Idea- Player -Run Guild.. sorta

[apex]

I think it would be great to at-least throw a pilot guild out there for this idea...

(Idea as follows:)
Wouldn't it be great if players were more invovled in their own guilding process?? Before I sorta had an iffy- idea of a player-run clan system that sorta got shot down...

But what about this: A guild, just like the rest of the other guilds, except it's requirements, guild items, the "look" of the guild, and other things were set by the guild leadership? (Also allowing for a "mentor" system to be put in place). Guild events could be spontaneous, and titles could be user-specific without much wiz-labor....

Basically, it's an idea for a real guild, with real qualities and real skills, just as any other, but with more player involvement in the guild- so they players are on both sides of the learning and advancement process, allowing the players their own little place in the game...

I know this isn't the most comprehensive (and comprehendable) post, but i'm short on time and its quite late.. please post feedback and more ideas, etc... I think this would be a really cool element to add to the game.

[dyzmal]

The chances of player-run guilds/clans/families being implemented are equal to the chances of undead races being implemented. There are many posts where people have commented on things like this and I think everyone's feelings towards it are almost unanimous, but it's not going to happen regardless, and the wizards have made that blatantly clear.

---------------------------------------------------
http://www.icesus.org/Forums/viewtopic.php?t=82
---------------------------------------------------
This is a post I made about a similar idea in APRIL.

Also Belannaer basically said on Icesus that it's never going to happen.

[apex]

Dyzmal, just so you know-
A friend and I started talking about clans way back when i began playing the game (getting to be over a year now i think). And the feedback we always got from the wizzies was: "I like the sound of that, but I don't see how it fits, and it would be a bitch to code". So its just a matter of finding a good way to make it fit etc. etc....

And if Maruxus would come back, we might have someone to do a pilot for the coding too...
-Where did he go anyway?

But it's bound to happen as it does in many muds as they get older. The player involvement in the game itself is going to increase- the more figures and bodies (systems) in the game that have a player behind them, the better the game can simulate actual interactions, etc.

never say never:) theres always a hope:)

[dyzmal]

Dyzmal has high hopes.

[apex]

Player-"RUN" guilds isn't exactly as i meant it... I just meant that maybe for the next guild that came out, -rather than having a player dictate everything that happened in the guilds, the players just have power to initiate guild events, mentor people, set advancement requirements and such. The skills/spells learning system would all be the same. Also having guild items and guild mounts available to purchase... that sorta thing.

[suron]

This was tried once upon a time in Icesus when the nasty people killed Weloq. The unfortunate leader of the Ranger Initiated of the Elements was elected to be the next Ranger guild leader for the duration of weloqs resurrection...which took about a month (real time), While that time rangers could only join the guild and train there if that specific player was online and at ranger guild room. This feature was neat for all non-rangers in the game but annoyed the rangers beyond belief.

[dyzmal]

I think it's a bad idea to make a guild player-ran, but I think it's a good idea to make player-ran guilds. If that makes any sense.

I don't think that player-ran guilds should be MAIN guilds though nor do I think they should involve skills or anything to that effect. Maybe just have taxes and shared-reputation and crap like that that's beneficial but not potentially annoying or abusable. IE: Join the guild and then never let anyone train.

[dracolipse]

While that time rangers could only join the guild and train there if that specific player was online and at ranger guild room. This feature was neat for all non-rangers in the game but annoyed the rangers beyond belief.

I agree... I was a newbie Ranger at that point in time and Morgatai was the leader. Basically the only time you could train was when he came on and said "I'll be on for the next 30 minutes, train while you can". It was a frustrating nightmare.

[artic]

Hmm... i dont like this.
You cant run event just when you please- if its a good event that gives good exp, you would run it over and over again, getting a supreme exp rate. or money or mastery whatever. seems unfair.
What if guild leader is a ****** and thinks its funny if everyone in the guild has the title "<name> the big F****T!" or if he desides he dont need to be powerful cause hes always idling and would downgrade the guild item?
Change advancement requirements? So if my pal wants to advance all requirements become very low and if some-one else wants to advance the requirements become very high (so no-one could get high enough level to beat the leader from hes position).

[apex]

Hmm... i dont like this.
You cant run event just when you please- if its a good event that gives good exp, you would run it over and over again, getting a supreme exp rate. or money or mastery whatever. seems unfair.
What if guild leader is a ****** and thinks its funny if everyone in the guild has the title "<name> the big F****T!" or if he desides he dont need to be powerful cause hes always idling and would downgrade the guild item?
Change advancement requirements? So if my pal wants to advance all requirements become very low and if some-one else wants to advance the requirements become very high (so no-one could get high enough level to beat the leader from hes position).

Limits can be put in place: like frequency limits on certain events.. and by events i was more thinking about guild raids, etc. as far a the leaders go, I was also thinking about a more democratic leadership-system, with a voting box in the guild hall... basically anti-prick measures. requirements could only be changed once every x days, etc. and i ddin't mean skill/state requirements: i wanted to leave the WHOLE training system alone and have leave it just as it is, i like it. I meant more of a "must be level X to get into this area" "must complete this easy quest to get to this level" and whatnot. It would be the player's buisiness to install someone responsible to the position..


My biggest motivation for posting this idea is one that i knew would sorta get flamed right away, why i didn't mention it earlier.. : Guild wars:\

[artic]

Im all for guild wars... and clan wars, yet i see no need for icesus to do anything about making either of the two possible. If you want to fight (icesus) guild versus another, get together some people who are interested in it into your guild and challenge the other guild. If challenged correctly im sure most guilds would be interested in some battles. Use tells and mails to negotiate with the other guilds leader/members.
If you want clan wars create an off-site clan, recruite members and then create yourself some enemies.

I even think if you do your part well, some wizard might even help you with some clan-titles/items/channel.

If i was a more active player (read: if i was not banned) Id create a clan myself. Not much work to it: just create a home-base with maybe a message board and a news post- to post planned events/raids. Recruiting members is a bit more difficult tho...

[felgand]

Player-run guilds are not a bad idea in of itself and have the potential to add another layer of interest to Icesus. However, there are many significant roadblocks that need to be addressed. First of all, a player-run guild is only as good as the leadership. If you have a very good leader who's on regularly, is fair and works actively to improve the guild...then it's an improvement on the general atmosphere of the guild. However, if the leader is inactive or idles most of the time, doesn't care for the guild itself, or is only holding the position for whatever fringe benefits there are...then the guild is much worse off than where it would be without player leadership.

In addition, player leadership of guilds has other problems when running guild events. First of all, for events like roll call in militia...leaders would preferentially run events (through no fault of their own) when their friends were online and so only folks that play during those hours would get any benefit from them. This already occurs a lot for global events...they are tailored for times when it's the afternoon or evening in Finland so players from other countries really don't get much access to them during their prime playing hours.

Guild wars are a fine idea in theory, but horrible in practice as seen when templars tried to start an event with shadowdancers by raiding the guild. Instead of acting in a suitable roleplay manner, many folks decided to take it to the forums and complain about it instead of participating and having fun. Those types of reactions to a player-initiated event tends to lower the chances of things occuring again.

So in conclusion, having a player-run guild leadership is a great idea if you can surpass problems such as this or at least mitigate the problems to a point where you would derive more benefit from it instead of headaches. Kudos on keeping the ideas rolling.

[apex]

in reference to the templar/sdancer war thing:
let em complain on the forums:)
It was fun while it lasted and those who didn't want to be involved (and weren't whiners) just sat out. it was a select few that came out and moaned about it, and since it's nothing official anyway, don't let them ruin your fun:)

[artic]

Guild wars are a fine idea in theory, but horrible in practice as seen when templars tried to start an event with shadowdancers by raiding the guild. Instead of acting in a suitable roleplay manner, many folks decided to take it to the forums and complain about it instead of participating and having fun. Those types of reactions to a player-initiated event tends to lower the chances of things occuring again.

The mentioned event does not at all qualify as a 'guild war'! The shadowdancers (at least 4 of em, including me) got even 'issue'd for this event. The point of the whines after the event was not about those events being bad, but more about the "bad" rules that covern aspects of such an event.
I think if both guild leaders had planned such a conflict more, the whines would have been quite bit smaller. If guild leaders would have known about such agression before they could have given each other a list of players in guild that would participate (that would have avoided the issue) and maybe even agree on some timelines (would have ruined the surprise quite a lot, but more people could have participated- I for one missed one of the 'Main' raids and feel really sorry about that).
So if you want a good conflicts, plan em a bit more, do a bit more work and don't expect the wizards do it all for you, cause they wont. as long as you dont agree on clear rules there will always be whining. Rules to be cleared before starting a conflict should be:
Area of effect- who is in the event? how far are we allowed to go? safe areas?
Timeline- So no-one misses something big- dont have to be very exact, more like 'In the beginning of this week' to not ruin the surprise.
revenge?- 'best served cold' yet also quite good in the heat of rage. the timelines of retalliation?
goals- at what point does the conflict end? at what condition does either side win? 'If you get the dagger off Ceawin, we will accept defeat' <example only!>

maybe something more... but these things can be agreed on guild channels and private tells. 'Leader_name <guildchannel> Will we accept a challenge from the Shadowdancers. 12 of em are willing to fight us under these conditions:...'
0-... ah... 99% whine carantied!

P.S- I am no leader of any guild or faction, so all examples here are only illustratory and serve no real meaning other that to illustrate my point. At no point should my words be considered as part of any inter-guild/conflict agreement.