Guild Wars 2

Proposal Overview
Guild Commander Tag
– A commander tag unlocked via influence (10,000) and guild WvW kills (100,000 across the entire guild) OR influence (20,000) and Merits (50). Both options should be added to keep acquiring the tags simple and easy for all game modes that use it (disregarding sPvP, which doesn’t currently involve commander tags). Once it has been researched all players in the guild with a commander tag get an orange (guild coloured) icon – that is only visible to players representing the guild AND players that right click the guild commander and join squad (the option would still be usable even though you can not see the tag). This means public invited players can still join in with guild events and coordination can be kept.

Goal of Proposal
- To allow guilds to do closed events and split off from the ‘casual community’. Content in this game is moving towards a guild based direction, in the form of organized world events and WvW guild ‘raids’. Please don’t keep restricting the player base by enforcing public only commander tags. Currently in WvW guild groups run without commander tag – using the target system to track the group leader. This is sub-optimal as it then strips the target functionality away from the group – which you could use for single target focus. A guild based commander tag would resolve this problem completely – and still not prevent public players from following; only they would be strongly discouraged. For large scale PvE events you often see commander tags when a guild is running it – mainly because multiple groups need to keep in contact with position information all the time and the target functionality wouldn’t work. By introducing guild commander tags you allow for Wurm and Tequatl runs by guilds to be more organized and more private by cutting down on the public players present. This means guilds have a bit more control over who takes part in their guild world events (an upgrade unlocked via the guild panel, yet can be consumed by everyone – not really fair considering its large cost. Also when this system is used you get little notification or credit to the guild, unlike a hero banner for instance) but can still allow public access.

Proposal Functionality
- A orange coloured commander tag unlocked by guild unlocks (prices broken down above) that can only be seen by people in the guild – or people who right click the person with the tag up (even thought they can’t see his tag) and join squad.
- When guild-representation are swapped with a tag up of guild colour the colour is switched to blue.
Associated Risks
- Cuts out public players who do not know about guild events. This is a good thing from the guilds point of view, but a bad thing from the public players. I think this system strikes a good boundary with the right-click-squad functionality not completely cutting them out. (Allowing for organization)

Castrin.8972:

Proposal Overview
Guild Advertising / Bulletin Board

Goal of Proposal
A formatted and real time way to announce your guild is looking for members without having to spam local and map chat channels. Allows players to find guilds they might want to join easier.

Proposal Functionality
In the Guild in game menu, on the left side there would be a “town crier” tab which would lead to two topside icons.

First icon would access the current listings of all guilds actively recruiting in the game along with what info they have put up describing their guild. There would be a “join request” option that would alert the Guildmaster (or recruitment designate) of the application. Filters would include Guild type (PvP,PvE,etc.), keywords, and server (if relevant).

Second icon would access a menu with the guild’s current “ad” displayed (or blank if none) and with an edit button. If given the right an ad could be placed for n days based on either a) influence spent and/or b) gold spent for the ad. As noted this would be locked down based on rights assignment.

Associated Risks
Would create a bit of negativity for those that still spam in chat but otherwise I can’t think of any.

I just want to comment on this, since i REALLY feel the community can come up with some of these (like a calendar or BB) on their own, IF only we had the tools (API) to do it. It was actually one of the HUGE selling points for me, back before the game released, where we saw a very robust API that included chat, seeing where players are in the world and managing guilds. Of which, all of that got backburnered, till a spark of hope came along when the OAuth2 was announced as a thing (almost complete, yadda, yadda). I think the community could really do a lot with it, but for whatever reason, ANet almost entirely, stopped either working on it or decided to focus their attention elsewhere.

I TRULY think if ANet development focused on this, at least in the sense that we can have the kind of input/output from the game, anytime, anywhere it would improve player experience a million fold and get our own development ideas (which are extremely vast) working at full speed.

I really think they are missing the boat here, it could be a stellar improvement to these QoL things along with features at a much lower (IMHO) development cost. It would also be HUGE to be able to post clickable URLS for “approved interfaces” with the game. I’ve implemented these kinds of things in smaller projects, and they were extremely popular.

It’s funny how many people don’t even know you can /wiki “something” in chat, a really powerful feature almost no one knows about…

Proposal Overview
Guild Material Storage and Crafting

Goal of Proposal
Allow players with crafting skills to craft items for the guild via a centralized system.

Proposal Functionality
In the Guild in game menu, on the left side there would be a “workshop” tab which would lead to a guild version of the crafting menu found at the crafting stations. This crafting station would support all crafting options and employ the level and knowledge (i.e. recipes) of the character doing the crafting (no separate exp system needed).

This in turn would be tied to a guild materials storage the same as each player has but with a stack limit of 5000 for each material stack. This would be a guild storage similar to the stash/trove/cave system, separated based on current material groupings, with rights to it assignable in the guild.

Any items crafted would be deposited in the highest level of guild storage unless full, then in descending order till an open slot is found. To access the finished item, or to deposit materials would require being at a guild bank location in game. The actual crafting of the object can be done anywhere in game just like building guild bonuses are able to currently.

Associated Risks
Security would be tricky but other than that I can’t think of any.

wwwes.1398:

I strongly disagree with guild taxes. Seriously, I can already see how this would create rage if this were implemented as a feature.

I agree, in game tax system is bad. I’ve had to deal with it and it just never works the way it should and leaves many running to guilds/corps that have no taxes.

wwwes.1398:

Instead of thinking about a tax, why not think about setting up a formalized system of a donation bank that everyone can put money into so the guild can buy things?

This. Let people donate. Simple and shouldn’t be too hard to implement. True that some will say “no one will then” to which I say “were you looking to get rich off of others?”

Peace.

Windu The Forbidden One.6045:

JonPeters.5630:

I see a variety of comments on feeling more attachment to a specific guild and a lot of talk of the # of guilds people are a part of and the fear that is causing a lack of attachment. This lack of attachment keeps players players from being compelled to belong to any of their guilds instead of being compelled to belong to all of them .

With all due respect Mr. Peters,

I believe the ability to join multiple guilds on this game is should not have existed at all. Very simply, it discourages guild loyalty and defeats the entire purpose of joining a guild in the first place.

Guilds are supposed to be a dedicated, close knit group of people. An ideal scenario would be a flourishing, active community in-game AND outside of the game, supported by communication programs such as IRC/forums/voice. The system now? Guilds having half the people not representing. Highly inactive/non-existent offsite interaction. Guilds are typically a hi-bye affair in the game.

People who say “I represent this guild today for WvW, then that guild tomorrow for PvE” – this isn’t how guilds are supposed to work. In my opinion anyway. Guilds are groups where people do different things together – not a “I come as I like” place. People who represent different guilds on different days as and when they like are akin to clan-hoppers.

But obviously, this isn’t just the fault of guild hoppers alone. The guild system design in this game is absolutely sub par – you want people to know as many different groups of people as possible, but do not allow players to participate in the chat of guilds they are not representing. This, to me is the biggest problem about the guild system, because it renders useless the participation of a player, simply because he/she does not know what is happening in other guilds.

I respect your decision to give people the ability to join multiple guilds, but I still believe it was a wrong one.

I agree here, perthaps it should be a 1 guild system. as far as bring other groups of people together. Maybe something could have/can be put in place such as guild alliances. Im not sure how it would function but, one way is to have an alliance chat that all the guilds see.

JonPeters.5630:

I see a variety of comments on feeling more attachment to a specific guild and a lot of talk of the # of guilds people are a part of and the fear that is causing a lack of attachment. This lack of attachment keeps players players from being compelled to belong to any of their guilds instead of being compelled to belong to all of them (which was the original intention of this design of guilds as more social groups rather than as exclusive cliques).
Jon

Dear Jon, it’s a pleasure to see you hopping in in the discussion…we may end up with two heroes rather than one (Chris really deserves cookies).
About the quote: from my point of view, how I perceive guilds (well, I am biased since in my job we also handle historical informations so I can’t avoid to think to actual guilds) and my approach to the matter, I’d say that “multiguilding” simply shouldn’t have ever happened. Ever.
I can see your point as developers in wanting to please everyone, it’s understandable from many aspects, but it really defeats the very purpose of the concept of guild itself; with the current gw2 approach, guilds are just a tool. They are not “family”, they are not “home”. Historically they defined a social status, and they were highly focused on specific goals (the easiest to remember, guild of merchants) and it was absolutely unthinkable to guild hop like a rabbit, because they were mimicking aristocratic heraldry therefore adhering to their rules (strongly based on iron bonds).
Now try to read this with Morgan Freeman’s voice (from Bruce Almighty): if you let everyone win the lottery, it’s like no one winning.
What is important, bonds aside, is making the choices relevants and having weight on shaping Tyria.

In my opinion there is still hope to please a large amount of players by just allowing guild founders to choose if guild is locked or not: if a guild is locked it gets the benefits I listed here:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/CDI-Guilds-Logistics-and-QOL/4397919

otherwise it will behave as it does now, and nothing will change.
The choice will still weigh a lot, and the locked guild WILL have more benefits in exchange of the ultimate-high commitment of its members, but the game will not be “forcing” anyone into doing anything, you are just giving options….

Proposal Overview
Simple in-game bulletin board for guild members

Goal of Proposal
To enable better communication between members with different schedules/timezones, and give members more tools to interact with the guild as a whole, rather than just who is online at that moment.

Proposal Functionality
This board would need to be located in an easy to see place in the guild interface, and maybe accessible from an in-world location/npc to add immersion. Something like checking the bulletin board and message board in your home instance, in LA, at the spawn of wvw maps, etc. Being able to leave a simple note – “Can’t make it to raid/meeting tonight” , “Person X, Y, and Z, please speak with me asap” , “Could the next available officer invite this person?” for the guild to see, rather than targeting one individual, might speed up communications. If there are players who are on staggered timezones, or simply have a change of plans and can’t play at an appointed time, this lack of communication can cause frustration and inefficiency in the guild’s working. I think this could be helpful both for small and large guilds, where there are either not enough people online at once, or so many people it’s hard to keep track of who can take care of what. Could also be used to organize smaller in-group events, ala “Please message me if you are interested in a guild picnic next week”.

Associated Risks
Spam, abusive messages would need to be removed by a moderator (this permission could be enabled/disabled by the leader in the rank options). As only guild members can use, abusive posters could be kicked. Old comments would need to decay over time, be pushed out of sight, or deleted after a certain condition (too many messages on board, passage of x number of days, etc) to avoid clutter. An option to set a time limit on a post at its creation would help (display post x number of hours/until x time/date).
Setting a cap on how many active posts can be up at once may discourage people from trash posting and keep the board manageable and easy to read quickly.

Sorry if this is seen as “content” rather than “QoL”, I have been thinking hard about what has caused the death of the two guilds I called home. In both cases it has been a lack of ability to delegate on the part of the leaders, who became burned out and frustrated the rest of the guild wasn’t taking as much initiative/reaching out to work on problems. As a member and not a leader of both guilds, I think lack of communication because of staggered playtimes was a contributing factor.
(though to be perfectly honest the dry matchups in wvw were the most direct causes of my guilds’ painful and sad deaths)

Castrin.8972:

wwwes.1398:

I strongly disagree with guild taxes. Seriously, I can already see how this would create rage if this were implemented as a feature.

I agree, in game tax system is bad. I’ve had to deal with it and it just never works the way it should and leaves many running to guilds/corps that have no taxes.

To expand on this: Taxing in Eve Online makes some sense because many of the structures and control areas are player-controlled in tangible ways – even in ‘safe’ space now. That does not translate very well (if at all) to GW2. This game was designed specifically to avoid this, which is one of the reasons I love it (my main reason? no tangible losses on death).

Chris Whiteside.6102:

I am going to look into the cost of a guild calendar.

I love this idea. My guild’s 7th birthday is next Tuesday and we’re having trouble communicating the schedule (most players don’t read the guild message unless you tell them to).

Proposal Overview
Guild Message of the day Notification upon changed MoTD
(Making this suggestion as all other MOTD suggestions I saw only mentioned showing the message every time someone logs in which I feel is unnecessary. Every time the MotD changes, or a new player who hasn’t seen it yet logs in, is enough.)

Goal of Proposal
Keeping guild members informed of current events.

Proposal Functionality
Everytime a player logs in do a check, has this player had a notification for the current MotD displayed yet? If no, display it. If yes don’t.

<What risks or problems can you foresee with this proposal which you would like to have assistance on from other members of the CDI>
None that I can think of.

Someone poke me when we get to halls/raid content? I’m not much use for discussing logistics since I tended to always run such needs simply when I ran groups for tabletop or Scouts meetings.

Thoughts on current topics:

Multi-guilds: Keep it as is , it’s nice to have separate guilds for separate activities, to alleviate what tends to be the main issues (chat and influence) you could make influence gain for all guilds you’re in. It’s mildly exploitable for banners and stuff but realistically the impact would be very minor and nothing every player can’t already get. Combined with guild chats for each guild and you remove the two main concerns. Wild thought you could completely remove the idea of repping either.

Main guild concept: If you really want to go down that road you need to incentivise it, allow guilds to choose a specialty (could only be changed once a week , as can the guild you choose as main). The specialties could be bonuses for different areas but only in personal gain not in competitive gain (i.e no stat boosts) could be +10% WvW exp , +10% dungeon gold reward , +10% rank gain in Pvp, +30% magic find, etc.
Making the boost upgradeable would also allow you to stop 1 man guilds being created for buff purposes.

Proposal Overview
Guild Parties

Goal of Proposal
When the members of a guild form several parties to participate in the same content at the same time, it’s hard to track how many of them exist or how full each of them is, as well as it is hard sometimes to even chat across all parties within the same guild. My proposal attempts to fix this, which would be interesting for guild missions, and even more for world boss events where guilds recruit all kinds of PUGs.

Proposal Functionality

• Add a subsection on the guild’s UI page for Organization and Parties.
• In this page, guild members can pre-create several parties, assign party leaders to each of them, and invite other members to each party either through said page, or through the already existing means.
• Parties created this way can be assigned specific names and be given a small description for their purpose.
• Permissions would be required to create and manage “guild parties”.
• A new command /guildparty (or other name) would exist to communicate to all guild parties. All party members would be able to read them, even those who are not from the guild. Guild members who aren’t participating/ in the party wouldn’t be able to read them.
• Party members would be able to view the position of all players in all guild parties in the map, not just the members of their own party.
• Members from other parties would be shown with a different dot color in the map, and a different colored name above their heads.

Example
Marionette Fight

1. Officer would set up five guild parties, each one named for each lane (out of the 5).
2. Officer would then assign a party leader to each party.
3. Party leaders would invite whoever they please, be it either guild members or pugs (could also be set up by permissions).
4. Party members would be able to see the blue dots of the remaining 24 other players (assuming all parties are full).
5. Lane1-3 parties would be given a short description: help lane 3-5 after you have completed yours.
6. Players would communicate across this “web of parties” to successful coordenate through the event.

Associated Risks
?

As a guild leader since release there are many suggestions I have for guild-tools as they imho still need lots of love. Many of the suggestions will come from the thread I linked to before (second post on this thread).

So I will post multiple suggestion but to in is separate post.

(Some of my suggestions might require a other suggestion so I will try to keep the suggestions in a specific order and link to required suggestions)

Proposal Overview
More options for ranks. Like splitting admin rights / permissions, kick / invite, promote / demote / how much money they can take each the bank, how many items they can take from each bank and so on.

Goal of Proposal
Being better able to give more specific permissions. For example if I give people the right to invite I automatically also give them rights to kick people (at the same and lower ranks). That I do not want. Kicking should only be available for a few while inviting should be available for almost everybody.

Proposal Functionality
Simple add many more rights / permissions to the permission option. It would also require more ranks then because you will be able to make more specific ranks. In addition you might want to be able to set multiple ranks at the same ‘level’ while having different right.

An addition way to make this more detailed is by setting up roles based on the permissions and being able to link ranks and maybe even specific members (not rank based) to those roles.

Associated Risks
I don’t think it has many risk, the only thing to be careful of is that you keep the permission window not to complicated for not so technical people. But that has more to do with how you present it then what options you give. It should be possible to implement the above suggestions in a very understandable way.

Personally I would really like this and we can discuss it more when we get to the Raid phase of the discussion. i specifically like the idea of making them part of the Living World with complimentary story, strategic group challenge and rewards that really show of that you have beaten the content.

Please no, none of this. The Triple Threat event is already bad enough. I really don’t like the content in the game where you need to “organize” well in advance and hang out on a map for hours just to stand any chance of completing it. The goal when designing content is that if it launches at XX:00, then any single player who knows what he is doing can show up at five minutes before it or less, hop in, do his part well, and receive the reward for the event.

There should be no waiting around beforehand, no need to taxi people in to hard cap the map, no need for a guild, no high likelihood of failure just because not everyone has it down already, no need to exclude players from the event because their presence might disrupt the team.

One of the core philosophies of vanilla GW2 that made it BETTER than other MMOs on the market was the idea that “every other player makes your experience _better,”_ but that philosophy has been greatly eroded the more content that comes out. Too much of it now allows for other players to make content worse for you, by scaling up events that require every player to be at 100%, and any player that is less than 100% is actually hurting you because someone else could be there doing it better. By content that requires 100% of the players on the map to be actively engaged in the task at hand, meaning any players on the map that are doing anything else, through no fault of their own, are killing your chances at the main objective. Getting T6 on Drytop was always a problem not of the skill of the players trying to complete it, but instead just of whether or not enough of the players on the map were even trying, when most of them had perfectly reasonable other things to be doing. Success and failure should be determined only by the skill of the people actually attempting a challenge, anyone who is on the map not trying to work on that challenge should not even be counted against whether it succeeds or not (meaning everything should scale to only require half the map or less, rather than ever requiring a fully capped map).

If you do insist on adding more of that sort of content, then do not give it any cool unique rewards that players might want even if they have no interest in that type of event. If it takes a lot of time then it can involve a larger quantity of reward to justify the time spent, but it should not be a higher quality of reward, including unique skins, than one could earn elsewhere, because any player that really does not enjoy that sort of gaming experience should never feel bribed into doing it anyways just because he wants that specific reward.

Proposal Overview
Add more useful information to the roster interface.

Goal of Proposal
Make the roster interface a tool to help guild leaders and officers to manage their members.

Proposal Functionality
Add useful information to the roster tab interface such as:

Been a Member for X days
Been [rank] for X days.
Represented your guild for X% of their playtime.
Been online for X hours over past 4 weeks.

<What risks or problems can you foresee with this proposal which you would like to have assistance on from other members of the CDI>
None that I can think of.

Proposal Overview
Turning Activities, like Sanctum Sprint and Keg Brawl into Guild Events

Goal of Proposal
Allowing Guilds to challenge one another in these activities offers a form of GvG in PvE

Proposal Functionality
Pretty much make these activities into instances that are opened via Guild window and created via guild influence and merits.
When activated, members in the guild(s) are given a prompt and guild members enter, when both sides reach an agreement and click a ready button, the activity activates

(I would also like to be put into instances with my party if you don’t make this into a guild activity, that way I can race my friends or whoop them in different activities)

Associated Risks
Large Guilds with active members will have a hard time because most of these activities are limited to 10v10 or less.

Proposal

add another UI option:

[See all player names of fellow guild members only.]

a) player names in my represented guild will show gold text, same as they do now
b) player names belonging to guilds i joined, but am not representing at the moment, would show the default player name color

why?

reduces clutter of player names during large zerg events, but also still allows a player to recognize fellow guild members immediately in the environment.

as a player, i want to be able to see my guildmates’ names in the world, without having my screen cluttered with all player names from other gulds.

Proposal Overview
More detailed permissions for members.

Goal of Proposal
Give guild leaders and officers more permissions to use when controlling what rights and privileges members of your guild has..

Proposal Functionality
In the “Ranks” tab, add more options in permissions such as:

-Allow [rank] to activate guild Missions (In the open world, once the consumable has been activated. This will help avoid new or inexperienced guild members triggering the event before the guild is ready.)

-Allow [Rank] to display your guild tag, (Useful for making sure new members don’t give your guild a bad reputation, having to earn the right to display to others that you are a [guild_tag here] will make sure it’s a privilege that can be taken away if you behave badly and represent your guild in a poor manner.)

- Allow [Rank] to Invite new member. (Separate this from “Admin Lower Ranks” so a recruiter rank does not have to be the lowest possible rank in the roster, it’s kind of insulting to the people who wanna help grow your guild to have them below everyone else.)

- Allow [Rank] to represent other guilds. (This is sort of a big one. I believe it should be each guilds choice whether or not they allow or disallow representing other guilds. In my guild we have a compromise, we allow it for certain activities that we ourselves do not partake in. Such as WvW, Tequatl/wurm runs and etc. Currently we moderate this by keeping lists and giving warnings to members who do not seek permission first. This whole system would be much more manageable if we could simply give the permission to certain ranks.)

<What risks or problems can you foresee with this proposal which you would like to have assistance on from other members of the CDI>

None that I can think of.

Proposal Overview
Make Guild Puzzles into instances.

Goal of Proposal
Many of the time Guild Puzzles are already active and you have multiple guilds waiting and end up entering together, where only one guild does anything and other guilds are simply along for the ride. (This mainly occurs during the weekends when guild commendations reset and the most members are active during the same time)

The other day, my guild tagged along and were peeved and extremely vocal about the failure of the ‘active’ guild doing the puzzle. It shames me, that it was my guild being rude but I understand the frustration. It is extremely rare for my guild to get together to do an event, like a Guild Mission, and time being an issue for my guild-mates. We prefer not having to wait 15-20 mins for another guild and not even sure that we’ll be the first guild in the next round.

Proposal Functionality
I think a simple prompt for any guild member(s) in the zone (not instance/server/IP) to enter a Guild Puzzle when activated by the guild in question.

Associated Risks
Creating entirely new instances may be problematic.
And this may beg the question, “why all the other Guild Missions aren’t instances?”
I believe that the other Guild Missions aren’t effected as much by the mega-server, in fact, the mega-server has helped with completing some of the other missions.

Proposal Overview
Show information about how much members have been online and have been representing the guild (in percentages of time being online). But also showing influence earned for the guild and additional it would be nice to also show much time they spend in specific game-modes like overall PVE, or specific dungeons or WvW or sPvP.

Not only show the hard numbers / percentages. (this can be done in the roster) but also have an option to see a graph that shows this over time (the time they are in the guild).

Goal of Proposal
Getting a much more detailed view of your members to base ranks on but also to use when organizing events (when you see people do many dungeons a dungeon event might be a good idea but when many do WvW you might want to organize something for in WvW.

It also helps to see if you are doing well. If people are representing you less now then a month ago you might need to change things.

It also gives you the option to allow representing for only 50% (or something like that). If a guild now allows representing in multiple guilds is very hard to see if a person represent sometimes or never.

Lastly the information can be used for automated ranks. A suggestion I will come back to later.

Proposal Functionality
Behind the names in the roster you can see the hard numbers like been representing your guild 60% of his online time. And so on.

When clicking on the member you can see another page with the graphs that show it over time.

In addition you can make a selection manually be selecting multiple members or selecting by ranks or by setting a rule (another suggestion I will add later) and then see the graphs for that selection. (so the average).

You can of course also do that with the whole guild.

Associated Risks
Only risk I see might be privacy and then mainly members now wanting to show how much time they play. However you can give people the option to now show that information. Guild-members can then still see percentage based on it and might even still set automated ranks based on hours played but are not able to see the time.

Proposal Overview
Show how long a members has been in your guild / when he first joined. (Not sure what to do if he left and came back later.. might want to give leaders the option to count or not count the previous time)

Goal of Proposal
Guild members can do many things with that information including basing ranks on it and so on. It’s also a prestege thing for members themselves much like /age is.

Proposal Functionality
Again in the roster (yes my suggestion do at a lot of information there so a UI change might be useful) you can see “Member joined on [Date] / is a member for [years / months / days / hours / minutes]

Associated Risks
When a member leaves and comes back (possible even accidentally) should he then lose his time? Preferably not. And how about a member who never represented. However you could see that with another suggestion: (see suggestion: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/CDI-Guilds-Logistics-and-QOL/page/6#post4399930 )

Apologies if already mentioned, but thought of this by page three yesterday and now at work so no time to read next three pages.

Guild Advertising.
A lot of good ideas have already been floated, just want to add these to the mix.

Advert needs to be able to be prepared by officers in the guild and all members should be able to review it before publishing. Leader is only member who can publish the advert so that it is solely their responsibility if anything inappropriate is published.

Advert should be paid for by guild influence/merit and needs to be refreshed on a monthly basis with message autogenerated to leader when expiration approaching. Should be easy for a simple refresh yes/no without having to redo advert unless you wish to. This will ensure that older defunct adverts will be removed on regular basis. Also, if guilds are paying then they are less likely to advertise incorrectly as it would be a waste of funds.

Additional info on advert.

As a potential guildie i would like to see a seven day population/activity graph (reset to reset) of previous week with a travelling red line showing “This time last week” so i can more easily see if this guilds activity matches my playing availability because for the life of me i cannot convert GMT to local time.

Considerations – WvW guilds could use this to advertise for people to help fill coverage gaps. However, opposing servers could use this info to exploit coverage gaps.

Optionally this sort of info for wvw guilds may only be visible in home borderland

Required other suggestions
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/CDI-Guilds-Logistics-and-QOL/page/6#post4399930

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/CDI-Guilds-Logistics-and-QOL/page/6#post4399978

Proposal Overview
Automated guild-ranks.
So the option to set rules (like a small script) for a rank.

Goal of Proposal
This makes ranks more clear and also more fear for members. It’s now really hard… almost impossible to set these sort of ‘fair’ rules so ranking is more based on the idea of how active members are. However especially international guilds might have very active members who play at other times as the leaders.

In addition it’s of course also QoL as it takes away a little bid of the work of leaders.

Proposal Functionality
Being able to make at least some of the ranks go automatically.

Just the options to set a script / rule for a rank. Example: “Rank x available when. Represented =>50% and been a member for =>14days and online for =>30h and earned =>1500 influence.

Associated Risks
Needs to be done in a easy to understand way and need to be careful that it can’t be misused by members. For example if a member only required influence a member can join, buy influence then automatically get access to the bank, make it empty (Might be prevented with suggestions https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/CDI-Guilds-Logistics-and-QOL/4399798 but only if the leaders set the correct rules) and leave. So it’s important to warn members for these sort of things when setting rules.

Proposal Overview
Auto-Represent the first Guild you join, but show a tool-tip explaining this feature

Goal of Proposal
Learning people how the representing works. It’s something you need to explain to almost every new member.

Proposal Functionality
Whenever a person joins a guild while not being in any other guild automatically let him represent and give a small tutorial how representing works.

Most people really don’t understand this when they are new to GW2.

Associated Risks
None.

Ohoni.6057:

Personally I would really like this and we can discuss it more when we get to the Raid phase of the discussion. i specifically like the idea of making them part of the Living World with complimentary story, strategic group challenge and rewards that really show of that you have beaten the content.

Please no, none of this. The Triple Threat event is already bad enough. I really don’t like the content in the game where you need to “organize” well in advance and hang out on a map for hours just to stand any chance of completing it.

…

If you do insist on adding more of that sort of content, then do not give it any cool unique rewards that players might want even if they have no interest in that type of event. If it takes a lot of time then it can involve a larger quantity of reward to justify the time spent, but it should not be a higher quality of reward, including unique skins, than one could earn elsewhere, because any player that really does not enjoy that sort of gaming experience should never feel bribed into doing it anyways just because he wants that specific reward.

It doesn’t have to be Teq / TT level, and I’d suggest it shouldn’t, if it is tied into LS. Marionette and Dry Top are more around the difficulty I’d expect, and at that should be repeatable content (as in guild missions) so there’s always a number of guilds attempting them week-to-week.

The challenging bit would be organising them. Guilds tend to pick up the slack there. Non-guild members looking for rewards could just join a party and help out where needed.

…although on looking back over it the original post was about instanced content.

No player should ever be ‘required’ to do raids with a guild for Living Story. If it happens to appear in relation to the living story, put it under a separate category, as Teq and TT were, so you don’t end up with players feeling they’ve ‘missed’ part of the story achievement line by not being able to participate with a large guild.

No player should ever be ‘required’ to do raids with a guild for Living Story. If it happens to appear in relation to the living story, put it under a separate category, as Teq and TT were, so you don’t end up with players feeling they’ve ‘missed’ part of the story achievement line by not being able to participate with a large guild.

Even in a separate category, it still feels like missing out. It needs to be something random players can just randomly hop into without needing to ask “mother may I” from anyone or coordinating a time and a place to meet up for it. It needs to be something you can just go and do.

JonPeters.5630:

Great points here and I think what I am hinting at is that if there was a way to maintain the current guild functionality of multiple guilds but also add a way to really commit to a singular guild what are the features old and new that you think are important for your basic guilds vs your, for lack of a better term, “home” guild.

Jon

That statement really fills me with dread. Please do not take anything currently available away from what I’ll call a non-primary guild, and if you are going to be adding functionality, please make sure that if it is something that grants any kind of in game advantage (access to raids, buffs, areas, gear, skins, whatever) that it is available to smaller guilds.

My primary guild is about a dozen active people and another dozen or two that we see occasionally. I’ve known most of these people for years before GW2, and gaming in the same MMO is mostly what keeps us together.

However, most of my primary guild is also member of another larger guild of maybe about 30 or so people that we do missions and other random things with frequently – it started because missions are (and remain) such an enormous pain to try to do as a small guild (seriously, try even a tier 1 bounty with 5 or 8 people online). Yet I’ve gotten to know some of this other guild and I want to keep playing with them.

Please don’t make me choose between the people I’ve known for years and some kind of game mechanics that penalizes me for not wanting to spend most of my time in a huge guild where you’re just another face in the crowd.

Guild Halls
Guild vs Guild fights
Guild Halls
GvG Maps and fighting system,

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Castrin.8972:

Proposal Overview
Guild Material Storage and Crafting

Goal of Proposal
Allow players with crafting skills to craft items for the guild via a centralized system.

Proposal Functionality
In the Guild in game menu, on the left side there would be a “workshop” tab which would lead to a guild version of the crafting menu found at the crafting stations. This crafting station would support all crafting options and employ the level and knowledge (i.e. recipes) of the character doing the crafting (no separate exp system needed).

This in turn would be tied to a guild materials storage the same as each player has but with a stack limit of 5000 for each material stack. This would be a guild storage similar to the stash/trove/cave system, separated based on current material groupings, with rights to it assignable in the guild.

Any items crafted would be deposited in the highest level of guild storage unless full, then in descending order till an open slot is found. To access the finished item, or to deposit materials would require being at a guild bank location in game. The actual crafting of the object can be done anywhere in game just like building guild bonuses are able to currently.

Associated Risks
Security would be tricky but other than that I can’t think of any.

This is an interesting idea. What would you do about players who constantly take from thee stock pile, for example hitting limit everyday and not re-stocking. Would this be handled by just cautioning the player or would you design levels of restriction?

Chris

Restocking the guild stores would be up to the guild members that have rights to the guild storage. It’d be up to the leaders to decide who is trustworthy and given access. In my experience if you give the guild leaders the tools to manage things it’s usually OK to let the guild deal with people emptying the stockpile. Managing guild theft is a bit out side of the proposal.

I’m not proposing an endless supply of mats that appear for guild use. I’m 100% sure that would be seriously abused.

Peace.

Devata.6589:

Automated guild-ranks.

No and just no. Beyond the “entry” rank assignment it’s a bad idea to automate any of the other ranks. If you can’t be bothered to manage your guild and have no one to help then it’s time to trim the membership or just close the guild.

Right now there is enough granularity for what is there. If things are added then they should include rights assignment like everything else. If things get really complicated it might be an idea to add guild roles as a sort of template to streamline assigning rights.

Peace.

Some sort of scaling system for influence and/or missions that better accommodates smaller sized guilds would be nice. While it’s probably most efficient to be in a huge guild with tons of influence, everything unlocked and every mission always available, for me it’s far more enjoyable to be in a small guild with friends, we’re about 15 people. While we’re fairly active, after some months of forming the guild we finally managed to unlock the real Bounty Hunter mission. It’s not a bad thing to slowly work towards something, but at this rate we might see the full experience by 2018 or so. :P For what I’ve heard most missions are definitely geared towards large guilds as well, so I hope we can even get to do them together.

Though by all means I don’t want them to be easier for smaller groups, a part of me finds odd enjoyment in soul crushingly difficult stuff haha.

Another thing is guild identity. While every aspect of this game is rather “asdhlgadfsaka I have no words /drool”, currently guilds are rather bland. They aren’t really recognizable apart from the name when you mouse over another character. It would be nice to have the option to look like a coherent group if we wanted to. There’s currently only a few possible few items with guild heraldry on them. One chestpiece for each armour class, while nice is rather limited. Then there’s a few weapons featuring the guild crest, though for me, of those only the shield stands out (the exotic one that drops, not the one from the actual guild vendor). Even better, that shield is absolutely perfect!

Many games solve this identity thing with a tabard – which would be good .. but the real GW thing should of course be a cloak. Or better, a choice!

And of course I’d also like Guild Halls, GvG and all that, but that’ll be for the other topic. :P

JonPeters.5630:

I see a variety of comments on feeling more attachment to a specific guild and a lot of talk of the # of guilds people are a part of and the fear that is causing a lack of attachment. This lack of attachment keeps players players from being compelled to belong to any of their guilds instead of being compelled to belong to all of them (which was the original intention of this design of guilds as more social groups rather than as exclusive cliques).

I’d love to see some discussion on how we could create greater attachment to a single guild without taking away the current value of membership in multiple guilds.

I think that involves some discussion of the following.

1) What is currently a part of being in a guild that can’t be taken away, and why would it be bad to take it away?
2) Is there anything that is currently part of being in a guild that could be taken away and given to a more focused guild association? What could we do to mitigate some of the negativity of taking away current functionality? For example replace it on all guilds or enhance it for the one guild that it is tied to?
3) What kind of features are there that don’t even exist yet that would really only make sense with a more fixed association with a single guild?

A lot of good design discussions come from answering these questions anyway which I would summarize as what can/can’t we take away? What can/can’t we change? What can/can’t we add? I ask them in that order because it’s generally the order that they are easiest to implement in.

Jon

Honestly, I feel that if you were to reduce the number of guilds a person can belong to (say 2 for instance) and introduce an alliance system where guilds can ally themselves with other guilds, then This would make the guilds more close knit and still allow people to interact with friends in other guilds. I feel this would be the best way to resolve the issue.

Each guild could have x max number of allies. This system would help smaller guilds to have more people to support their activities/missions. The alliance system should also allow a guild to earn guild merits/influence by interacting with the ally guilds missions and events.

I would be personally very unhappy if the amount of Guilds a player could belong to was reduced to only two.

Ideas that add to the game are great…ideas that remove what we already enjoy? Not so great. As evidenced by the player-base reaction to the latest Feature Patch.

Chris Whiteside.6102:

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

I would be personally very unhappy if the amount of Guilds a player could belong to was reduced to only two.

Ideas that add to the game are great…ideas that remove what we already enjoy? Not so great. As evidenced by the player-base reaction to the latest Feature Patch.

Yep that seems to be the resounding feedback about reduction in guild occupancy. Alliances can exist outside of that though.

Chris

Indeed. Alliances would be adding something to the game, and I’m sure they would make many players pleased. Especially, Alliance chat. =)

Not sure about the logistics of Influence, Bonuses, Buffs, or anything else. What I mean is would people be asking for such things? Would several smaller Guilds want to pool their resources in such a way as to be able to, then, participate in content only the larger Guilds are able to now?

It might require some thought.

Alliances may have some merit – I’m sure there’s a few things they could open up in terms of large-scale activities. Reducing guilds per account would only pressure guilds into supporting every one of their players’ interests, however, if they want to retain them. Guilds of friends would be ripped apart while people flocked to larger guilds in order to continue earning commendations and so on.

Make no mistake, GW2’s acknowledgement that players mix with different circles of other players was a huge step in the right direction for MMOs.

What it needs going forward is some mechanism to make that easier, and the suggestion above for a different-coloured ‘channel’ per guild in the chat would be very helpful toward that end – I’m representing one particular guild 95% of the time because my friends are there and I don’t want to miss the conversation, even though server resource guilds I’m in could really use the influence.

Inculpatus cedo.9234:

I would be personally very unhappy if the amount of Guilds a player could belong to was reduced to only two.

Ideas that add to the game are great…ideas that remove what we already enjoy? Not so great. As evidenced by the player-base reaction to the latest Feature Patch.

I agree with you, that we should not take away any existing features. As it stands now though, being a member in mulitple guilds is not really functional. If you are repping in guild X, you cannot contribute to guild Y, see the MOD of guild Y, or communicate with guild Y in guild chat. This functionally eliminates you from being a member of guild Y in all but name.

If these issues were resolved by opening up a seperate channel for all guilds you are a member of, dividing all influence earned between each guild you are a member of and displaying the MOD and online members of each guild you are a member of, then it would not be a problem. In essance you would need full access to each guild you are in at all times to truly be in multiple guilds.

I’m not into guilds too much personally, never really see the fun in being on teamspeak with 20+ people… so keep my perspective in mind.

A lot of the former/current ’’raid’’ formats have been very challenging organisation wise. This is something that really turned me off from getting involved in these events.
The Queen’s Gauntlet to me is the perfect example of how not to let people organise.
Especially before the rewards got increased people just didn’t care. If I wanted to get a decent attempt going I would have to spend hours to get people to do it nicely.
It was a royal pain if I wanted to do this on a daily basis. At that point people did not catch on, and I feel therefor the rewards were upped to give better incentive.
All the fights were fairly easy, some tiny tricks to get around them.
But more often than not I killed my boss before half the timer was over (or got him ready to die)… and then you ask others where they are and all of a sudden everyone at the centaur boss vanished. This to me is the perfect example of what isn’t fun.

I would love for the game to organise it for you, rather than you having to go out of your way to make people listen to you. Hence why so many guilds go out of their way to not play with others. Having content for guilds only is fine. It’s not my preference and I believe you’d lock people out.
But if you do make open-world content, please add some more ways to structure fights. Marionette was a nice attempt but I feel you could improve on that.
Tequatl right now is simply a zergfest.
Three headed wurm is really easy, but difficulty lies in having everyone do it.

Imagine having a group of 100 people, and you want them to all raise their hand at the same time. That should be easy, but in practise it’s not.
Solution: music ‘’put your hands up in the air’‘… and it’s done.

I personally would love more difficult content, but not in the way that the current world bosses are. I hope you catch my metaphore.
And personally I don’t think that super difficult encounters belong in the open world.
I’m quite surprised we haven’t had a ‘’mega-dungeon’’ of sorts yet, as I think that would be a better solution.