We need a higher guild capacity in Guild Wars 2.
For us as a community, it’s about keeping our members together in game. Making another guild isn’t an ideal option as it’s becoming a pattern of making an new guild and the upgrading it’s capacity fully.
Another alternative is the ability to have an alliance chat although this is more of a workaround than a solution. For this to work we would ideally be able to join more than 5 guilds in order to manage a large “guild”.
ArenaNet, please allow us to manage our guilds more effectively. Guilds help keep MMOs interesting, along with content updates of course.
I’d love to hear from ArenaNet regarding this because while it doesn’t effect all guilds it does effect a large number of players in multiple gaming communities.
I’ve just announced our 4th guild on our forum. The first 3 are all upgraded to the 500 capacity so we’ve done all of the upgrades that are available. We had 2 guilds when headstart opened because we knew we wouldn’t fit into 1 even then.
The system as it is works fine for smaller guilds but not at all for larger ones. We need some options for supporting a large guild in game
holy! how do you even coordinate 1500 people? never heard of a guild that build. that’s not a large guild, that’s almost half a legion. What are you picking up everyone on your server into a single guild? are even half of them repping on a regular basis?
holy! how do you even coordinate 1500 people? never heard of a guild that build. that’s not a large guild, that’s almost half a legion. What are you picking up everyone on your server into a single guild? are even half of them repping on a regular basis?
We’re international and have leadership in different regions around the world.
I’d say we have at least 98% rep us almost all of the time, I’ve seen only a couple not repping but that’s not much considering the total members. We brought around 700 players to our server at launch and continue to have people that buy the game and join our server to be in the guild.
We’ve still got a few recruitment posts out here and there but we have stopped bumping them and we have done no in game recruiting. We also do no in game invites without a forum signup process so it takes a little work to get invited. I think that is partly why they rep us because we’re not just another guild, they wanted to be a part of our community and it takes a little bit of effort to join.
bigger guilds means more power to the people/customer that’s not what anet wants.
We’re still relatively big regardless of how many fit in one guild. It’s in ArenaNet’s best interest to allow guilds to function as well as possible so that we can concentrate on promoting fun in the game rather than guild management headaches. The guild size constraints are just one more issue we have to deal with.
We need a higher guild capacity in Guild Wars 2.
For us as a community, it’s about keeping our members together in game. …
I’d love to hear from ArenaNet regarding this because while it doesn’t effect all guilds it does effect a large number of players in multiple gaming communities.
Yes, please. It’s disappointing for our community to have to split up into multiple guilds. In GW1 the alliance feature at least allowed us to chat easily across our guilds. Here we don’t even have that.
Scientific studies* suggest that the maximum viable size of a group that can sustain stable social relationships is 150 – 300.
Perhaps Arenanet have been reading these studies…
Studies performed by anthropologists – perhaps the best known being Robin Dunbar.
Anthropologists that went through, and continue to indulge in, a Prussian born Fabianist education system…..
I cannot see any disadvantage to smaller guilds on having a larger guild cap. How one can argue against larger guilds being able to organise better is beyond me….
Scientific studies* suggest that the maximum viable size of a group that can sustain stable social relationships is 150 – 300.
Perhaps Arenanet have been reading these studies…
Studies performed by anthropologists – perhaps the best known being Robin Dunbar.
Then they wouldn’t have made the cap 500 since Dunbar’s number proposes that the top of the range in 230. As a guild we also have a few things that would skew our possible number higher as theorized by Robin Dunbar.
I don’t expect to be best buddies with everyone in the guild but everyone can certainly have a circle of friends in the guild/game just as they do in real life and not feel left out of social interactions and relationships.
At present, a larger Guild cap would seem to affect very little in-game.
If, has been requested, Guild members were to show up on the map then having 1500 people in a Guild could be a problem. There could be other similar load issues (locations of all Guild members are tracked in the guild roster for example) that may play a part here.
At present, a larger Guild cap would seem to affect very little in-game.
If, has been requested, Guild members were to show up on the map then having 1500 people in a Guild could be a problem. There could be other similar load issues (locations of all Guild members are tracked in the guild roster for example) that may play a part here.
Then ArenaNet can explain their reasoning behind it if there is a system or network issue that prevents the larger capacity.
They could still implement a type of an alliance function with chat which would be acceptable if there is in fact a technical issue that prevents guilds from being larger than 500 members.
I am a member of ToG, and it is indeed frustrating to have to rely on something like our VOIP server to be able to communicate and coordinate with our playerbase. As it stands right now, at any given time I have access to maybe 20% of my guild if I want to see if anyone wants to run a dungeon or WvW, and honestly that’s not optimal.
As far as the argument against a larger guild cap because of the max number of social relationships: We have a large community. I’m not claiming that it is possible to be friends with everyone in my community, but the fact that we have a screening process and age/conduct requirements means that my having access to this pool increases my chance of a good grouping experience. Right now access to that group isn’t possible in game.
Frankly, saying “500 is fine” is a contrarian point of view. A larger guild cap doesn’t hurt the smaller ones, and helps the larger ones.
I feel that splitting guilds into smaller sections only hinders interaction between fellow guild members. The social aspect of MMO’s is very important and I believe that raising guild size limits would only help to improve this.
They may have caps on the guild size because they plan to implement guild-based competitions, and they want to keep it somewhat competitive. GW1 had areas you could claim for your guild. GW2 has areas in WvW that you can claim already, and I expect they may add more. They probably want to keep your enormous guild from being able to claim every neat thing on the server. At minimum, the separate branches of your guild will need to vie with each other to claim dominance.
They may have caps on the guild size because they plan to implement guild-based competitions, and they want to keep it somewhat competitive. GW1 had areas you could claim for your guild. GW2 has areas in WvW that you can claim already, and I expect they may add more. They probably want to keep your enormous guild from being able to claim every neat thing on the server. At minimum, the separate branches of your guild will need to vie with each other to claim dominance.
The guild competitions would need a limit on the number of competitors like GvG in GW1.
The guild cap only splits our numbers they don’t change who we are and we are cooperative across the guilds..
We’re on the same server so we’re on the same team and a guild claiming a keep or tower gives buffs researched by the guild to the keeps defenders. Having multiple guilds only allows us to claim more things as we aren’t competing internally.
holy! how do you even coordinate 1500 people? never heard of a guild that build. that’s not a large guild, that’s almost half a legion. What are you picking up everyone on your server into a single guild? are even half of them repping on a regular basis?
I’m one of several guild leaders in this community, at present we’ve unlocked every single guild upgrade and currently sitting on 120,000 surplus influence in the guild i am representing. The 2 other guilds are also at capacity with similar upgrades/influence growth.
So in short, yes we manage around 1300 members of our division and continue to expand our GW2 community and welcome all those who choose to join us.
The guild caps have no impact on smaller guilds, but are a major inconvenience for us to manage the rapid increase in numbers joining our community.
It force us to arbitrary divide our members in to smaller guilds and with no way within the game to cross-communicate between the guilds (i.e. alliance chat in GW1), means that members are limited to the guilds they’re representing, rather than be part of the community in full.
Our philosophy is try to create an environment for our members to have access to guild resources and like minded people who want to play together. Unlike many guilds who choose to close their guild invites because they can’t/don’t want to deal with this issue of overflowing capacity; our community Code does not allow us to simply close the doors on people that want to join up. We embrace our strengths in numbers and provide the services required to ensure a successful guild operation for our members in the community.
Having a limit really creates a lot of headaches for people, especially when you need to run multiple guilds but are limited in the amount of guilds you can be a part of at once (4 I believe).
That, and it just takes the massively out of the game imo.
There are balance issues. Pinkeh’s guild is sitting on 120k influence surplus, while my guild (which has to split into US and EU worlds) is going to require 3-4 weeks just to bring both “charters” into equity. So, yes, banding together in bigger groups has advantages…and therefore handicaps those who prefer to be in small guilds where everyone knows each other.
However, I would prefer that ANet handle this by allow guilds of up to, let’s 10,000 people and nerfing the influence gain (and/or require that larger guilds spend somewhat more on upgrades — after all 10% +xp for 50 guildies is a lot less than +10%xp for 1,000).
It might be the case that the current coding for the guild interface presents some scaling issues. During headstart and since, we’ve since problems with being able to invite people, whether they can rep the guild, or whether they have access to guild services (not to mention the confusion with upgrades and influence being restricted to the home world of the member). If so, it would be helpful if ANet were to let us know.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
There are balance issues. Pinkeh’s guild is sitting on 120k influence surplus, while my guild (which has to split into US and EU worlds) is going to require 3-4 weeks just to bring both “charters” into equity. So, yes, banding together in bigger groups has advantages…and therefore handicaps those who prefer to be in small guilds where everyone knows each other.
However, I would prefer that ANet handle this by allow guilds of up to, let’s 10,000 people and nerfing the influence gain (and/or require that larger guilds spend somewhat more on upgrades — after all 10% +xp for 50 guildies is a lot less than +10%xp for 1,000).
It might be the case that the current coding for the guild interface presents some scaling issues. During headstart and since, we’ve since problems with being able to invite people, whether they can rep the guild, or whether they have access to guild services (not to mention the confusion with upgrades and influence being restricted to the home world of the member). If so, it would be helpful if ANet were to let us know.
I think it’d be most fair to scale the upgrade cost some and to not penalize a player’s ability to earn influence as that doesn’t feel right and would alter the achievement.
I’m not sure that the costs should be completely equalized though but it is an interesting idea.
That’s fair. The current system rewards working together (a party of five guildies earns influence more than twice as fast as five people working by themselves). But normalizing the per-member costs should be ok:
Guild Storage: same price, since number of slots is the same for both large and small guilds.
Banners: add a moderate charge: they could impact more players, but depends on how they are used.
Guildwide bonuses: those provide 100 times more benefit to a 1,000 player guild over a guild with 100, so maybe they should cost a lot more for the mega guilds.
Upgrades: probably should also be more (e.g. researching L4 politics).
Accelerating progress: that’s a lot easier for large guilds to pay for. Maybe a modest scaling for this, too.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
the suggestion that large social groups are not sustainable is not relevant in todays society. MMOs are against the norm and can easily support the numbers if their management is able to do so.
Games like EvE online are a perfect example or massive corporations with thousands of players from all around the world in many different time zones working together as one corp.
Please raise the limit its frustrating being in with a split guild because the main one is more active and the other split guilds are all secondary. therefore everything is feeding down from the top. also im split away from my own countrymen and mostly playing with others in other timezones in a secondary guild split.
sure internal officers could mess around for months trying to make sure everyone is in the right guild split and ie people in the same guild ie all aussies or all americans etc. not to mention my real life friends have joined and we have all been put into different guild splits and not in the same guild…….. please raise the limit or at least add alliance chat . EvE is another good example of this.
I agree, if there is some reason why rhe guild cap can’t be raised, at least give us alliance chat like GW1. Not having the ability to communicate with with everyone in my guild is making GW2 a bit less enjoyable for me.
There are gaming organizations that offer community for multiple games and these tend to be very large. The current guild system in GW2 is too simple on a number of levels but the cap with no alliance interaction/chat is a very important one that needs to be addressed. Its my hope that this may be something to look forward to when they get the server visit system put in and I hope it wont be too long.
It makes for some very sad feelings among long time communities at the moment.
:(
It seems as if this issue needs to be addressed.
ANet, are you doing anything about this?
Is this falling upon deaf ears?
Should we, as a Guild, just give up on requesting this?
I’m not a programmer, I’m not a developer. However I have played way to many MMO’s and online games to know that what is being requested certainly can be done on your end.
Please, some feedback?
I’m going to guess that the reason the guild system hasn’t been expanded to accomodate more players/ guild is this:
WvW map queue requirements.
Correct me if I’m wrong but in the current state the limit is 1k/server/map yes? By having a guild limit of 500 that means that 1 guild can only take up half of the queue. This allows others to get in. On top of this each guild can only claim one fortification. With x many fortifications per map, if only one guild were in (taking the whole queue) that means only one structure could be claimed.
It also means that this guild would not be required to work with other guilds in order to achieve the goal of owning the map. That means it’s no longer a server wide effort, but simply a guild effort.
Imagine if they made a guild (the OP guild has 3 different guilds to date?) with the capacity for 2k members. This means that this guild could effectively take up 50% of the available queue space in the ENTIRETY of WvW!
I could be wrong, but I think this is the real reason for the limits.
I’m going to guess that the reason the guild system hasn’t been expanded to accomodate more players/ guild is this:
WvW map queue requirements.
Correct me if I’m wrong but in the current state the limit is 1k/server/map yes? By having a guild limit of 500 that means that 1 guild can only take up half of the queue. This allows others to get in. On top of this each guild can only claim one fortification. With x many fortifications per map, if only one guild were in (taking the whole queue) that means only one structure could be claimed.
It also means that this guild would not be required to work with other guilds in order to achieve the goal of owning the map. That means it’s no longer a server wide effort, but simply a guild effort.
Imagine if they made a guild (the OP guild has 3 different guilds to date?) with the capacity for 2k members. This means that this guild could effectively take up 50% of the available queue space in the ENTIRETY of WvW!
I could be wrong, but I think this is the real reason for the limits.
Well said, sir.
Then if your point is valid. How about an Alliance chat channel?? Is there a good reason why ANET cannot do this either? Seems like a simpler solution than increasing Guild cap, no?
Look at the bright side they raised the roster cap from 100 in GW1 to 500 in GW2 .
As far as an alliance chat goes to use the above example all it would do is serve to coordinate the mega guild to flood the WvW Queue so that once one guild member left another would immediately go in .
