New Guild System

[FinalLegacy]

We would like to open a discussion on the proposal of new Guild system that was based on players suggestions.

• Leader:

A system, where current Guild Leader can transfer it's rights to another member by simply selecting a player from Guild list, and assigning rights.

• Levelling:

Allow guilds to be able to Expand.
This will work by giving EXP % (ta from Guild member to the Guild itself, allowing it to level up and get more slots.
Each level will give one more slot.

• Bank:

A shared Bank that is allowed to be used by Guild members that earned this right from Guild Leader.
It will have Action Log allowing Guild Leader to check how it was used and who put or taken what items/gold there.

• Challenge:

Level 1-10 guilds can challenge each other two times a week in Arena or CA or Mirage like map gaining Guild EXP.
Level 10-20 guilds can participate in Mini Sacred War (Navy vs Pirate) gaining Guild EXP, Gold, and more.
Level 20+ guilds can participate in Sacred War (Navy vs Pirate) gaining Guild EXP, Gold, and more.

First of all, I brushed through some posts which gave me a general idea of the concerns, but not every post so I don't know if these ideas have been said/rejected yet. I'm not too familiar with guild system either so correct me if I'm wrong. Also, my format here would be topic - thoughts - suggestions.

LEADERS

For the leaders aspect, one thing we have to consider, in my opinion, is the possibility of guilds being sold. Here's a few thoughts:

1.)As I said, I'm not sure of the current system and if there is a limit to the number of guilds allowed in the server, slots could be hoarded and sold easily. Of course if there is unlimited slots there would be no merit unless you sell the name of the guild.
2.)If we go towards the idea of every guild will be equal, (high quality guilds only compete with high quality guilds, low vs low, no additional merits other than more member slots), this would not be a problem. However, if we choose to reward accomplished guilds, guild sale would be quite easy if we implement lead transferability.

Suggestion: This might seem complicated but I suggest guild leaders can select a certain number of people as next leader nominees in the event of a need for lead change. Nomination would require that the member be at least a member for X number of days(X>30) and member vote over a week. Perhaps if we could also give the leader rights to give an automatic welcome message to guild when members log in(i.e. when a member logs in the guild message would pop up in his/her chat window). In it the leader could announce the need to vote and maybe his suggested candidate if any(Would be useful for many other guild announcements, just a specific example if this suggestion is implemented.)

Leveling and Challenges

If you are suggesting that members mandatorily lose exp and in turn give it to guild, I would not enjoy that. Contribution should be optional but suggested. Expansion based on level is very amusing though. Using level to gauge challenges might not be the best though. Also, while the idea of navy vs pirate has always been appropriate, nobody ever joins the nave. Here's a few thoughts:

1.)Someone mentioned Fly For Fun and I actually played that game as well. In it, you donate quest items and money to level up the guild, and in turn the member that donated gets contribution points. This is something the guild leader can check to perhaps promote a player to have more rights and power(access to bank, accept/invite members etc) or it could become a competition for the members. Skipping to the private islands idea, perhaps leader can grant access to it based on contribution as well.
2.)High level players can join low level guilds to make it an unfair battle. High level guilds can also create a an alt guild to compete against
3.)We would have to make navy more appealing

Suggestion: For leveling, maybe introduce an untradable item that has a 1% drop rate on ALL monsters that members can donate if they happen by it. Perhaps only people in guilds can get the drops(similar to how quest items only drop when you have that quest). I suggest the item be something like Aztec Gold("Guildname"), as inspired by the first pirates of the Caribbean movie, and collecting a certain number would level the guild. This way, it wouldn't take away from the members, low level members can donate just as well as high level members, and one can't collect the coin as part of one guild and donate it to some other guild.
For challenges based on levels, point 2 above is my main concern.
First of all I think challenges should not be targeted but instead free for all and at the same time for all. This would prevent guilds to challenge their own alt guild. Perhaps a PK system such that each kill grants the guild points and the most points wins. Same time for all challenges is so that people on high level guilds have to focus on their own challenge and have no time to join low level guild on their alts(or choose their alts over their main but one over the other).
Second of all guild level is very misleading as a measure because we can join other guilds as we please after we level it up. A better measure is a ranking system based on a formula that takes into a account the average level in the guild, as well as perhaps the number of members and the guild's level. Not too sure on specifics on this one though, but the purpose is to bracket the guilds better in the case of free for all.

Islands

Fantastic Idea. I would love for a guild to have their own island for the week if they win their bracket(if my idea above about bracketing is implemented). Thoughts:

1.)Bosses with no competition
2.)Private leveling spots(but no extra exp and normal amount of monsters per spot)
3.)All in 1 grocer maybe. One that has Lv1-3 corals, city tix, armors, shields etc.

If it has the 3 above that would be pretty cool. Should help lower congestion in the regular islands as well so I wouldn't say its such an advantage over everyone else.

Share bank is straight forward in my opinion. Guild leader can set who has access and new guild leaders could change it as needed.


Anyway, I just thought I'd share some thoughts and ideas, hope they help. I know for a fact they are not refined in anyway but I'm really not sure what is possible and what is not, nor do I know what you'd call acceptable. Maybe it could give some idea though

 

[PanMilan]

TOP was fun because guilds would always change and players would always move around and flame wars, arguments.
Making guild systems(with rewards) might turn guilds into a long term thing and no one would want to leave the best guilds or create another just for pk.

 

[Leba]

no one would want to leave the best guilds or create another just for pk.

But that's already the case right now. If you're in the best guild, generally the only reason why you'd leave is if you get in a fight, get kicked or you have friends in another guild. There really is no point in splitting guilds as that may allow other guilds to progress and take the lead, and all of the guilds which have split here so far have either died out or gotten banned, nobody willingly disbanded a guild, at least not a top tier one.

guild systems(with rewards)

Being in the best guild is already rewarding, you get access to items you'd generally otherwise pay a lot for (Kals, CA Gear, UGs) or which aren't even on the market (BD Gems), which is especially evident if the difference between the Tier 1 and Tier 2 guild(s) is massive (Which is the case now).

I agree that "guild migrations" and the subsequent flame wars kept ToP alive for a long time, so I would normally agree with the fact that guild reward systems would make the game more stale, but as I said earlier, we already have that, except it's not direct. Maybe a more direct-reward approach would actually help the game, so from the perspective of how the server is doing in the guild aspect at the moment, maybe something like that is exactly what we need.

 

[tenko5]

TOP was fun because guilds would always change and players would always move around and flame wars, arguments.
Making guild systems(with rewards) might turn guilds into a long term thing and no one would want to leave the best guilds or create another just for pk.

he just want something for him self not for all player coz he in top guild already..hahahha

but ..the fact tht making guild system with reward.. the server nid to have more than just 2 guild fighting each other every single ca

 

[iBruno]

he just want something for him self not for all player coz he in top guild already..hahahha

but ..the fact tht making guild system with reward.. the server nid to have more than just 2 guild fighting each other every single ca

Well, I agree with you, but there currently isn't any restriction on guild creating, you just get a stone of oath and start recruiting friends or interesting people. It will be very hard at first but once you get the hang of it and level up, it will get easier. Leveling up and organizing your comrades in pk is what's mostly needed for emerging guilds, I say that as a guild leader. Except for a few "monster" players, the rest is defeatable if you gang up, even if you are lv60± on enigma chest equips and no unique or bd gems. But if those "monsters" are on, well, at least you tried. That Genocide guild faced such situation, except they gave up instead of trying harder, and I can understand that.

 

[Loneman]

Bringing up an off-topic question. What would be the effect of increasing UG drop rates on sources that the two major guilds don't control (nss, oss, some minibosses)?

 

[iBruno]

Bringing up an off-topic question. What would be the effect of increasing UG drop rates on sources that the two major guilds don't control (nss, oss, some minibosses)?

Price would decrease a bit, bot numbers would increase, NSS price would increase, good farming spots would be crowded, it would heat the economy and give more of a chance to random lucky players, but these players would most likely sell the gems instead of use it. Since a lot of the gold is concentrated in few hands at the moment, these very rich people would get even stronger which would lead to decreasing the chance of opposition rising because they would get rekt very bad (already happens, would get worse). Or it could just benefit people who currently don't have unique gems because they are rarely sold, and when they are sold the price is unnafordable. But we shouldn't go any more off topic than this.

 

[FinalLegacy]

Price would decrease a bit, bot numbers would increase, NSS price would increase, good farming spots would be crowded, it would heat the economy and give more of a chance to random lucky players, but these players would most likely sell the gems instead of use it. Since a lot of the gold is concentrated in few hands at the moment, these very rich people would get even stronger which would lead to decreasing the chance of opposition rising because they would get rekt very bad (already happens, would get worse). Or it could just benefit people who currently don't have unique gems because they are rarely sold, and when they are sold the price is unnafordable. But we shouldn't go any more off topic than this.

I think you make it sound like that would be a good thing for the lower levels, and perhaps it might help a bit, but I think overall it would increase higher leveled people's advantage. They would have enough resources to spam NSS/OSS and control mini-bosses and benefit them more than it would actual first timers who would probably jump at the chance to sell their NSS for 30k instead of collect them. It would lead to lower priced UGs, sure, make it affordable to mid level players, but that would still benefit higher level players more, allowing them to earn money and gem easier. Just my opinion on that though.

EDIT HERE: I just read that again and I guess you actually made quite the similar point as me, my misunderstanding.

Then again, off topic, so we better get off this.

 

[Developer]

Suggestion: This might seem complicated but I suggest guild leaders can select a certain number of people as next leader nominees in the event of a need for lead change. Nomination would require that the member be at least a member for X number of days(X>30) and member vote over a week.

Nice idea.
I try to formulate it.
Guild Leader can be changed once per 30 days by the majority of veteran guild players.

Perhaps if we could also give the leader rights to give an automatic welcome message to guild when members log in(i.e. when a member logs in the guild message would pop up in his/her chat window). In it the leader could announce the need to vote and maybe his suggested candidate if any(Would be useful for many other guild announcements, just a specific example if this suggestion is implemented.)

Wellcome message is nice too. Thank you for suggestion.

Suggestion: For leveling, maybe introduce an untradable item that has a 1% drop rate on ALL monsters that members can donate if they happen by it. Perhaps only people in guilds can get the drops(similar to how quest items only drop when you have that quest). I suggest the item be something like Aztec Gold("Guildname"), as inspired by the first pirates of the Caribbean movie, and collecting a certain number would level the guild. This way, it wouldn't take away from the members, low level members can donate just as well as high level members, and one can't collect the coin as part of one guild and donate it to some other guild.
For challenges based on levels, point 2 above is my main concern.

I've checked each and every post in this thread. And ended up in conclusion, that some "power" items can exist as part of initial guild levelling, as additional guild expansion item. But work like Quest, where guild member can pick an NPC quest, and gain untreatable item from BOSS hunt till the certain Guild Level.

First of all I think challenges should not be targeted but instead free for all and at the same time for all. This would prevent guilds to challenge their own alt guild. Perhaps a PK system such that each kill grants the guild points and the most points wins.
Same time for all challenges is so that people on high level guilds have to focus on their own challenge and have no time to join low level guild on their alts(or choose their alts over their main but one over the other).

That is more like sacred war, where Navy vs Pirates collide.
as for "Duel". I think that guilds should challenge each other, and agree on date/time slot.
May-be bet some gold, etc.

Second of all guild level is very misleading as a measure because we can join other guilds as we please after we level it up. A better measure is a ranking system based on a formula that takes into a account the average level in the guild, as well as perhaps the number of members and the guild's level. Not too sure on specifics on this one though, but the purpose is to bracket the guilds better in the case of free for all.

The avg is bad too. because there is guilds that mainly play for FC/DS.
As for me. I would enable friendly fire between guilds in FC/DS/DW so it's more players area then guilds.

 

[Gratiansin]

Whats guild exp btw?

 

[Developer]

Whats guild exp btw?

It's an EXP that Guild members contributed to Guild so it can level Up.
Just like You level up your player by doing quests, tasks, and grinding.

 

[LuisaRLZ]

We would like to open a discussion on the proposal of new Guild system that was based on players suggestions.

• Leader:

A system, where current Guild Leader can transfer it's rights to another member by simply selecting a player from Guild list, and assigning rights.

• Bank:

A shared Bank that is allowed to be used by Guild members that earned this right from Guild Leader.
It will have Action Log allowing Guild Leader to check how it was used and who put or taken what items/gold there.

these are my two favorites out of them all. having been a veteran guild leader in tales of pirates and tales of pirates II, these 2 are just perfect.

leader:

this kinda thing would be amazing for mazes and proper handling of guild members, however id recommend having a kicking/accepting guildmembers log.

when i was a leader in shadow isle, we always had trouble among the 3 guild leaders that we were, since whenever someone was randomly kicked from guild, people would rarely take responsibilty for it. same happened whenever a guild leader accepted a 'friend' of theirs, they would rarely admit to it. this way there would be a much better transparency and avoiding of a little bit of unnecesary guild-breaking drama

bank:

just perfect.

the biggest guild-breaking problem after all is the abuse of one or more of the guild leaders on drops sharing. 3 of the guilds i was a leader in, ended up breaking because one of the leaders kept on stealing gems and gold from the guild bank, without nobody ever knowing it. but as the suspections grew, the guild broke. i completely support this one.

i remember having to do this, just to keep a little bit of transparency among guildies. and really, f-word this thing. it usually took me between 8 and 10 hours to completely finish it xD https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yD2KRYA2GM9n2zfngkUYwelqVHW0ToGA8ZZJzAd82sE/edit?usp=sharing

edit: LOL sorry i think i ended up reviving a dead topic.

 

[Developer]

these are my two favorites out of them all. having been a veteran guild leader in tales of pirates and tales of pirates II, these 2 are just perfect.

leader:

this kinda thing would be amazing for mazes and proper handling of guild members, however id recommend having a kicking/accepting guildmembers log.

As I understand correctly. there should be some kind of Action log. And access to it.

bank:
just perfect.

This one I do not quite understand.
Should it track who put what? Should it have some kind of limited access (view only, can put, can take).
Should Everyone have View access? or only selected guild members? etc.

 

[LuisaRLZ]

As I understand correctly.

-cries in spanish- y so mean dev mi inglish not dat bad!

Jokes aside xD

Leader:

Yes, if possible, itd be amazing to have an action log that everyone can access (access and view only) on who accepted or kicked who if it is possible. These details are not of a huge importance, but it can really save some guilds from breaking because of lack of transparency.

Bank:

Same as above, yes. Only guild leaders should be able to make any changes at all to the guild bank (put, taking, moving stuff), however, again, if its possible, itd be really nice if everyone in the guild could have a view-only access to the bank. Yet again, because of proper transparency among guild members.

 

[Leba]

As I understand correctly. there should be some kind of Action log. And access to it.

I think this would be more useful if one of the things suggested here previously was added, the "vice" guild leaders. People who could only accept (and kick?) members, but couldn't disband guild (Or they could have that privilege too but they wouldn't know the guild password I assume), so that you could see who did what in said action log; with just one char as leader, I don't find this too useful.

This one I do not quite understand.
Should it track who put what? Should it have some kind of limited access (view only, can put, can take).
Should Everyone have View access? or only selected guild members? etc.

Maybe having some sort of guild bank on the website could work. Perhaps one that works solely on the web, where players (or leaders only) could add an item to the bank (Whether it's just textual or visually adding an item as you would in the bank), while having the time and date added as well. Transparency in terms of all guild members having access to it is a must.

 

[Gamma]

We would like to open a discussion on the proposal of new Guild system that was based on players suggestions.

• Leader:

A system, where current Guild Leader can transfer it's rights to another member by simply selecting a player from Guild list, and assigning rights.

• Bank:

A shared Bank that is allowed to be used by Guild members that earned this right from Guild Leader.
It will have Action Log allowing Guild Leader to check how it was used and who put or taken what items/gold there.

These two are essential in my opinion but it will be really hard to implement. I wouldn't think it was possible in any other server haha.

 

[Elven Ranger]

sounds like Ragnarok Online War of Emperium wich is a cool feature

 

[Developer]

sounds like Ragnarok Online War of Emperium wich is a cool feature

Exactly.
And they had this nice Castle wars. Remember? with shared dungeons in each city.

 

[Spidpex]

Exactly.
And they had this nice Castle wars. Remember? with shared dungeons in each city.

I 110% support this idea

 

[ImCris]

any progress with this? or just recolecting ideas?