Guild Wars 2

Can anyone shed some light on the initial intention of the Guild Wars 2 guild format? Should it be like a democracy? Should there be guild leaders who make all of the decisions about the guild without considering the opinions of the guild members? Should there be private meetings to discuss promotions, ranks within the group, and guild activity upgrades?

My current guild is experiencing these instances, and it is causing some strife among its members. Are we looking at this from the wrong point? Should we be content to have the decisions made by the founders of the group.

I personally prefer a format that allows its members to play together as friends without worry of rank or alienation. I want to feel included in all the decision making b/c I’ve invested all of my time and influence into this guild.

What are some of the dynamics of other guilds in the game? Any help is much appreciated. Please shed some light on this situation.

I always thought it was best to have my members vote on the outcome of something so that majority is happy.

Voting is always nice but you can’t put big decisions at the hands of all members. Nothing will ever get done that way. Best to put these powers in the hands of a capable few and trust them until they prove they can’t handle it

It really depends how the guild is built.

In example, at Counterculture we have no leaders. All members are equal and can take on different roles and activities. It also means our recruiting process is slow, and we must know and trust every single other person. On a large size guild, this wouldn’t be possible.

And this is just one out of many formats, I’d say.

Thanks so much everyone for your imput! I hope that the situation will just even out, and that everyone will be content.

I do think there needs to be some sort of structure, a head to the guild that can make a final decision when others are split, someone who can be in charge of delegating responsibilities so things can get done and so on. However I think there needs to be an opportunity for variations of group, officer and leader decisions depending on the importance of the decision. I feel that even though there is a figurehead, people should feel involved in the direction of their guild.

Something that also helps is making sure people know what direction you are taking the guild. I try to let people know where their influence is going and why we want to do some of the things we do. This gives everyone the chance to voice their dissenting opinion, if there is one, and gives them something to look forward to when we all agree.

Where I feel the design of the guild interface fails is the lack of tools we need to run our guilds as well as we could. There are several instances where I wish I had the ability to use a little more finesse when making decisions for the guild, communicating with my officers or even just sharing things from the guild bank.

Even something as simple as allowing members to withdraw items from the guild bank without access to guild funds is a small distinction that can have huge consequences for a guild; and it makes me feel like I am treating my people with a closed hand because I can’t leave the bank open to everyone.

Giving us more options only helps guilds large and small who prefer more structure, and doesn’t hurt those who want to be more open.

Because of the lack of things guilds can do in this game (I mean in-game options for guilds here: no possibility for guild vs. guild, no deciding how the guild village or hall should look etc), it’s rather pointless to have a political system which involves people choosing. Most of the events a guild can organize are events for which anet hasn’t build any infrastructure, so it’s mostly something that must be made up by a limited crew of people that have ideas to share. There isn’t much to manage atm.

This is also a criticism towards anet, but in short, I don’t think we need politics (yet) and electionary powers.