Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Guild Infrastructure - Questions and Suggestions


Recommended Posts

Hello Crows,

Since guild information hasn't been rolled out I've brought my questions here. Knowing this community is great with identifying pros & cons/strengths and weaknesses lets open this up thread up to suggestions regarding how YOU'D like to see guild infrastructure handled. 

My questions are listed below; feel free to comment with your own questions or ideas/suggestions that may spring up from this.

 

I did originally post this on the Community Question & Answer forum: http://community.crowfall.com/index.php?/topic/13082-general-questions-regarding-guild-infrastructure/ I was originally looking for answers to questions that perhaps more experienced members of the community had experience with. I've removed a couple questions that DID get answer and have left the questions that are still cloaked in mystery!

 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. How is the guild rank system (the system with the game) going to be set up? What is the anticipated degree of player customization?

The three different guild rank systems I have experience with is (I list these in case the intended guild rank system is similar to any of the following game guild rank systems which will make explaining the intended guild rank system easier- hopefully):

  • No in-game guild ranking system (Runescape). Guild ranks were basically completely conceptual and required a degree of RP to "accept".
  • Flexible, player controlled in-game guild ranking system (World of Warcraft, Star Wars: The Old Republic). Guild rank titles/names and permissions able to be customized by the player.
  • Structured, game controlled in-game guild ranking system (Black Desert Online, Guild Wars 1). Guild rank titles/names and permissions pre-established and not able to be customized.

Thoughts:

My personal opinion is that the middle structure is the better option. This option allows each group to customize their guild to suit their focus, members, and set up. I think even more customization could be even better.
For example:

- Allow more than 10 ranks

- Allow officers/guild leaders to set the promotion requirements through a built-in, game supported interface. Billybob is a new recruit and wants to reach the next rank, "cannonfodder". The guild master has set requirements for the "cannonfodder" rank; each recruit has to kill 10 people, craft a weapon, and enter a CW to be eligible. When the guild master (or officer) select's Billybob's name they will see check marks or a "status report" on his progress towards being eligible for the promotion.

Pros:

- Removes the monotony of officers/GM having to track and follow up with members completing the promotion requirements.

- Removes the possibility of "favoritism" if each guild member HAS to get check marks to be eligible for promotion.

- Provides clear and consistent promotion requirements to all members, officers, etc.

Cons:

- Probably hard to develop, "Requirements" would have be pre-generated (A way to do this may be to have 3 parts to setting requirements. Part 1 would be the numerical element (do X thing.) Part 2 would be the action element (DO x thing). Part 3 would be the thing. (craft x item), (kill x npcs), (acquire x thing). Splitting the generation of "requirements" like this may make the development side of things easier - idk about these things though soooo....)

- Limited amount of "requirements" 

- Could be restrictive 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. Will guild ranks be directly tied to, indirectly tied to, or have no significance/role on the hierarchy within an Eternal Kingdom (and vice versa).

For clarification I will incorporate the example provided in the Eternal Kingdom's FAQ (Question # 23): Do the nobles within Robert's kingdom have to be in Robert's guild? If yes, are there certain guild ranks that must be held by a fellow guild member in order to grant them particular land parcels?

(Example: Would Ned have to be at least be an officer in Robert's guild to be granted a land parcel/Archduke?)

 

Thoughts:

If the Monarch (or ruling noble) collects taxes from folks who settle in their land, it'd be interesting to allow the option to "send taxes to guild funds" for those who settle in your land and are in your guild. The "send taxes to guild funds" would obviously not be available from people outside of your guild (this would be a mechanic to discourage RL trading)

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

3. a -  Are there in-game upkeep costs associated with guilds?

    b -  If so, how will a guild sustain these upkeep costs?

 

Thoughts:

I think upkeep costs are good actually. The bigger your guild gets (more members) the larger your upkeep costs should be. I don't think this mechanic should be introduced, though, without some way for guilds to acquire funds to support that upkeep.

Also, I like the idea of guild contracts - Where a member pledges to be in your guild for X amount of days (as designated by the contract) and the guild pledges to pay that member X amount of currency (as designated by the contract) every day for the duration of the contract. Contracts can be renewed before and after the contract expires. Again, I don't think guild contracts should be integrated without guilds being able to acquire income. I'd love to see other folks' input on this though.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

4. Following the previous question (in and out of the CW), will there be a guild storage? Subsequently, will guild members be able to donate to a storage?

 

Thoughts:

I'd love to see guild members able to contribute to guild funds. This would hopefully mean that guilds can purchase items of great importance (or even guild skills) with those guild funds. It gives guilds something to work towards.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

5. What rank will be granted to the leader of a sub-guild? Are these ranks standalone or are they relative to the main guild? 

   aWill the leader of the sub-guild be considered a Guild Master (separate from the main guild's GM) or will they be given a variant of an officer rank?

   b Furthermore, will the main guild GM still be considered the GM for any sub-guilds?

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

6. What is the relationship between the sub-guilds and the main guild? What advantage, if any and besides bolstering the numbers behind a single banner, will sub-guilds provide?

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

I appreciate any additions, questions, and/or insight the community has to share. 

 

Thank you everyone!

Edited by Nivhawk

Of the Hawk People

Link to post
Share on other sites

when i was running a large guild in another mmo one of the things that came up more than once was that someone wanted to be a part of it but wanted to run their own branch. they wanted to be affiliated with us and work with us but under their own leadership structure and with their own rules setup. being a bit of a tyrant i immediately squashed that idea back then, in hindsight it is actually a pretty good idea as it would have allowed them to do recruiting for me and given them the freedom to do things their own way while still benefiting the group as a whole. i think this is where the concept of sub-guilds comes in to play, it would allow this situation to easily be resolved.

 

regarding your questions 5 and 6, i would say formal plans are probably still up in the air with ACE and they are likely open to suggestions. one of my primary suggestions, and one of our main hurdles when we did eventually branch out, was communications. that mmo gave us the ability to setup our own global channels that worked across servers and that went a long way towards making it easier to organize. for guilds with sub-guilds, please give us a method in-game to be able to talk to each other. one channel for the overall group as a whole, then a separate channel for each guild and sub-guild; and with that said if/when alliances become a thing a third channel for those would be great. 

 

regarding upkeep costs, please keep them sane if they are used. i've seen this done badly more than once and upkeep costs become a major hurdle and stumbling block that prevent groups from accomplishing half as much as they wish they could. please give us the freedom to create player organizations that will inspire others to keep playing without hamstringing us with absurd upkeep costs. some are okay, i only ask they not be oppressive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

when i was running a large guild in another mmo one of the things that came up more than once was that someone wanted to be a part of it but wanted to run their own branch. they wanted to be affiliated with us and work with us but under their own leadership structure and with their own rules setup. being a bit of a tyrant i immediately squashed that idea back then, in hindsight it is actually a pretty good idea as it would have allowed them to do recruiting for me and given them the freedom to do things their own way while still benefiting the group as a whole. i think this is where the concept of sub-guilds comes in to play, it would allow this situation to easily be resolved.

 

regarding your questions 5 and 6, i would say formal plans are probably still up in the air with ACE and they are likely open to suggestions. one of my primary suggestions, and one of our main hurdles when we did eventually branch out, was communications. that mmo gave us the ability to setup our own global channels that worked across servers and that went a long way towards making it easier to organize. for guilds with sub-guilds, please give us a method in-game to be able to talk to each other. one channel for the overall group as a whole, then a separate channel for each guild and sub-guild; and with that said if/when alliances become a thing a third channel for those would be great. 

 

regarding upkeep costs, please keep them sane if they are used. i've seen this done badly more than once and upkeep costs become a major hurdle and stumbling block that prevent groups from accomplishing half as much as they wish they could. please give us the freedom to create player organizations that will inspire others to keep playing without hamstringing us with absurd upkeep costs. some are okay, i only ask they not be oppressive.

The communications is a great point. GW1 allowed for guild chat, officer chat, and alliance chat (with guilds you had a formal alliance with). I'm not sure where the plans are headed for comms but having a comms system similar to that (including Sub-guilds) would be great. 

 

I agree with your point on upkeep costs. I don't want them to be debilitating to the point the guilds main focus is to now focus on staying afloat but be significant enough to where there's always the encouragement to want to go out and increase your guild funds. 

 

Thanks Kalus!

Of the Hawk People

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like these suggestions a lot, but, concerning your first suggestion:

Like you said, making a system for played-made checklists would take more development resources then it would be worth. Not to mention the fact that all of the resulting information would have to be stored on the servers, and that can create a very complicated web of information that ACE wants to avoid.

Edited by TragicNumberOne

Might I interest you in a low-interest mortgage?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I like these suggestions a lot, but, concerning your first suggestion:

Like you said, making a system for played-made checklists would take more development resources then it would be worth. Not to mention the fact that all of the resulting information would have to be stored on the servers, and that can create a very complicated web of information that ACE wants to avoid.

I certainly suspected so. I, admittedly, am unfamiliar with the back end of game creation and figured something like that would be resource heavy (which is maybe why we haven't seen it in a game yet).

 

Thank you for reading :)

Of the Hawk People

Link to post
Share on other sites

I certainly suspected so. I, admittedly, am unfamiliar with the back end of game creation and figured something like that would be resource heavy (which is maybe why we haven't seen it in a game yet).

 

Thank you for reading :)

Don't think I know more about the servers then you. I am speaking from the fact that, in one of the monthly Q&As, ACE said they want to minimize the amount of complicated webs of interactions (They already have player-server, player-guild, guild-server, player-player, guild-guild, and many more.) Adding another layer to this web seems like it would be more trouble then its worth.

Might I interest you in a low-interest mortgage?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't think I know more about the servers then you. I am speaking from the fact that, in one of the monthly Q&As, ACE said they want to minimize the amount of complicated webs of interactions (They already have player-server, player-guild, guild-server, player-player, guild-guild, and many more.) Adding another layer to this web seems like it would be more trouble then its worth.

Ahh, I see. I wonder if that suggestion would fall into guild-server? Or would it be player-guild-server. Serverception!

Of the Hawk People

Link to post
Share on other sites

A big thing that will be difficult with single person EK and guild build up is shared ownership, you never want the situation where the guild works to build something and someone goes inactive or worse takes off and takes the fruit of the entire group's labor. So need to think through shared control methods as well. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

A big thing that will be difficult with single person EK and guild build up is shared ownership, you never want the situation where the guild works to build something and someone goes inactive or worse takes off and takes the fruit of the entire group's labor. So need to think through shared control methods as well. 

Agreed, I like the fact that the EK owner can maintain primary administrative rights over all land grants. I believe they've built in the checks in balances for that (see the EK FAQ - #23). 

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

By granting a player an area, the monarch or noble is enabling them to have (secondary) administrative rights over that area -- and the ability to override the settings of any player further down the chain.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Of the Hawk People

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...