Guild Fort Mechanics
 

Recently I had "towered" with some random guild and noticed that the procedure was pretty much the same at it had been since I started back in late 2010. 1. Recruit randos while standing in Graal City advertising it. 2. Tell all guild mates to head near the fort and wait to attack. 3. Once attacking the fort spam the flag. 4. One the flag is down yell at the guild mates to either not afk, flag, down, and no spam, or kick. Rinse and repeat.

TLDR

If you could add some new mechanic to guild forts what would it be and why? Or are you just ok with the current mechanics and why.

- Import the shop profits that Era guild forts enjoy.
- Perhaps take a page from other tower defense games and add NPC enemy/turrets that can be paid for cheap (perhaps using gralats, or a guild points currency?)

Penalties for holding a single tower for long periods of time.

Example: (Guild) holds Deadwood for 1 hour. They gain an hours worth of "points" or "tower hours." (Guild) holds Deadwood for another hour and never loses the tower. But instead of getting an hours worth of points they get 45 minutes worth of "points."

Do guilds in Era have their own "pool" of money that the guild can use?

Layouts seems doable not sure about bounty system, that would maybe make more sense if you are just pk'ing.

Like 10 gralats for killing the guild leader or w/e, would have a cooldown

So like sacking the quarterback?

>trying to fix something that isn't broken when the actual problem is the guild system itself

unrelated but: There should be a system where for certain number of people you kill at each tower opens up a hat you can purchase. There would be a store with a hat/item for each of the towers, and people can try to collect each one.

back on topic uhh maybe make a system where there is a cooldown for kicking players? like you can only kick them after X amount of hours so you actually have to find members that are active and good

Who's fixing or trying to fix? These are merely hypothetical suggestions, albeit aiming for realistic probabilities but suggestions nontheless. Moreover, what is what is wrong about the "guild system itself"? I'm not defending anything here just prefere elaboration for arguments made.

The fact that you can recruit random people, and kick them in the blink of an eye, without any punishment is the problem.

In order for that to be fixed. It would have to be something like this.

1. Total guild hours reflect on amount of hours that members have towered for.
So Steve has 30, Megan has 20, Robert has 340 = 390 total guild hours.

2. If you kick a member, then their guild hours are removed from the total.

3. You can't join another guild for 1 day, after leaving, unless the leader kicks you. (No guild hopping)

4. If you want to ally a guild, that guild would need to have 100 hours during the season. (This way people won't just ally their guild with 1k hours based on the restriction, so it has to be during the season)

5. You can't be in more than 1 guild at the same time. (Guilds would be focused on only Spar, only tower, or guilds can be focused on both. That's if your members are active enough.)


I am not entirely sure how this would work out. Restriciting all the nubs that helped you gain hours, hours disappear if members leave. I guess there would be no more "1k" guilds. Guild members would actually go for the highest amount of hours.

If guilds were rewarded with a hat after every 1,000 hours, except for every 5,000, then that would solve that problem. Plus people would have passed CoM, VG, and CJ by now.

1k hat
2k hat
3k hat
4k hat
5k item? gif hat?
6k hat
7 you get it.

Guild members would settle in for the long haul, "guilds are for life, not just..."

On a Somewhat Unrelated Note:
I think there should be a system where you can choose if it is a towering guild, or a social guild. There could be different ways of recruiting players.

That is a good idea, since then, when people want to look for a specific guild:

Search Guild Database; Filter; o Recruiting, o Spar; Searching...

A-Z guilds that have had at least 5-10 members active during x amount of days.

Even other filters like, o amount of tower hours [xxx], o year when guild was created [xxxx], etc.

The letter o is the circle for the filters btw...

-King of the hill tower system for the castle
-New guild system that promotes and rewards loyalty to one guild & no spam recruiting

What I have seen from anime that deal with mmo/rpgs is a bulletin board type of thing were you can announce recruitment/ jobs... etc. However, I feel this type of thing would be better suited for Deltaria than classic.

I strongly disagree with this. As someone who paid damn hard earned gralats to purchase my own guild, then ally other guilds so we could have more people to chat with and team up with on holiday events, I would definitely NOT want these functions to become useless.

Not every guild is about towering or sparring. rather than being so self centered, take into account all of the people who this would negatively affect.

This idea is ridiculous and extremely selfish.

Beat me to it.
Nothings wrong with the actual fort mechanics really.

Adding on to what Ivy said: not all guilds are centered around towering, sparring, or PKing. The social aspect of Classic is still a thing, and guilds play a very big part in the way that socializing work. Family guilds, social guilds, event guilds, they all are social guilds that would be destroyed if this system was implemented.

Yeah, the tower system works pretty well in my opinion.

The guild system is the real issue for why the spam recruiting still exists. It may still exist if you went with the "they can't join a guild for a day if they leave/are kicked" since you could still kick and recruit noobs as a guild and you would remain unaffected. The players would be, but your guild wouldn't be. You could also have the players use noob accounts(much more difficult, but still possible.) I would personally like it to where the guild is restricted as to how many recruits It could have per day. Maybe "your guild can only recruit 5 members per day" or something similar. Probably some issues with it, but I think it would be a good solution for not impeding social guilds while also knocking back the spam recruiting.

Or you could just use this idea. How guilds would change based on their distinction is beyond me.

Are you saying that spar guilds, and tower guilds aren't social?

When I said "etc", a filter for social guilds was included in that category.

You "earned"? You already said that you get itunes all the time.

A simple way to fix your "dream family guild" is to just categorize it as social, then you can add other social guilds, simple fix.

Doesn't change the fact they were earned, they come out of the player's pockets to begin with.

I don't see why event and family guilds couldn't exist under Aguzo's system. It seems like most of them rarely have 25 members that are consistently active. Also, purely social guilds could probably just be replaced with a system to allow people to send messages to groups. I think it would make more guilds have an actual purpose, whereas right now many of them are basically just chatrooms.

If it isnt the mechanics then elaborate on what exactly you think is wrong. Saying stuff like oui i dont liek the whole guild sytum in the furst plaice don fix it stpd. Please explain clearly what you dont like about it. Furthermore, social justice warriors will not change anything here, this is just to suggest new ideas/suggestions... etc. The likelihood of any of these ever coming to fruition is null.

It's quite clear. The current guild system prioritizes spam recruiting and then kicking people over and over for short-term benefits, which honestly degrade the value of a guild. If guild loyalty was forcibly promoted, the other problems would be solved by proxy. Forcing guilds to lose spar points or tower "points" (or time if the system is kept) for kicking people or for members leaving will promote a more loyal environment and stop the abuse of the guild system that currently happens.

Don't try to "fix" it.

Simply wipe all the guild's hours after that remake all the towers next make a guild clash system for basing add a actual guild house with meeting rooms and stuff like that and rooms for all the members and they can edit it as well and so shields can work during basing next and turrets next change the hp system. To be continued

Do you even tower m8?

SPARRING IS LIFE.

Everyone who is saying to not change anything, doesn't even tower, or supports the easy way to 1k. I haven't towered with an active guild for maybe 2 years, because it's too boring.

Recruit nubs, take tower, gives nubs powers to recruit, let them do the work, kick all nubs in the morning, repeat process. There needs to be a punishement for kicking people. That way people will recruit wisely. Maybe their friends, or just skilled players.

The thing is, quantity > quality can only do so much when towering.

I paid for these features back in 2012, way before i was spending money on this game lol

Exactly. The towering players of classic shouldn't dictate something that will affect a mass majority of the other players, whether they participate in towering or not. Use your brain ffs

While the system would work for social guilds I don't think it would be fair to tweak the entire system for just certain types of guilds and try and find ways to make it work for other kinds of guilds. Classic is made up of various types of activities - sparring, towering, PKing, socializing, and guilds should be able to encompass all of these factors of Classic.

Also, lots of people like to be in multiple guilds, and some have guilds where the only members are their friends just for the sake of keeping them all in one place. While many guilds are just chatrooms/places to talk, many players enjoy these types of guilds as they encompass the social side of Classic.

Also, Aguzo, I never said towering/sparring/PKing guilds weren't social. I'm sure you know what I meant by that, as many players refer to social guilds as guilds who do not/rarely partake in these activities.

Who said it would affect social guilds? They can still ally, when they categorize themselves as social.

Is this all because I didn't want to stay on your vampiri family tag or whatever?

True, there are multiple guilds. They last what? 1 week, everyone is usually only loyal to one guild. I have so many tags.

Only allowing 1 guild would fix the following:

Guilds using low score to spar against guilds with a higher score, so they can lower them on the ladder.

Maybe the server would have an easier time with less data stored.

Gtg, so I can't add anymore.

Don't think that I am a mean person, Yeah, I also have a ton of guilds that have a lot of memories, but I am willing to sacrifice my guilds and saved guild names to just be in 1 single guild. Then it would actually be "Guilds are for life, not just..." (The perils of guild something something)

People aren't blind. We are well aware of what is happening with towers. I'm just not convinced with any ideas on here, they are one-sided and unequal to the rest. So don't try to replace the current one with unappealing ones.

You also do realize that 25 people won't spend their entire time on towers for a pixel hat. They should just abolish the towering system and implement something like a tower seize, that would be much more appealing to me.

Hypocrisy...

The towers are fine. You go in, take the flag, and defend it.

The guild system, and the way people use it to get 1ks effortlessly, while sometimes using others along the way... that's the problem.

If there were a punishment for kicking people, like removing hours, reducing spar points (which that member gained), then it would be reduced from the total.

Oh, the second one was a bait. :)

"You can't be in more than one guild, you can't join another guild for a day, deduct their total hours when someone is removed from the guild."
Do you expect a group of 25 people to tower for a month or more worth of time? What kind of system do you want? I might as well just remove the entire guild system.

There are people who do that already...

Actually that's exactly what's expected, because that's what an actual guild is.

(See Aguzo I don't just disagree with you for the sake of disagreeing, it just happens to turn out that way)

I'm sorry but 'one guild limit' isn't going to happen. With a guild limit of 25 members it would be too anti-social to expect people to stick to one guild tag at all times.

Then just make the guild count higher? If that person has enough hours, or has enough spar points, then they wouldn't want to leave either.

http://i.imgur.com/puBUw9f.png

Yeah, I can see how it could be anti-social. Guilds that practice spar/help others get points, help others with towering, etc. That would be affected. But then again, guilds would be much more than "just another tag". If the count was higher, then you wouldn't even need allies.

Is a 50 member limit bad? Or giving 50 people a tower hat is bad? (That's if 50 people actually contributed)

Sure, someone could say... Well, I'm bored of towering, so I don't want to tower anymore.

What would you do with said member/s?
Maybe, if they haven't done gained hours, or sparred during x amount of days, then they could be kicked. Then again, if the person contributed a lot (2000+ hours), I don't think they would want to leave.

We already know what we're doing. It's just not single-guild limits, so I thought I would point that out since it seems to be a misconception. I welcome the discussion though, it might bring up something that hasn't already been looked at. Just be aware that a lot of this is already decided on.

I like the idea of the longer a guild holds a tower the easier it is to take it. For example every minute the flag loses 1 hp, or if a guild holds it long enough, the members have a death cooldown before respawning, or a health debuff, or have it based on the certain amount of hours done to that specific tower by that guild in a week to encourage basing at different places and not have the same guild own a tower for a year. It kinda sucks when newish players wanna tower but have no chance of ever getting one without joining a huge ass guild rather than make their own.

These are good, but the hp would need to have a limit. Can't just remove the guild from the tower, after they have been holding the tower for so long. Maybe a limit of removing 50 hp from it's original amount.

the way the towering system works is perfectly fine but as thallen said, the way the guild system works is a problem. the suggestions i've read to adjust towers in this thread are all horrendous by the way.

why punish people for holding a tower for too long???

To give other people a chance of holding it.

why don't they just get good?

why are so many ideas these days like "this guild is too powerful, completely nerf them so us bad players have a chance"?

Simply wipe all the guild's hours after that remake all the towers next make a guild cash system for basing add a actual guild house with meeting rooms and stuff like that and rooms for all the members and they can edit it as well and so shields can work during basing next and turrets next change the hp system.
And here's some improvements to the towering.
1. Lets say towers take damage over time and the damage affects how much hp the tower has so the more damage the tower. But it can be repaired you can buy tools with a certain durability and you repair broken parts by playing a minigame but if you were to get hit you would have to start over.
Next increase the member cap and tower size.
Along with the guild clash system make it so if you kick a member you guild let's say looses 300 gralts and it goes to the member that was kicked.
Next is to make the ally system have more depth. For example my guild was certain divisions for certain things such as a war tag and special services and stuff like that but what if you all worked together to get that 1k hat wouldn't it be fair for everyone to get the hat. Not just the ones on the main tag.

you get points for creativity i guess

If guilds had a category such as misc, towering, and sparring, then I could understand the one guild limit for towering/sparring.

Yeah but the reality of guilds is not that black and white. You can be a 'social guild' and still participate in guild sparring or forts if and when you choose to. There is no need to make people box themselves in.