AQ3D Guild System

who doesn't want guild? i cant wait ,but they need to socialize the guilds a little more, like putting money in the guild vault and giving the guild leader to someone who needs gold.

 

Not really a fan of the current guild system; I think there are a lot of problems right now.

1) First, when you create a guild, you have to create a tag as well, but you can only use 26 letters (A-Z) and the guild name has to be between 3 to 5 characters long. Years down the line, it's going to be harder to assign a tag to a guild, especially with dummy accounts hogging up guild tags. And there's not really much restriction (i.e. doesn't matter if you're a Guardian or not; anyone can create a guild) other than the fact that you need to spend gold.

To explain that more clearly, here's the sum of possible permutations with repetition.

Number of possible three letter guild names: 26^3 = 17,576
Number of possible four letter guild names: 26^4 = 465,976
Number of possible five letter guild names: 26^5 = 11,881,376

Add those all up and you get 12,364,928 possible guild tags, technically a little less since some tags are censored (i.e. inappropriate names). Twelve million might sound like a lot, but some tags wouldn't really be meaningful to players (e.g. XQZXQ). So ideally, there'll be less meaningful tags. If people created tags as meaningful words, there are around 15,000 five letter words in the English dictionary, and less number of meaningful words using four letters and three letters.

So what happens, when you have more players playing over a period of five years, and the demand for guilds grow? It's going to become harder to make meaningful guild tags, and brute forcing (non-computationally) the various possible permutations just wouldn't reasonable for the average player since they'll be spending hours, possibly days or weeks, finding a tag.

Potential solution would be to move the length up to 6 at some point, but personally, I prefer that full guild names be the tag, instead of a shortened name.

2) Second biggest issue is that you can't restrict roles. Maybe you're the leader of the guild and you want to promote them as an officer. But officers can add and remove players from the guild. What if you only want the officer to have the ability to add players, but not remove players?

3) Third thing is, there aren't really activities that require a guild. If you need help in the game, it's always simple to just reach out to players for help.

 

It does bow but it’s still lacking that potential like guild wars an also more members maybe alliances too.

 

I don't think guilds will be expansive enough, especially considering the stagnation of the game's population right now. Guilds right now are more like social groups.

 

There should be a creation of a quest that REQUIRES guild participation. Large guilds would have an easier time rounding up members to complete quests. Smaller guilds would be more motivated to increase their numbers.
The creation of guild halls would be nice too. But this is a pretty intensive thing and probably would require a lot of work on the developers part.

 

I don't like games that actually force you to join a guild to do quests. I think players should be free to do things independently, with a party, or with random people, but not have to join just another social group to do certain things in-game. In fact, guilds in video games just aren't as popular as they used to be now that people are interconnected with social media. As much as players want guilds or even certain guild features, it puts too much strain on actual progress of the game itself.

 

I don't like being forced to do things either but this would just be an incentive to join a guild. There has to be some sort of incentive for people to work together. Otherwise, you'd have a bunch of lone wolves running around. Maybe you LIKE being a lone wolf but I think that there should be a reason for working together. I like working with other people and if there is a reason for people to be more inclined to work together then I am all for it.

 

The incentive is that you get to join a guild with people that share similar principles that you share; in other words, you get your own small social group where you can discuss things and help each other out. Guilds really don't have to be anything more than that.

The moment you start adding exclusive guild quests, the more exclusion you actually get, meaning that guild leaders are pickier with choosing guild members, which is counterintuitive to incentivizing players to join guilds. In other words, you start seeing parallelism in the community where there's a division between low leveled players vs. high leveled players, highly active players vs. infrequently active players, etc. And on top of that, you have people spamming guild recruitments with level requirements and other things constantly, because guild leaders will want to choose the best members that can help with exclusive quests.

It's part of the reason why I generally don't like games that emphasize guilds, because it takes away the holistic focus of the game itself. Rather than communicating with the general population and being able to cooperate with anybody, guilds emphasize a smaller scope, so then you're only cooperating with other guild members. It especially plagues games with a lower population count; for instance, in AQWorlds, you won't see a lot of players playing through older events with other random players, because there's a sense of illusion that there aren't many players showing up to a room, and so players tend to play older events in private room instances with other guild members.

 

I can see your point. Well spoken, Snowy.