Closing Guilds (moved from Keeper's Korner)

[Arcon]

So, what you guys are saying is that people shouldn't pay for their actions? I'm sorry but I don't agree. If you are an enemy and you want to join my guild(what ever it might be) I think you really need to prove that you are not a spy before I would even consider it. You think that Lindros should join the rangers? Rio PoT? Draugor, what if Poet joined RDA?

You hunt and kill people from one guild, you should count on not being able to join them on a moments notice just cause you feel like it. Should people be able to switch from evil to good, of course. But you should have to work on it.

[Padraig]

You hunt and kill people from one guild, you should count on not being able to join them on a moments notice just cause you feel like it. Should people be able to switch from evil to good, of course. But you should have to work on it.

I think the bigger issue is the fact that it takes a month+ to join a fighter guild, not just the evil-good swapping. If a newbie walked up to the Knights or Rangers or Calians today and wanted to join, shouldn't they be able to at least join their Squire/Pupil/Follower squad right away? Give them the time to prove themselves while in these ranks and if nothing major comes up, full Member in 2 weeks? I don't think that's too much to ask.

[Makfly]

I think the bigger issue is the fact that it takes a month+ to join a fighter guild, not just the evil-good swapping. If a newbie walked up to the Knights or Rangers or Calians today and wanted to join, shouldn't they be able to at least join their Squire/Pupil/Follower squad right away? Give them the time to prove themselves while in these ranks and if nothing major comes up, full Member in 2 weeks? I don't think that's too much to ask.

Not saying I disagree with your post, but I would like to know if you would like this system for your guild?
Anyone able to become an apprentice, then 2 weeks to full member if nothing major comes up?
As you say, it's not too much to ask.

[Padraig]

I think the bigger issue is the fact that it takes a month+ to join a fighter guild, not just the evil-good swapping. If a newbie walked up to the Knights or Rangers or Calians today and wanted to join, shouldn't they be able to at least join their Squire/Pupil/Follower squad right away? Give them the time to prove themselves while in these ranks and if nothing major comes up, full Member in 2 weeks? I don't think that's too much to ask.

Not saying I disagree with your post, but I would like to know if you would like this system for your guild?
Anyone able to become an apprentice, then 2 weeks to full member if nothing major comes up?
As you say, it's not too much to ask.

If you look at my signature you know my mortals - a Mage, a Warrior of Shadows, an RDA member and a guildless one. The first two require a _lot_ of work to join, but they are fairly active. RDA is purely melee -- two weeks to full member? Most times a day. And there is no training period. You have restrictions on looting the racks, but that is about it. What's so wrong with that?

[Laurel]

I think the bigger issue is the fact that it takes a month+ to join a fighter guild, not just the evil-good swapping. If a newbie walked up to the Knights or Rangers or Calians today and wanted to join, shouldn't they be able to at least join their Squire/Pupil/Follower squad right away? Give them the time to prove themselves while in these ranks and if nothing major comes up, full Member in 2 weeks? I don't think that's too much to ask.

why should that be different in fighter guilds, as opposed to magic guilds? are you some kind of "better", "more important", or what? MMs should be allowed months of apprenticehood, while the opposite side ... not? makes no sense in regards to RP/theme
moreover - reading Tolkien I'd say the MMs shoud allow everybody and their aunt to be their apprentices (the matter of what they could do/accomplish being a whole different topic), while Rangers were THE secretive and relatively closed (to outsiders) club in this duo (MMs-Rangers)

[Padraig]

why should that be different in fighter guilds, as opposed to magic guilds? are you some kind of "better", "more important", or what? MMs should be allowed months of apprenticehood, while the opposite side ... not? makes no sense in regards to RP/theme moreover - reading Tolkien I'd say the MMs shoud allow everybody and their aunt to be their apprentices (the matter of what they could do/accomplish being a whole different topic), while Rangers were THE secretive and relatively closed (to outsiders) club in this duo (MMs-Rangers)

Well, if you listen to the constant whining on these forums, the Mages are vastly unbalanced, overpowered and need to be babysat on a constant basis. The reason they have remained relatively untouched for so long (until this upcoming recode) is they are carefully screened for players who would abuse the powers they are granted. If the Vampires had been able to police themselves, they would likely exist in roughly the same form they were in for years.

No one is implying that the Rangers and other fighter guilds are less important, but typically, being a full member of a fighter type guild and a caster guild have different implications and "risk of guild-wide disaster" is less in a fighter guild. I have been wrong once before, though.

[Laurel]

typically generalizing can lead to wrong conclusions?

[Makfly]

If you look at my signature you know my mortals - a Mage, a Warrior of Shadows, an RDA member and a guildless one. The first two require a _lot_ of work to join, but they are fairly active. RDA is purely melee -- two weeks to full member? Most times a day. And there is no training period. You have restrictions on looting the racks, but that is about it. What's so wrong with that?

I have signatures turned off, so I wouldn't know. But I've been in all those guilds too, and the first two guilds only require alot of "work" if you don't have contacts, if you know people you get a fast track to Nazgul-hood.

Anyways Laurel already touched on the point of question. Why should it be any different in the Calian Warriors than the Union of Shadows than the Morgul Mages?
My opinion is, it shouldn't.
The game should have a system that is robust and fair enough to work for everyone, not just a selection of guilds that's still somehow looked upon as "lesser" guilds.

[Padraig]

I have signatures turned off, so I wouldn't know. But I've been in all those guilds too, and the first two guilds only require alot of "work" if you don't have contacts, if you know people you get a fast track to Nazgul-hood.

Anyways Laurel already touched on the point of question. Why should it be any different in the Calian Warriors than the Union of Shadows than the Morgul Mages?
My opinion is, it shouldn't.
The game should have a system that is robust and fair enough to work for everyone, not just a selection of guilds that's still somehow looked upon as "lesser" guilds.

My point was, until I was corrected by Laurel in his post (as my Ranger experience dates back almost 2 years), that the more inactive guilds should have easier-to-join systems. SU, MM are not inactive. I was unaware of the new-ish recruiting campaign the Rangers had put on. Inactive guilds are not lesser guilds, and the more active ones are not superior. The point I was trying to make was that the more active ones didn't necessarily need the "better/automated" joining system. I am all in favour of a working system for all guilds but I specifically mentioned Calians/Rangers/Knights as until very recently they had been the more inactive guilds.

[Cherek]

Anyway, about the topic of closing guilds as a solution.

To begin with, I think that question has to be settled pretty quick. Now everyone speculate about who will close, and who wants to join a guild now if it might close? Whatever is decided on this one, it cant take very long I think. Even if councils feel "Hey we better wake up so we dont get closed", I think it will be very hard to attract any members right now because who wants to invest time and join a new guild when it might as well be closed soon?

But there has been little talk on which guilds should close... surprisingly little. I am not so sure closing guilds is a good idea, but if some were to close... I would pick these:

Guilds to close

Gladiators: They are pretty dead already, they does not really have a purpose anymore with the merc's arrival. A classic guild though, and I'll miss them and hope they do return eventually. (like all guilds below)

SS: Perhaps the funniest guild there is, but severly lacking in power and not recoded, and not likely to be recoded anytime soon. And basically no members.

Red OR blue DA: I think this is perhaps one of the biggest "no-brainer" here. We only really need one Dragonarmy guild. There is no need to spread people fighting for the same cause in two guilds. Better to have them all in one very active guild.

Neidars: Let the Krynn battle be between knights and DA. Neidars is also a pretty "dead" guild with very few members, also it is restricted to dwarves only which makes it a choice for very few. (Which is most likely why it is pretty dead). Let the Shieldbearers represent the Neidars for now. "In hopes of the Neidar dwarves returning to their old glory days" or something like that.

Those are the three I would seriously consider closing. There are a few more that I would perhaps consider but that I dont feel certain about...

Maybe close

Pots: Perhaps the worst when it comes to inactivity? And perhaps the spellcasters should be either mages or Scops for now? On the other hand, pots provide another type of playstyle than the usual fighting guilds. In terms of "balance" they are the evil RP-choice in our biggest domain, Krynn. So I am not entirely sure they should be closed.

SU: Yes, they provide a perfect RP guild for the neutral player. On the other hand they are in a domain with no other guilds, no natural interaction with other guilds, and we have a number of neutral options that are more active. But they do fill the spot of a neutral RP choice. Something we wont have if they are removed.

Ogres: Fun. No need for council. Gives the casual player some crushing to do. Also a neutral grinding or RP guild. But again, also in a domain with no natural interaction with other guilds, and we have other neutral options around.

But hold on why close guilds like glads or ogres who dont rely on council and it doesnt matter if they have 1 or 200 members? Well simply to narrow the choices for potential new players so the population wont be too spread out.

All other guilds I think should absolutely NOT be closed. I think they are essential to the balance of the game. One would perhaps think it best to close the guilds with councils, like Calians, Knights etc, but I think that would be a huge mistake since it would seriously mess with the balance of good vs evil, and the balance in terms of different types of gameplay. Casual / grinder / RP etc.

They key for me as I see it is to close the guilds that does not serve a specific purpose, and those type of guilds that we actually have in abundance. (Like two almost identical DAs for instance).

And yes, this is complete speculation from my side, just thinking out loud which guilds I would close IF some should be closed.