A Guild and Its Meaning: Ecnouraging the Guild.

I'm a little torn on the guild levels.

My guild has been together (for the most part) for about 9 - almost 10 - years. At least a core group. We have been very picky about who is allowed to be a member, or at least a full member with all privildges (guild bank, etc). The gang has worked hard, but we're anything but "hard core" or l33t! As we advance, we get another "easter egg" as a perk.

At the same time, I understand. Guild turnover is what we've kinda discussed yonder regarding community and how it's not what it use to be. People now use guilds to "leap frog" to higher, more "ubah" guilds so they can get the phat l00t they want to boost about. Again, pointing back to another post, nothing is wrong with obtaining a really super piece of equipment that you've WORKED YER BUTT OFF FOR, and for your friends to rejoice in it with you. Most of them probably helped, after all, and it's an achievement for everyone.

My guild got to where they didn't like the idea of inviting strangers, or outsiders, to raids or groups. TOUGH TOENAILS! I explained the facts of life to them and reminded them that many of them started with us in the same way! You never know what wonderful person you might never get to know by snubbing strangers! Nipped that little fight in the bud! And yes, they got to roll on things, too!

And yes, this ties in with instancing! You miss a lot that way, too.

Meeting new people is encouraging to your guild. Growing together is encouraging. Achieving together is encouraging. WANTING to be there and not feeling guilty if you can't (but watch out or I'll kick yer rear if you just don't wanna help cuz you want to go play with the uber kids during one of our events) is encouraging. Watching your guild blossom and going from the underdog to the one people say, "HOW did you guys do that?? Where'd you come from???!?" is more than encouraging. It's uplifting and ever so special! (yes, there's a story behind that! )

So much rolled into one silly post, but it's near and dear!

Most of the posts within this thread seem to indicate a desire to use game mechanics to solve interpersonal skills or social issues. I don't believe game mechanics should be used in such a way. Every guild is going to be different: big, small, hardcore, casual, family oriented, content driven, run by council, run by one, so on and so forth.

The human tendancy to form guilds goes well beyond basic game mechanics. In games where there is no formal guild system, there are guilds/clans/fellowships. This need isn't merely social, either. Certainly, there are some goals which are achieved much easier or efficiently when you have a specific group of people working toward the same ends.

So why bother building a guilding mechanic? To enable and encourage guilding behavior.

1 - Guild Levelling

There should some form of pool of experience associated with the guild. As evidenced in games which utilize the mechanic (Everquest II and Warhammer Online both come to mind), guild experience can be a powerful motivator for guilded players. However, an obvious issue is that once the levels are achieved, new members gain all benefit immediately without having to have worked toward the team goals in the first place.

One solution (as pointed out in the first post) would be to use effort as a modifier to access these unlocked rewards. I tend to feel this is a good solution (and I generally don't feel time is a good cost, at least not as it was outlined in the first post) and one which would serve to mitigate any issues with "new member with all guild perks".

This entire concept also brings guilds into the gameplay as an entity unto itself. I think larger guilds should have an advantage over smaller guilds in this regard, but not through direct numbers (I don't think that a straight % of earned experience should be used). Utilize a variety of guild goals or achievements which can be accomplished through various means. Some of these achievements could be performed solo, some through groups, some through crafting - basically, whatever possibly playstyle might exist within the game's overall struture should be represented as a means to advance a guild. This would allow smaller guilds to advance while giving larger guilds an advantage. This encourages guilds to grow and players to join guilds.

2 - Guild Recruiting

One of the biggest issues in most games today is that guild recruiting is an afterthought in virtually every game. Even in games where guilding is highly encouraged, it's generally a discouraging and intimidating process for players to either recruit for their guilds or to try to find and join a guild that meets their needs.

Guild recruiting and the guild system in general need to have a very forward design presence built INTO the game's very fabric. Guild recruiting halls/windows need to be present throughout the game world and worked into the game's tutorial. Just as players should never be put into a situation where they HAVE to go to the game's forums just to fight a monster, they should never be put into a situation where they have to shift focus away from the game's window in order to find a guild.

The process for finding a guild needs to be made more accessible for players. The process for finding potential recruits needs to be made more accessible for guild officers. The entire system has been far too mystical and abstract up to this point - put it in the game's mechanics.

After all, if we accept that guilded players tend to stick with a game longer than players who are not guilded, we must also accept that games which make it easier to find a long term guild home will result in less churn than games which do not.

3 - Guild Amenities

I realize that it might raise the hackles of players who (for whatever reason) dislike the very idea of guilding, but I believe that joining guilds should absolutely be the path of least resistance. Guilded players should get better mounts, housing, outfits, and other rewards than non-guilded players. Elitist? Not at all, since I believe you should allow anyone to start up a guild (Single player guilds? Yes, please.)

Obviously, I feel that guild rewards should unlock as a guild advances (see point 1 above) and I feel that larger guilds should have the advantage, but I don't feel that this should completely exclude solo players, either. If a player wants to be the lone wolf, bucking tradition and going it all alone - allow it! It doesn't mean you make it easier, just that it's there as an option.

(That's a start...more to come)

I would have to completely disagree with the idea of guild levels.

I think Kendricke is right that trying to use a game mechanic to solve a social skills problem.

Joining a Guild shouldn't be forced, but it should come with some unique benefits. However, those benefits should be limited to raid content and maybe a very strict guild hall system.

Think of it this way. You can play as a lone hero, but a lone hero is able to do things like sneak into fortresses, complete small quests like save the princess and so on. The highest level lone hero imo is like the Knight facing down a dragon. Think Beowulf.

However the guild should be like an Army, full of all sorts of positions. The army could be any thing from a rogue guild influencing the city, to powerful warlord factions that control entire kingdoms. Would be neat to have cities being controlled by guilds, doing quests and raids killing city officials who are more favorable to them.

As far as what guilds get. Content that only they could do it.

And one thing about many guilds I've seen run, and heard run:

Do NOT threaten your guild members with expulsion if they can't make it to a raid, or guild event of some sort.

People have lives away from the game. As much as my guild is important to me, it's far, far, FAR behind my family. And, well, pretty much everything else "in real life", such as work, getting groceries, paying bills, etc. etc.

If I can be there, I will. If I can't be there, then trust me when I say I would have been if there was nothing more important going on.

Don't like it? Fine. I'll take my skills elsewhere.

Originally Posted by Laethyn

And one thing about many guilds I've seen run, and heard run:

Do NOT threaten your guild members with expulsion if they can't make it to a raid, or guild event of some sort.

People have lives away from the game. As much as my guild is important to me, it's far, far, FAR behind my family. And, well, pretty much everything else "in real life", such as work, getting groceries, paying bills, etc. etc.

If I can be there, I will. If I can't be there, then trust me when I say I would have been if there was nothing more important going on.

Don't like it? Fine. I'll take my skills elsewhere.

What you're describing here is a player-to-player social issue. This is not a game mechanics issue.

Originally Posted by Fahn

I would have to completely disagree with the idea of guild levels.

I think Kendricke is right that trying to use a game mechanic to solve a social skills problem.

Joining a Guild shouldn't be forced, but it should come with some unique benefits. However, those benefits should be limited to raid content and maybe a very strict guild hall system.

Think of it this way. You can play as a lone hero, but a lone hero is able to do things like sneak into fortresses, complete small quests like save the princess and so on. The highest level lone hero imo is like the Knight facing down a dragon. Think Beowulf.

However the guild should be like an Army, full of all sorts of positions. The army could be any thing from a rogue guild influencing the city, to powerful warlord factions that control entire kingdoms. Would be neat to have cities being controlled by guilds, doing quests and raids killing city officials who are more favorable to them.

As far as what guilds get. Content that only they could do it.

By limiting the rewards you present to guilds, you remove some of the incentive to guilds to stay within a game's environment. Either you want guilds to stay in your game or you do not.

Levels (or points or macguffins or whatever) are all devices or methods by which you involve and encourage guilds to remain within your game. Just as players become more emotionally involved in their characters as they grow within the game's various progression systems, guilds are more likely to both retain players and to remain within a game if there are additional rewards for doing so.

Raid content is not strictly "guild content" and certainly isn't much of a reward unto itself. Players frequently form up pick-up raids or ally guilds together to raid in many games without guilds. Beyond that, many guilds do not raid at all or do not raid with any great frequency or higher aspirations. Therefore, raid content isn't something I'd consider to be strictly a guild reward.

Guild halls themselves can be a strong reward for guilds, but without levels (or points or macguffins or whatever) what is the method by which guilds gain larger or more elaborate guild halls? What mechanic is used to differentiate the hall of a month old guild which has seven members from hall of a five year old guild with 80 dedicated members? If there is no differentiation, what's the motivation for the five year old guild to remain in your game as opposed to the other games which do make such a distinction?

If the idea is truly to encourage guilds and guilding (something I support greatly), then I would ask how the ideas you're presenting actually do this. It seems to me that you're trying to discourage guilding or at least to pigeonhold the idea into one which you personally feel is the "right" way to guild.

The fact is that there are all types of guilds - not just the "army" type you portray. As I mentioned, there are guilds which are big, small, hardcore, casual, family oriented, content driven, run by council, run by one, so on and so forth. Not every guild would probably agree with being likened to an army. In fact, I'd wager most would not.

The next big game will be one which engages the guilds and provides them the incentives to come and find a home. The largest, oldest, and most successful guilds are already built around recruiting. Find a way to encourage those guilds to come to your game and thrive and you'll find a way to build in a playerbase for you.

Some good discussion here I honestly think the reason guilds have less importance in modern mmo-space is the general dumbing down of the games. In EQ, you had a pretty severe death penalty and cr
It made belonging to a good guild almost a must to not only experience the game but help with rezzes and cr. Didn't have to big a big guild, or a hard core guild, just people who'd shared all those cr's , time and time again The difficulty and unforgiving nature of EQ is what made guilds strong.
I still now, 6 years after quitting EQ, keep in touch with former guildies. Haven't kept in touch with anyone in any other game since......

If you want strong tight knit guilds, build a harsh and unforgiving world

As far guild levels, I think there should be some mechanism for the uber guilds to show off. But it needs to be earned, should never be anything you could buy off a broker.

Having been an officer/guild leader many times in many different games, I would love to see a game actually spend some time on a good guild control interface. I really can't think of a game that I liked the guild interface. Most seem thrown together as an after thought

My 2 cp....

What you're describing here is a player-to-player social issue. This is not a game mechanics issue.

Yep. I realize that. Never said it was a mechanics issue, other then possibly the bad mechanics of the guild leaders minds.

Regardless, based off the thread title, this seems like the opposite of "Ecnouraging the Guild".

I know of a number of people who are driven away from guilds, and MMOs in general, due to this type of sloppy guild management. Indeed, for the longest time it left a bad taste in my mouth in regards to joining any type of guild.

Originally Posted by Laethyn

I know of a number of people who are driven away from guilds, and MMOs in general, due to this type of sloppy guild management.

...and I can list several players who have left guilds because guild leaders don't put enough priority onto guild attendance. It's all about personal preference and finding a guild which fits that preference. It's all terribly subjective.

For example, you see a guild where players are threatened with explusion for being relatively inactive toward guild events or raids. You refer to that as "sloppy" guild management. However, what you refer to as "sloppy" guild management, others might refer to as a firm, strict, or standards-based guild management style. Some players prefer such an environment, because they want to know that when they set their real-world schedule around a game, they can count on the fact that this event or raid is going to happen - that there will be enough players available to avoid cancellation.

We all have different ways we like to approach our online gaming. Some of us like to view the games as more casual entities ("it's just a game") and others view their gaming a bit more seriously. Guilds exist to allow players to come together with other players who share a similar viewpoint. There's nothing wrong with either perspective and guilds should be encouraged across the spectrum of playstyles.

Attempting to discourage one particular type of guild or guildleader because it doesn't personally appeal to your playstyle isn't the answer. We need to find ways to encourage guilding and guild matchmaking which make more sense in the first place.

No, you are saying relative inactivity. I am talking about there are times when you just can't. My wife, for example, joins every raid. She couldn't make one because she was taking the kid to a doctors apointment, attempting to avert her getting Lymes disease. She was threatened with expulsion from the guild if she didn't go to this ONE event.

Constant inactivity in guild events, fine, but some take it to far