Curse

Goldleader · Sep 15, 2007, 02:14 PM // 14:14

As someone who plays solo more than in PUGs, I can relate to the concerns others have posted.

The charm of Guild Wars is that it is one of the few games that can be played casually, and successfully both solo and with groups of players.

I definitely am not looking to change the entire structure of the game to make every zone a group required zone.

I am merely looking to create content specific for guilds to help make them more viable for the everyday player.

WAY back when Ultima Online was first released, the entire game was one giant PvP and PvE zone. PvE'ers who wanted to just play solo constantly had to be on the lookout for other players who might happen along and kill them. Because of these risks, guilds in the game became quite viable, both for protection and for the housing options available.

While I would not recommend that the GW adopt the old UO strategy, I do think that UO proved that if you create a need for guilds, people will play in them.

I agree with a previous poster who said the in-game chat system is lacking. Let's face it, everyone logs in and plays at different hours, so it can be difficult to find entire groups. I like the idea of the in-game calendar, for organizing events (beyond the silly announcement feature when players login). I'd also like to see this taken a step further, it would be nice to be able to leave messages for players that are not online. Those players would receive their messages the next time they logged in (taking a page from WoW).

The ability to solo in the game should be maintained, however adding a couple of high level zones for guilds and alliances would not ruin the game for anyone. I would imagine that you did not want to cancel your account when they introduced the Domain of Anguish and FoW. Just as players did not want to cancel their accounts because zones like UW almost became exclusively zones for solo and 55/ss duo players.

Adding features for guilds will not take anything away from players that like to play solo. In fact, it would not affect solo players at all (except if you became jealous that others were getting extra features from their guilds that you chose not too, I suppose).

Micromaster · Sep 15, 2007, 07:09 PM // 19:09

/signed

Also add permissions so that the guild leader can create new ranks and permissions on a user base.

We need the Guild back in GUILD WARS. It seems that Arena Net only cares about PVP.

Diddy bow · Sep 16, 2007, 02:03 AM // 02:03

/signed

I think more rewards for guild particapation would be great but no friggin restrictions or punishments by any means. However, youll find well orginiset guilds with leaders and officers who really care dont need this and ones who dont wont benifit anyway.

MoldyRiceFrenzy · Sep 16, 2007, 04:43 AM // 04:43

alot of it seems alittle to much work, but the idea is pretty straightforward... guildwars needs some more guild orientation... instead of a bunch of ppl who leave and join new guilds all the time with no loyalty whatsoever

Targren · Sep 16, 2007, 11:56 AM // 11:56

I'd rather see guilds become character tied instead of account-tied. The current setup means I can either join a PvP guild for PvP XOR a PvE guild for PvE XOR A small guild with my RL friends/family in the game. So no GvG and all PUGs for me. It really seems to be a rather goofy mechanic...

Tamuril elansar · Sep 16, 2007, 01:36 PM // 13:36

/halfsignet
guilds shouldnt be for more/better rewards, but i'd love to see a dungeon or something that is only accesable with guildies of ppl from alliance.

Krento · Sep 16, 2007, 01:49 PM // 13:49

It was so long that I didn't read all of it but:
A guild with good management will be valuable to players. Consider finding a Guild with better management.
Examples of bad management:
-Big guilds. The management will pay minimum attention too you.
-Guilds that let anyone in. -It will be flooded with unpredictable personalities.

Mr. Wilson · Sep 16, 2007, 08:04 PM // 20:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Goldleader

Basicly, I'd like to see the guild made more of a focal point for players.

I agree with all you have to say.....and to Anet about the dragon......THIS IS A MEDIVALISH STYLE GAME......WHERE'S THE DRAGONS, I mean c'mon, all rpgs have dragons, even nautical rpgs have some sort of dragon......so i vote yes to this

terminus123 · Sep 16, 2007, 08:10 PM // 20:10

yep, guilds need alittile more importance!

/signed

UnforgivenIII · Sep 17, 2007, 01:22 AM // 01:22

/signed

I would also like to see more tiers added within the guild. I'd like to have some way to give some members of my guild some recognition within the guild for their loyalty without the responsibility that "officer" implies if there were more ranks...that would be lovely, and probably even helpful for bigger guilds because then you have a little longer chain of command to work with and such...makes sense in my mind anyways

the_jos · Sep 17, 2007, 11:15 AM // 11:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Krento

It was so long that I didn't read all of it but:
A guild with good management will be valuable to players. Consider finding a Guild with better management.
Examples of bad management:
-Big guilds. The management will pay minimum attention too you.
-Guilds that let anyone in. -It will be flooded with unpredictable personalities.

Agree on the second, partly on the first.
In my view, guilds are what the members make of it.
The management (GL+officers) are there to support the common goal of the guild and to some extend help less experienced people out.
This however does not take away the responsibility from all members, including GL and officers, to participate and come up with ideas.
Or even organize things themselfs.

I don't see why management should pay attention to each and every member, except when helping out on the common goal of the guild or just be available when issues arise.
However, this is from the point of view of a specialised PvE guild.
In a guild that has many new players, things would be different.

This does not mean I don't care about guildies at all.
I do and like to know them and have at least played several times with them for fun.
I think that of our 70 members I know and have played with 50 and the rest have not been active enough to get to know them.

The one thing I think management should take care of is guild stability.
That's by not inviting just anyone and making sure people that don't fit the guild leave.
However, it's been a very long time since people got kicked for other reasons than long-term absence.
I even 'upset' our alliance leader by not kicking a member (he left himself after a serious talk)

Most of the time people that don't fit move on after a short period.

glountz · Sep 17, 2007, 11:45 AM // 11:45

/unsigned.
Guilds are there for people. YOu don't like people you don't need a guild.
A 24 players arena with dragon? Seriously.
Guilds offer already evrything you need.

intent · Sep 18, 2007, 06:08 AM // 06:08

I don't think this would be a great idea.

First of all have you ever played a game where 20+ people went to one area as group at one time to kill something? I have one word for you LAG. The casters spend more time looking down at the ground just so they can cast anything so that they can fight then doing anything else. (Course most of my raids in other games were 50 plus but still no matter what large numbers in one area create lag when there is spell effects and such going on.) We don't see a lot of lag in cities because there is no spells going off in the cities. Even on high speed tho with large numbers like that it tends to lag to death. All the raids I have ever done most of the time was spent people complaining about lag then having fun. I agree that doing something like this would turn GW into another WoW or EQ and not GW. GW is special because it is its own game.

I realize that there should be areas for full groups and for solo players (harder places and easier) but even the harder ones with a good build a solo person can at least attempt it even if they fail it was fun trying. If you put in something that 20 plus people have to kill it would be impossible for a solo person to even try it (heck it would be impossible for a solo group to try it if it was meant for 20 plus people) There it would be taking a big part of the GW Community and saying sorry this doesn't include you "You are to weak or you don't play our style so don't come here"

I agree totally with the poster that said there were rewards out there for Guilds but not everything is in Gold and Loot. A big plus of having a great guild is the friendships, the help that you can get when needed, the support, and having team mates there to watch your back when you need it. Plus many others but not everything has to be gold, loot, or extra zones in a game to be a great reward some rewards are personal ones. I think Guilds are one of those. Could Guilds be improved? Yes everything can always be improved. Just in my opinion this would be the wrong way of doing it.

/unsigned