|
I actually think this idea would be very good, but I still think incentives are kind of required otherwise half the people in guilds would stop because they don't get a hat. Maybe this "rating" could include things that individuals in the guild do such as spars or pks, as well as gs and towers, wins would increase rating and losses obviously decrease it, all these factors added together would give a good idea of the quality of the guild and it's members.
|
What I sort of had in mind was a way to get the right players in the right guilds. There'd still be incentives, and that would help boost a rating (ex: this guild reached 5k, therefore they have a higher rating than a guild at 1k). Players would naturally want to join guilds with higher ratings, which is why I believe loyality and consistency should be the largest component. However, if a guild also has high ratings in other areas, that will show too. The point is not to show which guild is the greatest, that's a matter of opinion, but the best for the individual. Individual ratings would follow suit. If a guild is known for sparring, it will naturally attract good sparers. If a guild is known for towering, PKers and tower takers would join. Just so long as there is many ways to boost their rating (not solely tower and spar I hope), it would help people find guilds they want to join and stay with instead of hopping around, and make creators more intentional on their purpose before creating a guild. Nobody wants to be the owner of a guild with a poor rating. That way you don't have a bunch of dead guilds lying around with two members then they're never used again afterwards.