Graal Forums
Page 3 of 3 12 3
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Graal Forums (https://forums.graalonline.com/forums/index.php)
-   Classic Main Forum (https://forums.graalonline.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=175)
-   -   Local Guilds (https://forums.graalonline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=85731)

Pelikano 05-28-2009 05:01 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufus (Post 1494901)
People do, unless they have a hidden agenda or are friends with the leader. I've seen it especially on Zodiac, where the nations themselves mean nothing and it's all about the people in those nations. Would a leader of a guild leave their position for leadership of another guild? No, because the guild has meaning and they're not forced to do it to gain some kind of competitive edge. Would someone leave a nation on Zodiac to become the leader of a better nation? Yes, because it is easier and there's very limited options. Would you join a nation that was weak over a nation that was strong? Probably not, unless there was something in it for you. The very same applies to this guild idea and it deviates guilds into property, which is not what they are about.
I always joined the weakest Gang on Era, to be able to kill more in raids ;).

Also it's not just being friends with the Leader, you can also be friends with other members of the Gang/Guild.

Rufus 05-28-2009 05:08 PM
Why do you believe that this system would be successful? Because it would force people to pick one guild? It seems to be that, which really doesn't solve anything as if there was that many people who could make up a guild at the moment they should have just done it by now. People can't compete with US or don't bother trying, the guilds that could possibly do it are not entertained by the server in general, and therein lies the problem. Guilds should be given the tools and encouragement to drive their purpose, not limited, consolidated, and managed by the server itself.

Pelikano 05-28-2009 05:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufus (Post 1494912)
Why do you believe that this system would be successful? Because it would force people to pick one guild? It seems to be that, which really doesn't solve anything as if there was that many people who could make up a guild at the moment they should have just done it by now. People can't compete with US or don't bother trying, the guilds that could possibly do it are not entertained by the server in general, and therein lies the problem. Guilds should be given the tools and encouragement to drive their purpose, not limited, consolidated, and managed by the server itself.
We're not going to get new players to Classic, EVER.
Understand that! How many new players join Graal every month? 1-5? How many leave again? 6-10?
So we have to work with the current people on the Server, which are about 50 players, yes I think this system would be successful, becase we kinda force people to join a Guild.

BlackSolider 05-28-2009 05:26 PM
Whether guilds are local or global, classic currently has a lack of guild content, nor a way to draw guilds to classic, so it doesn't matter if this switch is made if things stay as they are.

Once the server improves, the playercount will improve, and thus guild activity will improve. Switching things over to local guilds limits people new to the server b/c it forces them to join a guild they have no allegiance to. Newbs won't have a problem b/c they don't have an allegiance, but hardcore guilders won't be eager to abandon their guild.

But if you really believe local guilds will solve the problem (once things improve,) feel free to make a list of Pro's that local guilds theoretically provide.

xnervNATx 05-28-2009 05:34 PM
dont expect me to join sht if yoour planning on releasing that

Rufus 05-28-2009 05:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pelikano (Post 1494918)
We're not going to get new players to Classic, EVER.
Understand that! How many new players join Graal every month? 1-5? How many leave again? 6-10?
So we have to work with the current people on the Server, which are about 50 players, yes I think this system would be successful, becase we kinda force people to join a Guild.
If we're not going to get new players then both local guilds and global guilds are pointless. If a push was all it took for players to create a guild on Classic, then it would have happened by now and it could still happen if someone stepped up. If people are happy to be guildless now I don't see where anything would change, therefore I don't see why they wouldn't remain guildless.

Mark Sir Link 05-28-2009 06:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufus (Post 1494881)
If this is done, that one guild that actually does things together won't be taking part either. We don't recruit at the moment and don't want to recruit either, but would I have to if there was a limit to 3 guilds on the entire server? We'd have two big competitors, and people would be forced to pick one of them through lack of actual choice. What if people don't like how the guilds are? The guild leaders? The guild members? How they're ran? It doesn't make way for choice and is excludes both players of the server and players off the server. The biggest fault is that it doesn't allow people to create their own factions based on rivalries, and it will ultimately make the people on the server want to flock to whatever is the strongest guild (not because of the guild itself, it's people, or its history) like they do on Zodiac with their nations, and Era with their gangs, rendering the guilds themselves individually useless.

Make your own guilds (or even join one!!) if you're that upset about the lack of activity in them.
If this is done I'd be pretty excited since it means you can't use your stolen guild on a server you care about.

Rufus 05-28-2009 06:06 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark Sir Link (Post 1494931)
If this is done I'd be pretty excited since it means you can't use your stolen guild on a server you care about.
Well at least you won't be able to see it happen, being banned on the server you care about. At least I'll still be able to play.

Remonq 05-28-2009 06:52 PM
notice how he didn't deny he stole the guild

Pelikano 05-28-2009 06:56 PM
I've decided to abandon this project, since the majority is against it.
However, if you keep going on like this guys, and not trying out new stuff, we'll never get anywhere :p

Please Close.

MysticX2X 05-28-2009 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufus (Post 1494881)
If this is done, that one guild that actually does things together won't be taking part either. We don't recruit at the moment and don't want to recruit either, but would I have to if there was a limit to 3 guilds on the entire server? We'd have two big competitors, and people would be forced to pick one of them through lack of actual choice. What if people don't like how the guilds are? The guild leaders? The guild members? How they're ran? It doesn't make way for choice and is excludes both players of the server and players off the server. The biggest fault is that it doesn't allow people to create their own factions based on rivalries, and it will ultimately make the people on the server want to flock to whatever is the strongest guild (not because of the guild itself, it's people, or its history) like they do on Zodiac with their nations, and Era with their gangs, rendering the guilds themselves individually useless.

Make your own guilds (or even join one!!) if you're that upset about the lack of activity in them.
Well I wasn't thinking in the range of 3 guilds. That's too sparse and would seem forced. I would suggest 6-8 guilds since I doubt there can be 8 guild leaders all people don't like. It can be Classic ran and controlled to some degree and guild events can be focused around it

There are about 900 guilds registered. 800 of those guilds, most have a zero activity percentile. Globals aren't doing much to fix the issue with global guilds so this is a different resort.

Doubtfully this idea will ever happen, but it is a thought.

Rufus 05-28-2009 06:58 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pelikano (Post 1494936)
I've decided to abandon this project, since the majority is against it.
However, if you keep going on like this guys, and not trying out new stuff, we'll never get anywhere :p

Please Close.
I think you were on the right track with a lot of your ideas, just local guilds and limiting guilds didn't sound right to me. I hope you keep up with wanting to make guilds better on Classic, it's about time someone tried to.

xnervNATx 05-28-2009 08:45 PM
thx for listening to my idea sam!

Nataxo 05-28-2009 11:07 PM
Guilds need more purposes.. (on classic at least)

DarkCloud_PK 05-29-2009 04:25 AM
At this point in time, I don't think the small playerbase we have at the moment would be able to sustain any long term fun guild activies. This is a similar reason why I have put of fixing cards. Cards was started 3 years ago when the playercount was much higher. This isn't true anymore and a playercount of 20 doesnt have enough players playing cards casually to sustain the card economy. I am afraid if I rerelease cards now it would crumble again.

xnervNATx 05-29-2009 04:51 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DarkCloud_PK (Post 1495110)
At this point in time, I don't think the small playerbase we have at the moment would be able to sustain any long term fun guild activies. This is a similar reason why I have put of fixing cards. Cards was started 3 years ago when the playercount was much higher. This isn't true anymore and a playercount of 20 doesnt have enough players playing cards casually to sustain the card economy. I am afraid if I rerelease cards now it would crumble again.
getting good cards was way too long. that why some stopped to play it, because of the booster giving sht cards to them.

Nataxo 05-29-2009 04:57 AM
I didn't even had my chance to buy a booster :cry:

Everyone stopped playing :(

BlackSolider 05-29-2009 05:59 AM
If your luck was like mine (and the majority of players,) then you wouldn't want to get a booster.

However if your luck was like nights, squirts, and the minority of players, you'd want one.

Are ya feeling lucky, punk?

DarkCloud_PK 05-29-2009 07:08 AM
The booster system was part of the failure but the game would have not got off the ground anyway, since there were so few people making it to the top and there was no real way that wasnt hell to getting your first 10 wins. The game required more of a player pool than it had recieved.

Terazel Tenjin 06-01-2009 02:54 AM
Well, I guess this thread shows one of the problems Classic faces. Grouping monopoly because of what people are left. Kind of a shame since it seems OP didn't want to compromise to accept more flexible ideas that might have worked out beyond the concept of guilds.


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 01:23 AM.
Page 3 of 3 12 3
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright (C) 1998-2019 Toonslab All Rights Reserved.