Guild Management & Leadership

I haven't followed any news regarding ideas on how guilds will be managed in the game. But I have an idea that I am wondering about: Will there be different ways to manage and lead guilds? Normally there is one leader with officer roles, but how about something like a council where each council member have equal "ownership" so to speak?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Ludullu

What exactly would that entail, mechanics-wise? Cause I don't quite see how that's any different from the usual setup.

_deathcap

It wouldn't have to be much different. Just more of a gesture if people want to share that status.

Ludullu

_deathcap wrote: »

It wouldn't have to be much different. Just more of a gesture if people want to share that status.

But if there's no mechanic tie-in, there's no difference between the current system and your suggestion. If someone comes up to me and asks "who's your GL, I wanna talk to him about making an alliance", under your suggestions I'd say "well, we have 5 GLs, but if you want to talk to the main guy then it's ___", because only the "main guy" has the rights to ally the guild with another guild.

And if you want to share those rights between several people, I'd rather prefer just more functionality where the GL can give out those rights. But this is also smth that I'm already expecting from the guild control options.

_deathcap

NiKr wrote: »

_deathcap wrote: »

It wouldn't have to be much different. Just more of a gesture if people want to share that status.

But if there's no mechanic tie-in, there's no difference between the current system and your suggestion. If someone comes up to me and asks "who's your GL, I wanna talk to him about making an alliance", under your suggestions I'd say "well, we have 5 GLs, but if you want to talk to the main guy then it's ___", because only the "main guy" has the rights to ally the guild with another guild.

And if you want to share those rights between several people, I'd rather prefer just more functionality where the GL can give out those rights. But this is also smth that I'm already expecting from the guild control options.

The point of having a council is that you vote on things together. If someone wants an alliance the council brings it up and votes on it. I think it would be a cool system for those that want such a system. If you don't then that's fine it wouldn't be forced.

Taleof2Cities

_deathcap wrote: »

The point of having a council is that you vote on things together. If someone wants an alliance the council brings it up and votes on it. I think it would be a cool system for those that want such a system. If you don't then that's fine it wouldn't be forced.

Is it a cool system? Definitely.

Does it need it's own in-game setup (separate from the standard guild settings)? Definitely not.

Ludullu

_deathcap wrote: »

The point of having a council is that you vote on things together. If someone wants an alliance the council brings it up and votes on it. I think it would be a cool system for those that want such a system. If you don't then that's fine it wouldn't be forced.

But that's already what some guilds do. It just doesn't have an in-game mechanic. And if implemented, how granular would you want this mechanic to be? Would it be for each and every guild decision or just the "big ones"? And how would you determine which are the "big ones" for different people? And if you go with "each decision", then how do you avoid situations where there's a high urgency for some decision but you're missing 2 co-leaders in-game, so you physically can't make the decision and you miss your chance for smth important.

I could maybe see this working out if Intrepid tie the guild management to their mobile app (also smth I kinda expect already), but there's also possibilities of varying timeframes. What if one of the co-leaders got some time to play during the night and an enemy guild decided to declare war at that time and the guild now has to respond in a timely matter (this might not be the case at all, cause we don't have details about these systems) .

Or maybe there's a strong party, that plays on the guild's off-hours, which wants to join the guild to support it during their gametime. But due to guild invites being a vote-based feature that requires all co-leaders to be present, the party can never really join.

In other words, I see several potential problems with this type of system from the mechanical standpoint. And outside of that you can already have vote-based guilds and some people already do.

CROW3

I don’t think you need an in-game feature to do this, just actual leadership, social, & communication skill (& maybe a piece of paper).

Mr_MaDrupalow

I think you don't need an extra ingame system for that, usually guilds do that in Discord or on their Websites.

Mag7spy

I would say and open, they allow you to create your own roles for a guild and as many as you want (within reason). With each of those roles the gm is able to give ranks different perms that rank has access to. So if you wanted 5 gms you could create a role that gives them all perms effectively.

jarjarblinks

They will have deligation / permission systems for the guild. Sharing the status of a "guild leader" seems to be a more ooc / flavor thing. And it would probably be a headache to mechanically vote for a small group of council members within an MMO. I like the idea of the guild leader being able to hand out flavor titles to folks in-game. It will help with the immersion and wouldn't require much on the development side.

Child Item