Curse

Ristaron · Oct 21, 2005, 08:06 PM // 20:06

Umbrella guilds.
This is the most brilliant idea I have ever seen suggested. Alliances between the thousands of guilds wouldn't bring any form of politics into play, nor would it give one guild a distinct advantage. Different guilds in an umbrella wouldn't be able to GvG on the same team, but it would make IG chat SO much easier, AND make solid connections between allied guilds.

My guild has a little under 15 members, we are friends with a guild with over 40. I originally wanted to merge with the guild with over 40, but merging in this game is retarded and the terms wouldn't work out. So I suggested we be allied.

Is it the mechanics of how the umbrella would work that is keeping it from being implimented? Let me give you how I think it should work:

The leader of the guild that founds the umbrella becomes the High Councillor, and he must pay 1,000 (or even a sigil) to invite another guild into the umbrella. When that happens, the leader of the new guild also becomes a councillor. Repeat process.
Should a problem arise in the High Councillor, the Councillors can overrule the High Councillor if they are unanimously in agreement against him (a voting system, see below).

Overruling a High Councillor:
Decisions such as removing a guild from the roster would require full agreement (in a case as the one just presented, the guild being removed would have no say of course) of the council. If, however, the High Councillor is to be removed from his or her seat (his/her vote only counts as a normal vote for things like removing a guild), the entire council (excluding the vote of the current High Councillor) would need to elect a new person to take his/her place.
Alternative: a percentage (90%) would be required (rounded down). If there are 6 guilds in the Umbrella, 5 would need to vote against the current one. If there are 10, 9 would have to. If there were 20, 18 would have to.
This can be lowered to 80% or even 60% if it is projected to work better. In fact, the % doesn't even need to be static, but can be dependant on the number of guilds in the umbrella.
Note: Umbrella guilds are expensive to run, it would take dedicated people to join an umbrella.

The High Councillor's only purpose is to invite new guilds, and open votes for removing one. Otherwise the umbrella would be too political.
Once you have entered an umbrella guild you can leave it at any time.

I think that covers the more technical areas. So now you (Devs) can't say you would be unsure how the make the umbrella function. It's all a matter of implimenting it, or not.

My reasons for pushing this issue: I have no intention of giving up my guild, as any mergal terms I have attempted with other guilds have been "You join us and work your way up the ranks".
1. We're about to give you a large infusion of new members, therefore our leaders deserve a place in your roster above the simple rank of member.
2. We're making a new guild from the both of ours, we don't necessarily have to change names, but if we're rank 100 and you're rank 500, we're not going to give up our place so simply as to get larger.
3. We're not wasting a guild hall. When we merge the guilds we should be able to choose which guild hall we keep, not whoever is smaller loses theirs.
4. Our separate forums and sites shouldn't be lost, but merged.

As much as I want to join up with people whom I've been willing to merge my baby (my guild) with, I won't simply give up all I have made, least of all if I (or any of my officers) will not have any say in the resultant. And I can tell you that this is the reason we don't have a fountain of active guilds making the game much more enjoyable.

/signed, impliment the umbrella guilds please. Or at least promise you'll do it for the expansion.

KelvinC · Oct 22, 2005, 12:10 AM // 00:10

Here it is

http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...light=umbrella