Jump to content

Photo

Can we talk seriously about a Guild Merger mechanism?


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#21 celendais

celendais

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,424 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 07:58

I wonder how usual this scenario is:

guild is formed, guild grows, prospers. Guild founder ( its usually them) start investing real money for further growth, upgrades,gear and so forth.

The "me me me" people with ambitions will always tend to move on fast as lightning to top10 guilds since it benefits "me me me " , the "best" want to be with the "best".

then negative spiral hits and people start leaving, going inactive etcetera. Guild stalls. Guild founder invest even more more to keep bank running ( since people believe in maxed structures being important or powerful lol) .

There comes a point where guild is dying. How many players will a) leave game B) join other guilds. I think there is quite big loss of players and donators in this scenario since a restart from scratch , both on xp, gear and upgrades you have played a part for is quite demoralising.

So I believe a guild merger mechanism would benefit both game and HCS . Details and technicalities can be discussed.

( since gear is untaggable it can be left out completely, just untag , sell some and bring some to new guild)

#22 Sustortias

Sustortias

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,214 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 08:09

Nice idea in principal, in practice though the game would need to lose things like titan hunting which would be become an even more greatly monopolized pursuit than it already is.

Yes you can argue this till the proverbial cows come home but that is what would happen imo.

Ignition_Honda_410x200_zps03cc040c.png


#23 fs_regnier7

fs_regnier7
  • Guests

Posted 12 April 2010 - 11:09

Nice idea in principal, in practice though the game would need to lose things like titan hunting which would be become an even more greatly monopolized pursuit than it already is.

Yes you can argue this till the proverbial cows come home but that is what would happen imo.



How do you connect Titan hunting and guild mergers? O.o

#24 fs_littlejom

fs_littlejom
  • Guests

Posted 12 April 2010 - 11:13

Nice idea in principal, in practice though the game would need to lose things like titan hunting which would be become an even more greatly monopolized pursuit than it already is.

Yes you can argue this till the proverbial cows come home but that is what would happen imo.



How do you connect Titan hunting and guild mergers? O.o



7 + Guild - Hunting * Merging = Titan

wtf noob common sense

#25 fs_regnier7

fs_regnier7
  • Guests

Posted 12 April 2010 - 11:15

Nice idea in principal, in practice though the game would need to lose things like titan hunting which would be become an even more greatly monopolized pursuit than it already is.

Yes you can argue this till the proverbial cows come home but that is what would happen imo.



How do you connect Titan hunting and guild mergers? O.o



7 + Guild - Hunting * Merging = Titan

wtf noob common sense

Hey! Screw you buddy! I am no nub! :lol:



Not familiar with that formula.... but I suppose it'd make sense with a bit more drinking or a hit over the head. o.O

#26 Sustortias

Sustortias

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,214 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 11:50

Actually,thinking about it some more, the mergers would probably help smaller guilds (who thus become bigger guilds) to take out titans easier and thereby even the score a bit. (though it could still be monopolized per se).

Of course the other major problem is guild membership max limits.

If a big guild tried to merge with another big guild and the membership limit was reached then there would be nowhere for the overflow.

If merging did get semi automated it would need to be done with these things in mind.

I kinda like the idea, it just seems a bit of a colossal jump atm.

Ignition_Honda_410x200_zps03cc040c.png


#27 fs_littlejom

fs_littlejom
  • Guests

Posted 12 April 2010 - 12:18

Actually,thinking about it some more, the mergers would probably help smaller guilds (who thus become bigger guilds) to take out titans easier and thereby even the score a bit. (though it could still be monopolized per se).

Of course the other major problem is guild membership max limits.

If a big guild tried to merge with another big guild and the membership limit was reached then there would be nowhere for the overflow.

If merging did get semi automated it would need to be done with these things in mind.

I kinda like the idea, it just seems a bit of a colossal jump atm.


I'm too lazy to click on the first page but weren't these already? Also the simplest solution to the restriction member limit is for the merge to not follow through or for inactives to be booted. Durka durka

#28 Sustortias

Sustortias

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,214 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 12:27

Actually,thinking about it some more, the mergers would probably help smaller guilds (who thus become bigger guilds) to take out titans easier and thereby even the score a bit. (though it could still be monopolized per se).

Of course the other major problem is guild membership max limits.

If a big guild tried to merge with another big guild and the membership limit was reached then there would be nowhere for the overflow.

If merging did get semi automated it would need to be done with these things in mind.

I kinda like the idea, it just seems a bit of a colossal jump atm.


I'm too lazy to click on the first page but weren't these already? Also the simplest solution to the restriction member limit is for the merge to not follow through or for inactives to be booted. Durka durka


Wouldn't always work though as not all guilds have inactives. Some would still lose out and possibly have to find another guild which kinda defeats the object of the merger.

The only solution to this would be to not have guild cap limits in the first place. This would potentially lead to a whole new ballpark of problems.

Ignition_Honda_410x200_zps03cc040c.png


#29 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,956 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 13:19

Although I like the idea of guild mergers in principle, it's not going to happen any soon, I guess.

That is all that needs to be said. Why would HCS shoot themselves in the foot? They need to pay bills!

[Signature removed]

 

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” -GRRM


#30 Phlyon

Phlyon

    Member

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 13:48

I don't like the idea of guild mergers. In fact, one could make a very strong case against it by simply saying that guild members are not property owned by the guild. They are free people within the game. It is tantamount to working for company X and then they want to sell you to company Y for a profit to 'get you off their payroll'. This is the exact same thing as slavery and in prohibited by law in many lands in 'real life'. I don't believe elements of slavery should be instantiated in this wonderful game.

Only by allowing members to freely leave and join another guild of their own accord does the member remain free.

Transfers of equipment are best handled by Secure Trade and Auction House. Why would anyone wish to allow a non-competitive exchange of items to occur? That just smacks of serious exploitability of the games' mechanics.

The best thing the cows could do is allow a founder to disband a guild of their own accord and move on to greener pastures. Maybe... make it more expensive to start each subsequent guild and recoup less from each subsequent guild, as a means to keep failed founders from exploiting that sort of system. Failure should not be rewarded in 'real life' and most definitely not in this game. Which only makes for a very good reason for failed founders to not recoup anything from a failed guild, except what they can get from selling off guild tagged items.

I vote NO on this entire topic for all of the above reasons.

#31 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,956 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 13:53

The best thing the cows could do is allow a founder to disband a guild of their own accord and move on to greener pastures.

The game exists in this way already.

[Signature removed]

 

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” -GRRM


#32 Phlyon

Phlyon

    Member

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 13:58

The best thing the cows could do is allow a founder to disband a guild of their own accord and move on to greener pastures.

The game exists in this way already.


Then it isn't broken. Why fix it? :?

#33 Thorsark

Thorsark

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 281 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 14:04

Although I like the idea of guild mergers in principle, it's not going to happen any soon, I guess.

If the cost of the merger would be, say, 1000 FSP now and 200 FSP with your tool, in order to make it profitable for HCS, 6 merges would have to happen in the new system for every 1 merger that would have happened anyway - with the net profit of 33 FSP per merger!


That's the thing, the mergers we have had cost Backwoods almost nothing in terms of FSP or gold - a bit for retagging on a few items. We don't retag much, as we already have plenty of hunting gear (more Epics are always nice.)

We generally suggest that the incoming guild untag items to make sure incoming members have resting/defense gear and use whatever other resources (sell off gear, guild bank) to upgrade the characters of the incoming players.

So, from my experience the cost of a merger now would be 5 FSP or less, and the proposed method could easily be 200 FSP or more.

After "We're happy here, thanks for asking" the #1 answer for not merging is given as

"XXXX says: not looking for a merger now- we have way to much invested in buildings and storage! but thanks for the offer! "

I think a lot of it is the emotional attachment to something you have built, even if the exact same structures or guild store slots (or likely more upgraded ones) will be there in the merged guild. With no mechanism of merging they're not "your" structures.

#34 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,956 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 14:05

The best thing the cows could do is allow a founder to disband a guild of their own accord and move on to greener pastures.

The game exists in this way already.


Then it isn't broken. Why fix it? :?

Sure. Why would HCS cut costs for players? It doesn't make any sense. Costs are involved to pay for maintaining and developing the game. This whole merger idea is contrary to how HCS works, to make money. Might as well just beg HCS for something, that is all this idea really is. Need some reserve stam?

[Signature removed]

 

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” -GRRM


#35 Phlyon

Phlyon

    Member

  • New Members
  • PipPip
  • 148 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 14:11

Need some reserve stam?


Sure. Where do I sign up?

The only spot I've ever used reliably is in the Upgrades area under +25 stamina @ 1 FSP each. :P

#36 Sustortias

Sustortias

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,214 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 14:16

A different but nonetheless appealing idea would be to have 'guild alliance leagues' that gvg each other so its not just one guild versus another anymore but rather those that are allied all become participants in the gvg. It would require a certain coding from the cows so the alliances would be recognised but regardless of gvg or merging guilds, alliances are another aspect of the game that could be improved upon.

I know that's not what the op was getting at (re:- merging) but just a thought.

Ignition_Honda_410x200_zps03cc040c.png


#37 fs_littlejom

fs_littlejom
  • Guests

Posted 12 April 2010 - 14:52

Sustortias you must stay away from the forum when you are high. That is another no go idea from you...

what you just suggested is another form of rp trading, it would get abused immediately and little level fairies could get free fsp out of this.

#38 sweetlou

sweetlou

    Veteran

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4,956 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 15:05

Need some reserve stam?


Sure. Where do I sign up?

The only spot I've ever used reliably is in the Upgrades area under +25 stamina @ 1 FSP each. :P

I think you have seen my sarcasm in the question. Much too often players want something for nothing. I just see this suggestion as another way to ask for the same thing, something for nothing. If the guild is dead let it die and move on. Someone asked why HCS doesn't allow selling of guilds. Well, it is so that no player can take advantage of others in their guild. Doesn't mean the founder can't kick everyone and bury the guild, upgrades included, if that is the direction the guild is going.

[Signature removed]

 

“When you tear out a man's tongue, you are not proving him a liar, you're only telling the world that you fear what he might say.” -GRRM


#39 Sustortias

Sustortias

    Veteran

  • New Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 2,214 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 15:06

Sustortias you must stay away from the forum when you are high. That is another no go idea from you...

what you just suggested is another form of rp trading, it would get abused immediately and little level fairies could get free fsp out of this.


Was just an idea, no need to be facetious about it. RP can be spit off to the victors, its just a question of logistics.

Ignition_Honda_410x200_zps03cc040c.png


#40 Thorsark

Thorsark

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 281 posts

Posted 12 April 2010 - 15:19

I don't like the idea of guild mergers. In fact, one could make a very strong case against it by simply saying that guild members are not property owned by the guild. They are free people within the game. It is tantamount to working for company X and then they want to sell you to company Y for a profit to 'get you off their payroll'. This is the exact same thing as slavery and in prohibited by law in many lands in 'real life'. I don't believe elements of slavery should be instantiated in this wonderful game.


This gives me a real WTF?!?!?! moment.

Slavery? Aren't we being a bit of a drama-llama here? All players remain free agents and can certainly leave the merged guild if the wish. Where do you come UP with this stuff?

And yes, this would work like a corporate merger. You work for Company X. They merge with Company Y. All employees from the earlier X and earlier Y now work for the new merged Company Y. Extremely common "in many lands in 'real life'"


Edit: Of course, you're not exactly "working for" a guild - I'm trying to relate to the analogy presented.


1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users

Font:
Arial | Calibri | Lucida Console | Verdana
 
Font Size:
9px | 10px | 11px | 12px | 10pt | 12pt
 
Color: