Karthos wrote: » A guild is going to make alliances that most benefit their guild. If not, then why even alliance? How would this discourage people? Would it not also encourage people to rise up and take them out? Having played a few games now with similar guild v guild or zone v zone types of battles, these huge alliances do exist, but the beauty is, they don't exist in a vacuum, the server is always in flux, there are always power plays, new guilds, new alliances, new circumstances and sometimes just random chaos. I played Archeage, and there were 2 huge guilds, that teamed up to take two castles when they opened up. They then bought each other's first siege token to avoid getting sieged. The server was pretty pissed. So guess what happened? Random people started donating to a third larger guild to help them buy the siege token the next time they were available, and they got it. By then, the two large guilds had merged and so essentially one guild owned both castles. And they lost one. Because the server said "no today you fucks". It was glorious. And watching this unfold (and being partially involved) was something amazing I'll never forget. This is why I don't see large guild alliances being a problem. They are content.
Yuyukoyay wrote: » This has the potential to stop the game from growing ever again if it happens. I don't think it's going to cause people to want to form what is essentially a pug to try to put an end to it when there is essentially no limit to how big a guild can get within the game. Sure there is a guild limit, but people make more guilds until they have as many as required or needed. The problem with it getting to this point is new players will consider the game impossible to get into if it gets to a state like this. There isn't anything in the game right now to actually stop it from happening either. That's the problem. The reason guilds have ruled the MMO genre for so long is because there is never any downside to forming them to be as big as possible aside from sucking the entire server into it and have no opposition. Which actually happens in retail WoW to this day. For the servers that aren't completely dead. The devs needs to look into preventing Guild Alliances above what they want to allow into the game. No matter how unlikely or annoying it may seem to do. People will probably do it anyway if it gives them a completely unopposing advantage. Honestly I would sacrifice the guild systems in the game and promote the node systems instead whenever possible. The alliances that would form from them are more natural to the state of the world. There isn't really a downside to limiting guilds however if the goal is to make the game not rely on them, but that isn't really what is happening yet. Right now everything in the game to make guilds as annoying as possible is in the game. So good luck on brainstorming every possible way that guilds can potentially ruin the game. There is a crap ton of them. xD Right from day 1 they will already be at an overwhelming advantage. Not even accounting for how badly streamers are going to break things. I wouldn't be surprised if this is how the overall world defaults to at first They probably also want to look into nodes and guilds not devolving into being the same thing. That is another possibility.
Eathan wrote: » So you are saying there are things to make it to where guilds can be annoying? Maybe due to demands of good etc, but there isn't any disadvantages to how big the guild itself can be? I think thats what I am taking away from your comment, I may be wrong, but if that's the case then what causes the guild itself to be a disadvantage? Only thing I can potentially think of is because there will be "More to feed", but with this games market being completely player driven and only being able to spec into one profession I think it'll completely make that ideology false.
Jahlon wrote: » Guilds do not control Nodes. Guilds do not control Node Sieges. Anyone can drop a siege flag on a Node at any time, and then everyone who wants to can join.
Yuyukoyay wrote: » That's just his theory more or less. Until I hear about a counter to slave guilds that's not how it's going to work though.
Recluse74 wrote: » I thought there was a mechanic involved where a node has a deteriorating XP bar, and if the citizens of that node do not keep the XP flowing in, than the Node can and will lose levels. I looked on the wiki and did not see it anywhere, but I know I heard or read it somewhere.
Frank Castle wrote: » hmm. im sure in other games there were situations where guilds ruled everything and no one could've done anything about it. There are limitations though to how many can join a siege. how big a guild can get and since guilds have talents then that 1 guild will sacrifice benefits for being huge rather than the slow ones. Now that being said can there be hidden alliances between big and small guilds? sure. but since that is the case you could seriously "divide and conquer". They cant defend all nodes at once. The server could ally with each other, declare a siege on each mega node with a very small guild and then team up against 1 trying to confuse them which city will be attacked. that makes them lose progress, another node can prosper and someone else can take over the leadership and control. As much as the big guilds will find ways to dominate, the small guilds will find a way to overcome them. That's the beauty of player-driven, dynamic worlds.
Eathan wrote: » This goes back to one of the beginning statements someone made. The fact is it's not a perfect world and most people who care enough are likely already in one of the more prosperous guilds, finding enough people to overcome an alliance of mega guilds is likely just not in the cards.
