

I would also like to comment on your last statement, "You don't have to worry about MY staying power Director. I will be here long after you have quit the game."

How do you know? do you have a time machine? i have been here since July 2012, which means, i am one year old in TSO (Huzza) who will and who won't doesnt matter, and this kind of attack is rude and to be honest, low.

Finally, sorry about my first post on this thread, since it was aggressive and to a certain degree, rude.

(i am happy to report that not once of rage sauce was added to this meal of forum goodness)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Domesday

A built-in - automatic take away of these assets is simply not right. and those who clamor for this ability - are lazy and greedy - in my opinion.

---

This issue should be completely under the control of the Guild Leader. If she or he wants to step down or quit as I have seen happen, then they have that ability to do so. To engage in some kind of takeover where others can get the guild house or slots for free is not right and could create more problems than what is intended with this new feature. Should the leader just go inactive, they would have had the chance to rank the next in line. Again, by choice and under that Guild Leader's control.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Domesday

WOW rightback at you Director. I don't really like wasting my time on the Forum but I have certainly noticed that you contribute solid insight and advice on almost every post that has ever caught my fancy. So I guess you were enraged as your post seems somewhat out of character for you. I have to say that I prefer RonEmpire's more modest post below.

As Shakespeare had Capulet's men do to the Montagues in the opening scene - I (Blue) Byte my thumb at you sir. I believe I have amassed a very decent reputation for fairness and generosity in the game (albeit on the younger Ares server) and don't need any lectures from you. Maybe you better open an account on Ares so we can line each other up for pvp when the day comes! LOL

You do not need to fear about Sammy's Lost Legion. Our guild is active and intentionally maintained in the 20-25 membership completing GQ daily. I have been playing since the Halloween event in 2012. Ironically, we agree on most points. At the end of the day I am laissez-faire; I do not think the guild leadership issue needs a Ubisoft solution. If the leader is noble, he will let his members know. If he is ignorant and just walks away, the others need to figure it out and come up with a solution (like we have done twice before.) EITHER WAY- other players should not get the leader's guildhouse and or paid memberships, without his consent and action.

Your point about gems is ridiculous. It does not matter how the guild leader paid for the guild house and memberships; gold, gems -- they are still the leader's assets not the guilds. THAT is the central issue and why I propose two differnt kinds of guilds based upon whose assets are used to FOUND and EXPAND the guild. Regardless of how the guild leader behaves - these are his property rights. Guild members can always just click the quit button.

A built-in - automatic take away of these assets is simply not right. and those who clamor for this ability - are lazy and greedy - in my opinion.

You don't have to worry about MY staying power Director. I will be here long after you have quit the game.

Domes

---

your part about how it is the guild leaders PROPERTY (guild house, guild slots)- that is disgusting. I led a guild last year for about 8 months 100 active players and presently officer in one of the top guilds on Zeus Server- ELY- for you to refer your members (slots) are you property is absolutely disgusting and would be surprised if they stayed in your guild after seeing this (if you are a guild leader). Guilds are for the guildies, everyone in it, to help all and have fun together. For you to only care about your resources just goes to show the true colors you wear. And it is greedy of you to run a guild with active members and for the leader to go MIA for them to just be S*** out of luck and have to start over. You have some serious issues my man, you might want to think that over

I don't mind a spirited debate but just remember to keep it friendly. If you feel like there are further improvements that could be made to the upcoming guild changes, make sure you are participating in the feedback process over on the test server and the test server forums.

I believe the time limit set for now (per testing) is 30 days of inactive. The guild leader has the ability to set 3 people...1, 2, and 3...as the successor. The Guild House does not transfer....you have to have one to accept the position. The certificates do transfer. So yes, the guild leader has a choice. If the Leader is not active, there are certain functions that can not be done by officers. I would rather see a guild succeed, than see it split due to non activity.

All of this is being tested right now....hope this info helps

Truehead- I am not worried about our guild members leaving; haven't had a single defection ever....my argument in not meant to be emotional. At the end of the day, this is a game that is based on an inherent business transaction. Yes - you can play for free - but you can only take it so far. (It would be almost impossible, for example to fill every spot on one's island withour purchasing gems and additional licenses from Ubisoft. That is built into the design.) (n.b. the universal hesitation by Ubisoft to make pvp a high stakes risk for players BECAUSE the island is each player's developed asset whether by time, sweat, and/or gems. I merely point out that a guild is a similar asset. My members sometimes think there are three of me because I am always on! LOL!)

Similarly, the creation of guilds is a transaction initiated by the guild leader with a cost paid by the guild leader, period. Without the guildleader paying that cost there is no formation of the guild. I LOVE that players THEMSELVES can figure out ways to share the cost. (Some fairly spread the cost as you suggest - I know of others that unfairly taxed newbies!) But that is the POINT! There should be no restrictions! There should be good guilds and bad guilds. (how else will we know who to fight in pvp - You want a World Cup with "friendlies" only? LOL)

m

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TrueHead

your part about how it is the guild leaders PROPERTY (guild house, guild slots)- that is disgusting. I led a guild last year for about 8 months 100 active players and presently officer in one of the top guilds on Zeus Server- ELY- for you to refer your members (slots) are you property is absolutely disgusting and would be surprised if they stayed in your guild after seeing this (if you are a guild leader). Guilds are for the guildies, everyone in it, to help all and have fun together. For you to only care about your resources just goes to show the true colors you wear. And it is greedy of you to run a guild with active members and for the leader to go MIA for them to just be S*** out of luck and have to start over. You have some serious issues my man, you might want to think that over

---

Classy reply Director! Greatly appreciated. Sorry about "staying power" line; just trying to point out - whatever the new Guild inactive period is - it won't apply to me!...But I do worry about being trapped by a "zero tolerance" rule. I have a two week business trip to Asia soon. Will not be logging on. Level II leadership is strong; membership is kept active, so daily GQ are a non-issue. Why must the leader change in my absence? Are we only taking about the singular ability to cancel a GQ? Then THAT is all that should be able to be passed along - like a baton or the red phone - during my absence. What else is there- truly? I wonder if this whole thing might be a subtle encouragement by Ubisoft to create MORE friction and drama in the game instead of less....Oh well - like everything else - this too shall pass....P.S. Tell Blitz2002 his Nords his the cleanest ride (though I would throw in Evil J's soldier block before the final assault.) Cheers - Domes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The_Director

Good Morning everyone.

lol Dooms, lets restart shall we?

1. Thanks for the compliment, i always try to be current with my news, and the advice and tips i share i do my best to be correct in every way, even if it hurts. (then i say something like :o )

There is something i forgot, vital you can say for this issue. The Leader ISN't kicked! he only steps down. That means if he was a good leader, then his old members can restore his leadership back. (huzza)

Finally, there is one more point, this fact is the pointest of all, Blue Byte is the one who made this game, the majority of players wanted this option to be included, including me. So why wouldn't BB want to add it? everyone else wants it.

Of course there are exceptions, but at this time its a mute point to say no.

I respect Ares, and the players there, i have very good friends like Aisastrings that plays there. I also respect the guilds on both sides, Zeus and Ares alike. Its also why i am "fighting" for these changes, since they will improve them all.

Is it a shame the old leader will lose his gems/resources? yes. and i respect that loss. but if he went offline than thats his own fault, why should anyone expect 100 members to go leaderless for even one day when they could replace them? Drama is worthless and cheap. Go play Command & Conquer Tiberium Alliances if you are so desperate for drama.

I would also like to comment on your last statement, "You don't have to worry about MY staying power Director. I will be here long after you have quit the game."

How do you know? do you have a time machine? i have been here since July 2012, which means, i am one year old in TSO (Huzza) who will and who won't doesnt matter, and this kind of attack is rude and to be honest, low.

Finally, sorry about my first post on this thread, since it was aggressive and to a certain degree, rude.

(i am happy to report that not once of rage sauce was added to this meal of forum goodness)

---

Good question, one the Dev's are still working on.

The Dev's are planning for a month tolerance level. Meaning that after a month of inactivity, you are booted down a rank. (so a 2 week business trip won't "trip" you up) :)

Also, PvP is coming "soon"(tm) So these changes are in preparation for that event.

How PvP and Guilds will work is a mystery in of its own, me personally i am hoping for some GuildsVsGuilds, and that would bring a greater importance to Guilds.

No matter what, these changes are here to stay. How you deal with them is up to you.


P.S I sent your message to Blitz :)

Suppose I just want to have a guild of 1?
Then suppose I take a few months away from the game?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by EpsilonSilver

Suppose I just want to have a guild of 1?
Then suppose I take a few months away from the game?

---

Thats a good question to ask.

But i think the answer is simple, if there isn't anyone else to defer to, you stay as leader. (That is, the leader of one XD, so this question is a mute one)

I hope the Devs read this but since this game is based upon a medieval society, shouldn't the guild and the way it is structured be ran in a similar fashion?

I did some research and what I found was that for an apprentice to join a guild they had to pay a fee of some kind to the guild along with their application for acceptance. Many guilds used gold (silver and gold coins were in common usage so this was a monetary fee) and it is from this common storing of gold that the word "guild" was derived in the first place. In game a combination of gold and a certain amount of specific resources to be set by the guild's founder. An apprentice was a person who was accepted into the guild and performed basic tasks and techniques until it could be ascertained whether or not they could be entrusted with the guild's secrets. This phase could be done by seeing how active a player is, if they complete their guild quests regularly, if they pay their regular dues, etc. But would be prohibited from traveling to another member's island to buff or aid or assist them directly.

If they proved themselves trustworthy having mastered the duties of the apprentice, they were then promoted to journeyman, a word derived from the French jour and journee (with an ' over the first e) which basically referred to them being a "day" laborer. It was at this level that they were taught the secret techniques of their craft, and sent on journeys to work and learn under different master craftsmen, often on a day-by-day basis. It is at this point that a player could then (in addition to what they were already doing as an apprentice) be allowed to "journey" to another guild member's island to buff their supplies or perhaps help in speeding the training of soldiers for them or assist the other guild members in other ways. There could potentially be additional guild quests offered at this level that required group participation among the guild members similar to the adventures that utilize multiple players to complete but are related to not only military campaigns but also the completion of major construction projects that require a variety of resources from multiple players to complete. In addition a journeyman would have a Masterpiece Quest they have to do at that point before they would be permitted to be eligible for Master craftsman level.

The Masterpiece that they complete would be the property of the guild and was historically used to show off the guild's skills to prospective employers who would hire the guild's workers to complete their projects. I'm sure something could be done with the masterpieces owned by the guild on guild against guild quests of some kind.

The final level, Master Craftsman, was the highest level anyone could reach and all of this level were equals. They would regularly nominate and second proposed officers and then elect officers by ballot from the nominations from among themselves. These were for a specific length of time but the officer could be removed for bad behavior in accordance with the guild's bylaws (also discussed and approved by nomination, seconding the motion, and then by voting) ... this could also be if the chosen leader goes MIA for an extended period of time which would amount to forsaking the duties of their office. Also to obtain the level of Master Craftsman a donations of goods and resources was also often required in addition to the regular membership dues paid by all players.

At the Master Craftsman level perhaps a specialized skill event chain could be implemented where the products from the members of a particular guild have different qualities than those produced by other guilds creating a guild trademark where the steel swords produced by Guild A were more flexible and of a superior quality of steel than those of Guilds B and C resulting in a greater hit point damage when used in battle by players, (whether they were members of the guild or not) just because they had acquired those swords for their soldiers from that guild in the trade office. This would also make those resources from that guild potentially more valuable that other players would pay more for because of the superior quality compared to other resources produced from different players.

Only the Master Craftsmen are permitted to vote in the guild's affairs and it is the Master's level that can accept an Apprentice into the Guild, and then raise an Apprentice to a Journeyman and then a Journeyman to a Master Craftsman. However there must be at least 3 active Master Craftsmen in the guild to form a quorum for this restrictive vote. If there is not at least 3 Master Craftsmen then there must be at least the Guild founder (or a Master Craftsman) and 4 others of Journeymen level or above with the Guild founder or Master Craftsman having the deciding vote if the guild founder is not active and at Master Craftsman level). If this requirement is not met then the voting is open to all guild members with the Guild founder (or highest ranking guild member) having the deciding vote in a tie, unless otherwise specified by the guild's bylaws (which can be adjusted to a limited degree on the guild management window that is accessible by the players.

The membership dues would increase for each level (apprentice, journeyman, master craftsman) and to apply for each level required the fulfillment of certain tasks and an accompanying application fee paid to the guild. Each level contains all the requirements and duties of the level that came before it so as a person advances their duties and requirements increase. If a person leaves one guild, they have to start over as an apprentice in another and rework their way up (unless the new guild agrees in their bylaws to accept newcomers in to their guild at the level they had attained in a prior guild).

I think the guild should be revamped to follow something like a real historic guild as outlined/proposed above. This would permit a means in some ways anyway to replace guild leadership, creates a collective ownership and direction over guild resources while still providing for a leadership structure. Addresses the problem of absentee guild leaders. As well as enhancing the Guild Levels themselves.

When the guild format is changed to this or something similar, I think each player (regardless of where they are in their existing guild, they have to start at apprentice and work their way up so that everyone is on common footing and no one has an advantage because of their prior arbitrary placement that varies from guild to guild). That way it is fair to everyone and no one can say to a higher member "this isn't fair, you didn't have to donate all these resources and do all this to get to your position, why should I have to do all this?".

I like what you said tiger, but almost everything you suggested here is allready done.

1. Price required to join a guild. Most Guilds now simply let in members, as paying 400 coins is very expensive, and not very attractive.

2. As for ranks, there are no secrets in guilds, there is friendship. So being entrusted with secrets would probably never go beyond what i ate for breakfast.

3. Master Craftsman is already ingame, but called "Officer". It is the 2nt highest rank, and it lets you do guild mail, kick and bring in new members, as well as changing the guild chat message and Main message.

4. Taxing Guild members is a scam to be honest. Now if there were special Guild buildings,( buildings only able to be build with the teamwork of the guilds members) then i could see how a tax could work.

5. Final point, being a higher rank than someone else doesn't matter. At least not for now. Like i said before, PvP may change every way we think about Guilds. But until then...

Frankly, I don't know how having the ability to relinquish guild ownership became the ability for the guild to forceably remove a guild leader. I do think this is fine if the guild leader left instructions for specific guildies to take over the guild in the event that the guild leader doesn't return.

I wasn’t saying none of what I said was done but I figured revamping the entire guild system I should mention things that would carry over as well as the new stuff so a complete picture of what it would look like afterwards would be described. That way no one would wonder “what about this or that?”.

It is true that right now, most guilds let members in for free. Now let us look at the consequences of this policy. Many people join a guild, and then don’t participate. The effect this has is that they risk nothing by joining and because they have not had to contribute anything, don’t feel obligated to participate unless they want to. Lack of participation simply means they may get booted out of the guild at some point by the guild leader and again they haven’t really lost anything since they didn’t invest anything to start with. On the other hand, the effect this has on the participating guild members is this: the guild grows, thus the required number of participants to complete guild quests also grows. But with non-participating players, this places a heavier burden on those participating members to complete the guild quests and often the guild quest does not get completed because it lacks 1 or 2 participants who did not complete their guild quest and thus everyone in the guild does not get the additional 56 guild coins they would have had beyond the 8 or 9 they got for doing their own quests because the guild itself did not reach the required number of guild members completing their own individual quest.

Now on the other hand, if all players were required to pay resources, (whether it be gold coins, hardwood planks or gems or whatever) they then have a personal investment in the guild. This amount should be comparable to the cost of a major building or upgrade. Something not to be taken lightly and that you will think about before purchasing guild membership. Nothing in life or in this game is gotten for free. Why should guild membership be any different? If you just want someone to trade with and chat with that is why we have an “add a friend” list, a guild is and should be more than an automatic “buddy list” thus there should be a required investment representing a personal stake for the new guild member. This will also result in the new guild member wanting to get their money’s worth (or resource’s or gem’s worth) so they will be more involved and more likely to participate in guild quests and other guild related activities. This would be an improvement over this existing system as the guild leader of my guild I’m sure would agree because it would save him from having us all on probation currently for not doing guild quests and regularly asking those of us who are on if we have seen so-and-so?

As for #2, I agree there aren’t really any secrets in this game. However, in game secrets could be developed as I alluded to by the guild specializing in the production of certain items that have enhanced qualities (such as the steel sword example I mentioned in my original post). Although not really a secret, it would have the same effect of what guild secrets were back in the old days when guilds were prevalent in society before corporations and trademarks and patents.

#3 Apprentice, Journeyman, and Master Craftsmen were the titles of the three levels used in guilds in the past and I just borrowed the terms. I never meant to say or imply that they were a new creation that I originated. That is one of those things that most likely would carry over with little change.

#4 actually relates to #1. Unlike a building that you invest resources in and then use for a while and after some time you may tear down because it has out worn its usefulness or build up to level 5 and are done with it because you have taken it as far as it can go, a guild should last and be ongoing and have continued interest rather than fading into the background of newer and brighter things. As a result, by continuing to pay membership dues, on a yearly basis (or whatever frequency, though I would recommend not any more frequently than quarterly at most and in my opinion even that often is pushing it), guild members would stay dedicated to the guild by regularly investing their own resources of whatever nature into it at stated intervals. If they decide that guild membership is not worth the investment they can leave and stay out of a guild or find another where they feel they will get a better value for what suits their capabilities and needs, but dedicated to their guild they would be and they would have a loyalty to what they have invested in and worked to be a part of. Further it is not a tax and it is not a scam, it serves a specific purpose and is not just a grab of money or resources.

On a different note, I agree that there should be guild specific buildings that can only be constructed by a guild. I mentioned this in the form of a guild adventure, but can also be extended to buildings that exist on the guild member’s islands as well.

#5 It is true that being of a higher rank right now does not matter, but we are talking about a way of revamping/restructuring/recreating the guilds. As such, there would be changes and guild vs guild competition can be part of that. With any restructuring, having a higher rank can give you greater capabilities within the guild and thus become more important to a player. The added powers that comes with being a Journeyman instead of an Apprentice, and the greatest powers that come from being a Master Craftsman rather than a Journeyman, would be an incentive to aspire for the higher level and as I mentioned before, the application fee for that higher grade could be akin to the fees you pay to upgrade an existing building from level 1 through level 5.

I hope this reply clarified and further explained a few points. Let me know if there are any other questions and I'll try to answer those as I'm able.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tigereye468

It is true that right now, most guilds let members in for free. Now let us look at the consequences of this policy. Many people join a guild, and then don’t participate. The effect this has is that they risk nothing by joining and because they have not had to contribute anything, don’t feel obligated to participate unless they want to. Lack of participation simply means they may get booted out of the guild at some point by the guild leader and again they haven’t really lost anything since they did not invest anything to start with. On the other hand, the effect this has on the participating guild members is this: the guild grows, thus the required number of participants to complete guild quests also grows. But with non-participating players, this places a heavier burden on those participating members to complete the guild quests and often the guild quest does not get completed because it lacks 1 or 2 participants who did not complete their guild quest and thus everyone in the guild does not get the additional 56 guild coins they would have had beyond the 8 or 9 they got for doing their own quests because the guild itself did not reach the required number of guild members completing their own individual quest.

---

I couldn't agree more. However the expensive resources you are suggesting is a let down to new players.

A better idea would be a "rent" or a "rent-to-own" set-up, that way new players can still join, without having to be rich.

And always, a member is a investment. No matter how high you make them pay, remember that they are part of your team, not a cash cow.

I have seen where the game adjusts requirements based upon the player's level, for someone who is just starting out the resources could be in pine logs or stone. Something affordable but valuable to a low level/new player. Using more higher priced materials for more experienced players.