Curse

Aërendil · May 05, 2006, 07:23 PM // 19:23

I agree with you Jaek. But really the Alliance chat open for entire guilds? 1000 people chatting there noncense to their mates in other guilds? I find that really irritating.

Vusak · May 05, 2006, 07:48 PM // 19:48

wow some people...

if it was an option then:

A. people who believe in stupid crap like 'earn your officer position', 'waste your time babysitting your guilds requests', and just general 'i wanna be an officer that can do more and therefore have more control' bs. then fine. you can. selection the option to NOT allow everyone access.

B. people who understand that sometimes an officer isnt on, or that friends can be in separate guilds, or that organizing teams is a lot easier with cross communication, or that not every alliance is full of 100+ member guilds, or whatever other reason, can simply selection the option to ALLOW everyone access.

thats what options are - they make more people happy - because it covers more peoples preferences

Hell Raiser · May 05, 2006, 08:15 PM // 20:15

As Jaek said that would create a problem because not every guild in the alliance would want to listen to everyone chatting so they turn off the chat and miss anything important.

If everyone could use alliance chat then the only thing officers have over members is being able to kick/invite people. In most guilds you have to earn your officer position for these priviledges.

As for Leaders/Officers not wanting this "chore" I say you need to rethink your position in the guild and demote yourself or take the responsibilty.
Imo ArenaNet did a great job with this. So I say leave it as is and let the members earn their place in the guild.

~Hell

Jaek · May 05, 2006, 08:49 PM // 20:49

One final note before I lose interest in this topic entirely.

One of the points on the "All access" side is that this wouldn't be bad for smaller guilds.

Keep in mind that the devs have to think about worst case scenerios.

What would happen if 1000 people were all talking at once?

What would happen if 1000 people simultaneously entered a message into the same channel?

Do you know for sure?

I don't, but I can easily believe it would not be good.

Granted that situation is not likely in normal use however gamers have proven time and time again that given the chance to mess with the system, they will.

Given the opportunity 1000 people will gather in a full Alliance just to test this even if it's just for this purpose.

They will simultaneously or as near as possible enter a message into the channel.

Assuming this does do something bad that affects other players not part of the experiment the victims will scream bloody murder.

It may not just be a design decision. It's quite possibly a decision based on necessity.

Plus you don't really turn channels off. You filter them out. You're still receiving the info.

I don't want Crackhead Bob in some allied guild taking up any of my bandwidth what so ever.

Bored now, moving on.

Zehnchu · May 05, 2006, 10:08 PM // 22:08

I really don't see the real problem with everyone one being allowed to use alliance chat, if it’s because of spammers then it’s your guilds fault in teaming up with another guild that spam’s. It just creates more of a rift between players and officers and now guild to guild. If there are no officers and you see other people in the other guilds on but none of them are officers and you want to know if anyone needs a mission quest what ever you just say screw it I’ll do it alone, good way to help people in your alliance. But since I can’t use it…it’s just like the local channel of LA that only officers use, so it’s always turned off, if they want to speak to me there’s guild chat

sumasage · May 05, 2006, 11:11 PM // 23:11

everyone make their own guild and make an alliance.....1000 people can talk woot!

arkane_academy · May 06, 2006, 01:13 AM // 01:13

IMO guild wars made the right decision here. It is always assumed that an officer should be elected because they take on more responsibility than the other members in the group. While i'm sure there are alot of guilds where the members know each other in real life as friends, and that it would be impossible to say they are not all equally deserving as officers, it is only one way of how the game should be played. If you're a traditional guild, then yes, the leader assumes the most responsibility, then the officers. If you're a friendly, everyone is equal guild, then as the leader, you should just change everyone in your team at the Time of the alliance battle, to Officers, because thats the way you would like the guild to operate.
ANET needn't change anything as each guild can already customize who wants to speak in the officer chat already.
It makes sense IMO to have the leaders (guild leader and officers) of the group consult on strategy, and then disseminate this to the soldiers, i.e the other members. ANET is simply trying to promote a beurocratic guild structure where officers actually have superior rank.

Vusak · May 06, 2006, 05:47 AM // 05:47

its sooooo much simpler if they just add TWO tick box options to the alliance menu.

1. allow non-officers in my guild to talk in alliance chat
2. allow non-officers in other guilds to be heard in my guilds alliance chat

done

everyone is happy, nobody has reason to disagree with this because it caters for all issues raised.

Ohtar Nimloth · May 06, 2006, 08:16 PM // 20:16

you know if they are gonna do that then maybe they should have a non-officer/leader alliance chat. So members can spam each other all they want and noone gets thier feelings hurt.

this would allow non-officers to take charge and get things done when the chance presents itself.

Allow everyone the options to

1)allow everyone to use alliance chat (or not)

and for officers.

1) listen to member chat (or Not)

This way officers still maintain a little priveledge over regular members...

Just an idea.