Guild improvements

[shorty13]

It would be great if guilds could also have other sects or clans within them.  The leader would create the guild, name it, then be able to create a bunch of sects.  He would be the leader of the guild and all of the sects until he named another player as head of the sects.  Players would have to join one sect.  An example could be The \"Fire\'s Flame\" Guild.  Then it could have sects called \"House of Wizards\", \"House of warriors\", \"House of the Enkidukai\", \"House of the Dermorians\", etc.

The leader of each sect or the guild leader would promote the members of that sect to advance in that Sect\'s rank.

Of course, when the guild is created, the leader will have to name the levels of each rank in each sect.

Also, in the member list in-game, It would show each member\'s sect and rank number, and rank name.

If you are a little confused or want an example, go to http://thedragoncouncil.free.fr/

They have a really good example, although a bit extravagant.  I think something like this is a great idea.

[Xordan]

imo, the guild system definatly needs improving ingame. Atm it\'s very static and boring. I\'ll take this idea into consideration in the future. I definately think that some ability to have larger that 9 ranks, and the ability for some ranks to be equal to others but with different names are needed. I like dynamic systems.

[druke]

this surely is backed by AO       :]

[Efflixi Aduro]

Just to add to what Xordan said, a guild should chose the number of ranks it wants to have. It should also be able to have more than one name per rank. So a Holy Mage and a Holy knight could be different ranks but both could still be rank 4\'s.

[Kiramon]

would also be nice if a guild could have more than one leader, to make an example the mercenaries are led by 5 champions - but ingame only one can be the leader...

[zabeal]

Originally posted by Kiramon
would also be nice if a guild could have more than one leader, to make an example the mercenaries are led by 5 champions - but ingame only one can be the leader...

I belive the reasoning for this is to prevent the splintering of guilds- and also the devs would like one person to be able to point at as the leader. They were looking for suggestions of how to have a second in command, so that if the leader leaves of in unavailble, soneone else can take the blame. One way to do this is to use the option listed above of having people of the same rank, namely the highest, but only one would be listed as leader. Sound fair?

[Cyl]

Originally posted by Efflixi Aduro
Just to add to what Xordan said, a guild should chose the number of ranks it wants to have. It should also be able to have more than one name per rank. So a Holy Mage and a Holy knight could be different ranks but both could still be rank 4\'s.

Well, the guild leader can give two different ranks the same rights, so it would be nearly th same.
My suggestion on how system could work
[Leader01] - [Leader02] ...
____\\___________ /
[First Rank01][First Rank02]...
____/____\\____/_____\\
[people__[People of__[People of first rank 02]
of first___both first
rank 01]_and 2.
________first ranks]

and so on

[Forum doesnt like asci orniganigramms!]

[Icefalcon]

Originally posted by druke
this surely is backed by AO       :]

... and TMG as well.

[Rioth]

Yeah an advanced guild system would be really great. Well I\'m for this anyway because my guild has a clan system, but I\'m sure many other guilds would like to have more options.

By the way...

Originally posted by shorty13
They have a really good example, although a bit extravagant.

Not that extravagent in my opinion

[Robinmagus]

I for one like it. I could imagine myself in a big shiny chair controling thousands of sects all around planeshift. *dreams of PS domination*

[druke]

Originally posted by Efflixi Aduro
Just to add to what Xordan said, a guild should chose the number of ranks it wants to have. It should also be able to have more than one name per rank. So a Holy Mage and a Holy knight could be different ranks but both could still be rank 4\'s.

just create two ranks with the same rights, thats what AO did

and for multiple leaders(councilors in our case)
we have the top two places called \"Councilor\", the game has nothing wrong with two ranks named the same, so we really dont have that much of a problem, however it is kinda inconvienant when it comes down to the elites of a class and such

[Rilar]

I for instance also dont like it to be bounded to one guild. With this limit, the purpose of secret guilds isnt that obvious. Without this limit and without the notice to which guild you belong at the /who-command, it would be more fun to sneak around...
To prevent too much abuse, there could be a spell (for really experienced mages) to discover in which guilds one is a member.

The result would be less spam-invitations, a more realistic ingame and more purpose for secret guilds.

[Rilar]

I for instance also dont like it to be bounded to one guild. With this limit, the purpose of secret guilds isnt that obvious. Without this limit and without the notice to which guild you belong at the /who-command, it would be more fun to sneak around...
To prevent too much abuse, there could be a spell (for really experienced mages) to discover to which guilds one do belong.

The result would be:
Fewer spam-invitations, a more realistic ingame and more purpose for secret guilds.

Bye,
Amogorkon

PS: the upper posting was a mistyping, sorry.