Guild Spar/Tower/System Suggestion Thread - 6

Craftz · 08-08-2015

Posted by MIWolverine

Penalties more in the sense that if you're booted you can't be re-added for 10 days or something like that.

This is dumb for tower guilds, seeing as most players will get kicked when they go offline and recruited again when they're back on.

Comyt · 08-08-2015

force queue in guildspar after every match so guilds can't boost their points by avoiding matches against good guilds.

Chun · 08-08-2015

Posted by Comyt

force queue in guildspar after every match so guilds can't boost their points by avoiding matches against good guilds.

they can still re-enter the gs room to avoid it

Comyt · 08-08-2015

lmao "everyone leave the room and reenter so we can vs death gods xx" that'd be funny to witness

David · 08-08-2015

Posted by Craftz

This is dumb for tower guilds, seeing as most players will get kicked when they go offline and recruited again when they're back on.

god forbid something was actually challenging

Thallen · 08-08-2015

Posted by MIWolverine

Penalties more in the sense that if you're booted you can't be re-added for 10 days or something like that.

Yeah, guilds in general need to be penalized for kicking members or recruiting players who insta-leave

I don't think it needs to be that harsh, because I'd still like for for-fun guilds and practice spar guilds and trolly PK guilds to exist, but there needs to be a way to incentivize people not to do it if they want cool stuff (which will happen)

Then people will actually have to GS for points with their true guild roster and actually tower with a core group
IT'S ALMOST AS IF THEY'D BE LIKE REAL GUILDS INSTEAD OF DISPOSABLE TAGS?

It'd also enable GS guilds to tower and tower guilds to GS, generally would force guilds to be of a higher quality or die out

Liam Kelly · 08-08-2015

Posted by Thallen

Yeah, guilds in general need to be penalized for kicking members

This would change the tower game entirely.

Areo · 08-08-2015

Posted by Thallen

I don't think it needs to be that harsh, because I'd still like for for-fun guilds and practice spar guilds and trolly PK guilds to exist, but there needs to be a way to incentivize people not to do it if they want cool stuff (which will happen)

The only thing is, what cool stuff could you really offer?
At least to me hats won't cut it. Maybe something entirely new?

I would honestly feel like a limited number of guild tags would be a decent idea. Problem with implementing that is some people have 100+, and how could you lower their guild tag numbers without the complaints?

Even so, chances are the incentives would have to be pretty large, or the penalty be pretty harsh for people to not tag switch. I honestly feel fixing the tower system would be easier

Thallen · 08-09-2015

Posted by Liam Kelly

This would change the tower game entirely.

Ya, that's good. People behave as if change is bad for some reason, like:

Posted by Craftz

This is dumb for tower guilds, seeing as most players will get kicked when they go offline and recruited again when they're back on.

It's dumb because they're changing something in a way that will make guilds function more naturally like a guild? I don't understand that mindset, but I do know that when people say things like that it probably makes it a lot more difficult for staff to make important changes.

Posted by Areo

The only thing is, what cool stuff could you really offer?
At least to me hats won't cut it. Maybe something entirely new?

I can't answer that for you because I'm not staff and not allowed to/shouldn't, but people will tell you that Rufus has mentioned it in game. I've talked to him about it a lot, maybe he has spoken to other people who regularly lead guilds.
If they intend to change the system in a way to reward people, I'm sure the rewards are going to be worth playing for. I mean, right now towering is active and all you get are hats. There will be more.

Posted by Areo

I would honestly feel like a limited number of guild tags would be a decent idea. Problem with implementing that is some people have 100+, and how could you lower their guild tag numbers without the complaints?

It's only logical that would also happen, yes. Again, can't say much of how that will be done.

Posted by Areo

I honestly feel fixing the tower system would be easier

I don't really see what's left to fix specifically at towers. Recent changes:

Tag flicks down during activity, giving flag defenders more of a purpose
Sardon's was nerfed
Snowtown was nerfed
York was deleted (less towers, more competitive towers)
MoD was changed so that it offers a spawn-point benefit to defenders, making it more defendable of a tower

So, I think all of the necessary changes left that will actually make towering more enjoyable revolve around changing how guilds themselves work, not towers.

Towering should be competition between guilds to see which guild is the strongest at strategizing and attacking/defending a fort.
Right now, the strategy seems to be this:

Create guild
Recruit anyone and everyone
Get 1000 hours
Start over

So based on that, the definition of a "guild" at towers is a disposable tag that anyone and everyone has access to because the main purpose is to use it as some sort of vessel to reach a reward. The system allows you to recruit and kick 25 people without any penalization, so everyone does it because it's efficient.

What a guild actually is, IMO, is a group of loyal players who come together to achieve something. So, to me, limiting access to how players freely join and leave guilds is a necessary step in fixing the problem. That's just my opinion though.

twilit · 08-09-2015

Im assuming these "penalties for leaving/kicking from guild" are a way to prevent guilds from mass noob recruiting. But I dont think a penalty for the player that was kicked is an appropriate solution.

The idea I came up with involves different tiers of members:

Guild Owner -- (one person) has same ability as current guild owners
Leaders -- limited to ~5-10 people. These are basically your ranked members that probably have powers. However, leaders cannot kick other leaders; only the Owner can kick leaders.
Members -- normal guild members.
Recruits -- newly recruited people are placed in this group. This group is limited to ~2-3 people at a time. Recruits are restricted from certain guild activities (by staff's discretion). For Recruits to become Members, they must prove their loyalty by being active on guild tag for a certain amount of time. Recruits will then automatically be moved into the main Member tier. If your Recruits arent loyal, then you can kick them to free up recruiting space.

When the guild is first created, the first 'x' number of members do not have to go through the "Recruit filter." When anyone is kicked, they must go through the recruit filter again. This way, guilds arent able to turnover their whole roster every time a noob or subguild member asks for a tag.

Imprint · 08-09-2015

Requiring new recruits to wait 24h is a simple way to almost completely eliminate recruiting and kicking. It's long enough that you can't recruit large numbers of members for specific timezones. But it's not too long so that loyal guild members are kept from enjoying taking towers with their friends.

Thallen · 08-09-2015

I don't think the player should be penalized at all because the player is punished by proxy just through guilds not wanting to recruit them and risk penalization
I think the guild itself should be penalized, falling in line with the points system that was discussed in another thread

Players should be freely allowed to join any guild, but guild leaders should be considerate of who they are recruiting and that in itself should eliminate the "noob recruiting" strategy (which is anti-competitive, boring, non-interactive, just stupid altogether)

And I know everyone's concern is then, "OMG, BUT HOW DO WE HOLD TOWER WITHOUT NOOB RECRUIT?"
Consider the fact that every guild will be held to the same standard, it applies equally across every guild

Craftz · 08-09-2015

I find it interesting that Thallen creates so many hat guilds without saying a thing, then when he is done towering he wants to ruin it for everyone else and change the system

SouthernZombie* · 08-09-2015

Everytime you mention Thallens name I get excited, it's kinda like when one of my favorite shows comes on but a tiny bit better! Keep at it pls!

Thallen · 08-09-2015

Be grateful that this forum has people who come and suggest things to help improve the game while you're contributing zero other than low-IQ monkey posts and delicious tears

I'll be one of the first guild leaders to participate when new changes happen and you'll be stuck here on the forums flaming and trying to get attention from men (weird)

08-09-2015	85
twilit michael Join Date: May 2012 Location: Hyrule Posts: 3,511	Im assuming these "penalties for leaving/kicking from guild" are a way to prevent guilds from mass noob recruiting. But I dont think a penalty for the player that was kicked is an appropriate solution. The idea I came up with involves different tiers of members: Guild Owner -- (one person) has same ability as current guild owners Leaders -- limited to ~5-10 people. These are basically your ranked members that probably have powers. However, leaders cannot kick other leaders; only the Owner can kick leaders. Members -- normal guild members. Recruits -- newly recruited people are placed in this group. This group is limited to ~2-3 people at a time. Recruits are restricted from certain guild activities (by staff's discretion). For Recruits to become Members, they must prove their loyalty by being active on guild tag for a certain amount of time. Recruits will then automatically be moved into the main Member tier. If your Recruits arent loyal, then you can kick them to free up recruiting space. When the guild is first created, the first 'x' number of members do not have to go through the "Recruit filter." When anyone is kicked, they must go through the recruit filter again. This way, guilds arent able to turnover their whole roster every time a noob or subguild member asks for a tag.

08-08-2015	77
Comyt Emperor Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: New York Posts: 1,000	force queue in guildspar after every match so guilds can't boost their points by avoiding matches against good guilds.

08-09-2015	86
Imprint Registered User Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 1,992	Requiring new recruits to wait 24h is a simple way to almost completely eliminate recruiting and kicking. It's long enough that you can't recruit large numbers of members for specific timezones. But it's not too long so that loyal guild members are kept from enjoying taking towers with their friends.

08-09-2015	87
Thallen Enguard & Alumni Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 5,773	I don't think the player should be penalized at all because the player is punished by proxy just through guilds not wanting to recruit them and risk penalization I think the guild itself should be penalized, falling in line with the points system that was discussed in another thread Players should be freely allowed to join any guild, but guild leaders should be considerate of who they are recruiting and that in itself should eliminate the "noob recruiting" strategy (which is anti-competitive, boring, non-interactive, just stupid altogether) And I know everyone's concern is then, "OMG, BUT HOW DO WE HOLD TOWER WITHOUT NOOB RECRUIT?" Consider the fact that every guild will be held to the same standard, it applies equally across every guild

08-09-2015	88
Craftz New Age Legacy Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Graal Posts: 1,633	I find it interesting that Thallen creates so many hat guilds without saying a thing, then when he is done towering he wants to ruin it for everyone else and change the system

08-09-2015	89
SouthernZombie* 0.0 Join Date: May 2015 Location: Destiny Posts: 1,235	Everytime you mention Thallens name I get excited, it's kinda like when one of my favorite shows comes on but a tiny bit better! Keep at it pls!