Limiting Multiguilding
 

We've (the general public) talked about it a great deal, and the majority of players would like to see the restriction of multiguilding (the number of guilds a person can join at a time). Creating / operating a guild used to mean something, but as it is, its a part of signing up for Graal. Since this happened, guilds have lost there meaning. I propose that multiguilding should be limited to a few guilds (when I say a few, I would be thinking around three at most). Granted, you'll tell me that if a guild doesn't want multiguilding, they'll make it a rule of joining, but I think this restriction should apply to all guilds. We might see the return of guild rivals, and guild wars, which I am sure would attract more players.

Feedback, but I'd like to see the Guild Admin's response.

I disagree, I believe the best solution is cutting the amount of guilds significantly.
It could be easily done, by setting a requirement of 10 active guild members in one month.

Currently, 310 guilds are inactive (with 0 activity percents) and at least 200 have 1-9 active members.
Those guilds should be erased, reducing the number of active guilds to 120 (out of 630).

I don't see why you would want to limit the ammount of guilds a person can be in. I personally think that if a guild leader wishes to not have multiguilders then they should instate a rule for their members.

As for the ammount of inactive guilds, I agree. Something will need to be done about all the guilds where no one has worn a tag for a year >.> I'll take time to talk with Stefan about these guilds and probably start erasing extremely inactive ones.

Hm..

stuff like this is the responsibility of the guildleader. Just because most guildleaders can't enforce it doesn't mean a rule should be created to make them suck less.

Ultimately such a rule would kill their guilds anyway, as all of the flavor of the month guilds would never get off the ground..

I am in several guilds. No.

People should be allowed to be in how ever many guilds they want. It is the guild leaders responsibility to monitor multiguilding if he has issues with it.

There is no reason to enforce multiguilding. Personally, I am only in a couple of guilds, but if people want to join any guild that tickles their fancy, that seems fine with me. In my experience, the days of guild rivalry took the firmest grip when there were not a lot of servers, and there were very few guilds on one particular server. With the way things are now, even if global guilds are cut back to try and produce fewer guilds with more activity, it will not stop individual server guilds from springing back up in number. The days of guild rivalry were fun, but, they've been outdated by global guilds.

Make it easier for leaders to find out if there are multi-guilders in their guild.

Also, there should be incentives for guilds if they do well. Maybe the guilds with the top 10 activity could have free webspace?

You can't bring back the old guilding atmosphere unless multiguilding is prohibited. That way, a player will join the guild that they think offers the most potential to them. A better shopping market. Guilds should also be separated into family guilds and nation guilds. Family guilds would have a cap of maybe 8-12 members, nation guilds would have a cap of 45-60. A player can only join one family guild and one nation guild, but perhaps they can wear their family guild and their nation guild tags at the same time. Lower restrictions for family guilds and heighten restrictions for nation guilds.

If people want to join any guild that enters their fancy, it destroys the atmosphere of guilding on Graal. Recently I readded the MoD Fort to Classic, and when I massed asking for ideas of how I should script who owns the fort, I received a severe lack of interest. Because almost everyone is multi-guilding, there is no sense of rivalry/alliance between guilds. Unless the modern global guild system can make some changes, the only way to regain the environment of the old guild system would be to make guilds local to server, but in doing that, it would discourage players coming to a server with only local guilds, or discourage competition between servers when people wouldn't want to leave their guild on the initial server.

Any other system is flawed because not many people would care about "free webspace" or things you can do globally, only advantages within the game, and with a global guild system, and with so many guilds, that would be impossible to accomplish. However, where the server that the guild plays on is listed, you could possibly give servers the option of giving the highest active guilds special NPCs. Other than that, no, I wouldn't care. Nobody cares and that's the problem.

With apathy all about, you can't stop it, but you can enforce against it.

You can't say prohibiting multi-guilding would be negative on the guild system, but without it, it would probably leave the most serious guilds that have higher standards of recruiting, so newbies would always be looking to start their own guild and join a guild. A new guild would have lower admission requirements as is expected, and etc.

It would be also neat if you could have guild mergers too, like... MyNick (Guild Name) (Guild Alliance Name), for allied guilds or families that align themselves with an alliance.

The top 10 guilds having free webspace idea wouldn't work because they change so frequently.

I, myself, like the idea of restriction of guilds but I'm all about being in one guild. BTK uses the "no multiguild" rule. If I see a member in another guild, I remove them. :P

who is btk?

Well?

He hasn't done anything about the copyrighted guilds I sent him a month ago either.

Well then I bring up my old point. If they don't remove old copyright infringing guilds, then they should start accepting them. I want my guild Microsoft, thank you.

Seriously, who cares about guilds with trademarked names? They shouldn't be illegal.

Seriously if graalonline gets a letter telling them to cease and desist with using a certain name...then they should do it....otherwise it shouldnt hurt anyone unless we had Zelda guilds and RPG guilds which should still be illegal.

Filtering new guilds better would also be helpful, there are too many.
http://graalonline.com/guilds/viewgu...ll=0&view=info

As for multiguilders.

Give them the option of showing anything after thier name with ( ) and they will be happy. All they care about is having lot's of tags.

As for true guilders.

They only care about one. Guilds aren't a status symbal. Thier a community.

And right now with multiguilding thier broken communities with members who are worthless trying to serve so many guilds.

Most game's only allow one guild. Actually most games put a high high value on guild creation.

Good job.

I believe no multiguilding it's a rule a leader shall enforce if he/she feels the need to, it shouldn't be obligated by the system. Regaurding the inactive guilds, there is a big number of useless guilds.

- Kaasharu

6 months, no progress..

We can't even make a system that takes data from the guild db, that's all I'd want.

EDIT: http://forums.graalonline.com/forums...ad.php?t=66341
Something like this would be the best way to go. That way scripters could create their own downfalls to multiguilding, but rather than placing the problem on the player that's multiguilding, place it on the guild that has a multiguilder.

It would also be nice if there were a guild type variable in the guild db (family/common)

blah
 

New Guild Administrator Please.

Thank You.


The End.

Seriously, do SOMETHING.

I don't really partake in much multiguilding myself as a leader. However, I am a member and old contributor to some allies. For example- Vigilant Knights where I am a senior knight.

I use both tags, LOA majority of the time.

Another example: some members of LOA are also members of US, done intentionally to strengthen the alliance. Depending on who's in need at the time the tags will switch.

It's the same army pretty much under different leadership structures. I guess you could say it's similar to an officer exchange program.

But yes you're right. People who are in 15 guilds are ridiculous. My account is probably in 5 or so- but I don't use them. Just haven't bothered to remove myself from them.

let's become super best friends to really strengthen the alliance.

Yeah, this is still a problem.

yeah
 

:cool: this caught my eye and I'm running with it we should make it like setnick nick setguild guild , guild , guild ...... which will appear as

nick(guild (guild (guild)

:[

hmm from a player that multi-guilds more than most people id have to say id actually like a limit on muti-guilding. Being in a guild used to mean something, but now theres NO guild wars anywhere. Multi-guilding reduces the tention between guilds and players just stop caring.

Inactive guilds need to be deleted, and i even think its wrong that im in 30+ guilds XD

Nearly 9 months..

Yea, I dont bother with guilds for this exact reason x_x

Does anyone actually care for the guilds anymore? Seriously?

Why hasn't anything been updated or changed within the 9 months?

So? It seems as if it's only you that cares about being in many guilds at once, perhaps instead of bluntly refusing to accept the idea so quickly, give some ideas on how this could affect graal in a negative way, and ask yourself, "what would people just downloading graal for their first time think about being limited to one or two guilds? Would they worry about it for very long? Would it be just part of the game?"

You were able to accept many things with graal when you first started right? How certain systems worked, how you did the quests, it all seems great at the time but it wasn't perfect, that's why graal is moving forward, constantly making things much better than before, so why is fixing how the guild system works going to hurt you in the long run?


Certain people don't seem to want a change even if it has the possibility to help graal have more customers, i always find that strange, the better the idea given then the more some people try to shoot that good idea down.

Exactly.

Removing multiguilding would upset too many old players.

What I don't understand is why new useless guilds such as i R Turtle, Awsome-O-Saurus, and Soda are still approved.

I think multiguilding should be kept. It is up to the players and their sole decision whether to stay with 1 guild or join multiple guilds.

Multi-guilding isn't so much a problem. The problem is that there's not much incentive to be in a guild. If a lot of people want to be in a guild, then the guild leader will have the ability to shape the guild as they please. However, guilds aren't incorporated into the system as players are. You can set a player's flags, but you can't set a guild's flags. You can view a player's variables, but the only thing that's accessible is guild name. When you use requesttext, you can get a rank # and guildnick, not much else.

On Classic I built a system that can save flags for guilds. The current problem with this system is that it's difficult to remove guild info for inactive guilds. However, guild life seems to be improved on Classic in a sense that it hasn't been very active since WillieJamal and Gorthaur left.

390 inactive guilds out of 680, perfect.