Curse

Lorelei · Jul 27, 2005, 02:09 PM // 14:09

We could get feudal with a structure that allows guilds to associate together into a super-guild (or association).

The layers are:
- Individuals (each character is an individual)
- Guild (Individual + leader)
- Association (a group of guilds)

Associations hold territories. Guilds and associations fight for territories.

Why associations? it allows to limit the number of territories to a manageable.
Who could start an association? If a guild wins in HoH a number of times, it earns the right to start an association. It can then invite other guilds into the association.

Leader of an association is like a king. His followers are in guilds. Leadership could be challenged (A sub-ordinate guild may challenge a ruling guild for leadership).

Why having subordinate guilds and ruling guilds, why not having a very large guild? Individual can't challenge guild's leadership. But a guild could. To make the ruling guild accept other guilds, the maximum number of territories an association could hold is proportional to the number of guilds it has.

ANet may implement this as part of the game, or it could be run as a forum-based game. Fights are done in GW Arenas. Results and territory/ Roleplaying are done here in one of the forums.

Darksci · Jul 27, 2005, 04:23 PM // 16:23

Not bad - kinda like in the book of lore.
The guilds of Kryta, Ascalon and Orr.

Of course they end up fighting upon one another and there is total destruction.

Lorelei · Jul 27, 2005, 05:17 PM // 17:17

That's the whole idea

KelvinC · Jul 28, 2005, 06:11 AM // 06:11

sounds like an interesting idea.

Yea it could work like the Realm vs Realm in DaOC except it is Kryta vs Ascalon vs Orr.

Iceciro · Jul 28, 2005, 11:33 AM // 11:33

Hmmm! Could fix the ongoing problem that is Favor... change the countries to guild associations having favor.

But this would probably make it even MORE unbalanced than it is now. Could be looked at and tweaked, however.

RTSFirebat · Jul 28, 2005, 11:57 AM // 11:57

Like the idea, but it with result in a overall greater problem. New guilds would be bullied or forced into joining larger groups in order to even have a chance of being reconised.

And example of this is within the game Planetside which I came from, there are 3 main sides which battle, however as the players dropped it before harder to get the forces suitable to fight back.

The problem was not helped by so-called alliances within the 3 groups between Outfits (Guilds) who were unwilling to folllow orders given from each empires commanders.

Iceciro · Jul 28, 2005, 12:11 PM // 12:11

Yeah, I see too many downsides to this...

Makes me laugh, my Guild Leader left Idiot Savants for a more relaxed experience, and we might get forced to join a supergroup headed by them... man that would be silly.

Yeah, too many negatives vs. positives.

Lorelei · Jul 28, 2005, 03:11 PM // 15:11

Just want to give a new dimension to PvP: you play against other players for even a bigger goal. After all, am tired of killing random monsters and random humans

Iceciro · Jul 28, 2005, 03:25 PM // 15:25

I'd like Guild WARS, not angry guild skirmishes on an island. I want like 50v50 or more... maybe smaller guilds could band together to meet that player req.

DrSLUGFly · Jul 28, 2005, 03:27 PM // 15:27

I love this idea. I also love the idea of a guild-association leader (the King) being challenged and dethroned... This would add a great deal of depth to PvP and would likely draw a huge number of players who tend to play PvE only into the grey realm of PvP and PvE together.

You get a 4 nose salute from the slug!

Edit: this also has a massive potential to introduce politics and ambition into the game... which at first no doubt will be shouted to great degrees as "griefing" (omgf!!! this guild joined our alliance last eweek and then they killed me and stole my alliance!! sgo red engine lamers!! stoopid noobs1!! how do I complain to anet?? I awant this greifer banned!)