Pokemon Universe MMORPG
Pokémon Universe => Ideas & Suggestions => Game Features => Topic started by: LeoReborn on March 12, 2011, 12:27:55 AM
-
Ever had trouble deciding what guild to join?
I have an Idea, how about the ability to join multiple guilds?
Not infinitely so, but 5-10 MAX.
Opinions?
Also, how about a leader system?
I know the leader idea has been brought up, but let me explain..
Say you don't like the leader of your guild.
You challenge them, and whoever wins, becomes the new leader.
I'd suggest a 3 Pokemon per side rule.
-
That could work
-
But maybe, you can't decide, a certain amount of people must also want to overthrow, and you decide who battles.
-
what do you mean?
-
If a situation like that arises, a tourney-ish system would work.
-
sort of like what the Pures are doing? for spot of head honcho?
-
Say 8 people want the leader gone, but they can't decide who will battle them.
A
A moves on to fight D
B
D Wins
C
D moves on to fight A
D
E
F moves on
F
F Wins
G
H moves on..
H
The final match would be Trainer D VS. Trainer F.
Whoever won that would battle the leader.
Of course there would be pre-battle heals.
-
ah...
-
so can i be in two guilds?
-
if this idea is accepted, then yes.
-
So far, just about everyone in my guild has stated that they dislike the idea of being in multiple guilds at once. Multi-guilding is along the lines of being on the side of different warring countries simultaneously while a war is taking place. It just seems like it breaks an unspoken guild code of some sorts.
-
please no offense but a multiple guild system wouldn't be a very good idea D:
-
please no offense but a multiple guild system wouldn't be a very good idea D:
Should i go philosophical?
-
I will second Amphi and the others against it for not making the 'multi guild system'.
-
How about Guild Unions?
-
How about Guild Unions?
I agree with Jerry and everyone. Allowing a player to join multiple guilds at once is a terrible idea. It would create a lot of unnecessary smaller guilds. Everyone would try to start their own guild because they could still be apart of a larger guild as well. It will lead to hundreds of failed guilds.
But every now and then two guilds working together against two other guilds could be a cool idea.
-
A guild union would actually be a good idea. Multiple guilds teaming up to become a union/alliance would make guild wars and pvp more fun.
-
that would be cool
-
I'm thinking more loma style, where you have to contribute to level up the guild, and gain skillpoints, etc. If you want to get rid of the leader, you have to pay the amount invested by him.
-
Well think about this you build up this amazing faction/guild/clan or w/e you wanna call it and then some new comer comes in challenges you and overthrows you taking over all your hard work and then ruins your faction/guild/clan or w/e that would just be a terrible idea all the guilds In PU would be chaotic and disorganized. This would just leave people QQing all the time about guilds and how they hate their own members
-
Yea, you totally dug this thread up.
-
I do not support the idea of being able to join multiple guilds.
The idea of challenging the leader for the leading role sounds good, but usmerchant had a point when he said newcomers with no idea how to lead a guild could come in, challenge the leader and totally ruin the guild.
-
I'm thinking more loma style, where you have to contribute to level up the guild, and gain skillpoints, etc. If you want to get rid of the leader, you have to pay the amount invested by him.
To elaborate on Baka's little blurb here,
I'd say a Guild should have a Size variable. This affects the minimum rank a user would need in the guild, to challenge the leader.
In a small guild (15), Top 3
In a large Guild (100), Top 10
Does this make sense to anyone?
-
Challenge the leader? As in, to a pokemon battle? And whoever wins is the new leader of the guild?
Sounds like a bad idea to me. Imagine if we chose leaders IRL like that.
-
I'm thinking more loma style, where you have to contribute to level up the guild, and gain skillpoints, etc. If you want to get rid of the leader, you have to pay the amount invested by him.
To elaborate on Baka's little blurb here,
I'd say a Guild should have a Size variable. This affects the minimum rank a user would need in the guild, to challenge the leader.
In a small guild (15), Top 3
In a large Guild (100), Top 10
Does this make sense to anyone?
Yes, but you would need to be a higher-up, if you wanted to challenge them.
-
it's definitely an interesting idea and a guild/clan system would be very good to have for a game like this...
But there would definitely need to be an instanced area for guild members to meet, and a tournament system would be interesting although I'm not sure how that would work if battles were to be on such a large scale.
What if your guilds instanced area was a town, that only your guild and invited guests can access, in the beginning it is just a blank area but if you build up enough currency then you would be able to populate it with common buildings such as a pokecenter, a shop which with currency could be upgraded to house higher level items (pokeballs and other things of the sorts)
Heck maybe it could go as far as to be able to set up your own personal gym, which guild members would be able to practice on, the leader of the guild would be able to set up the AI and which pokemon they use and possibly even what skills they have so that the guild members and guests could practice, they would not be able to gain and xp but the guild leader may be able to set prizes from his own inventory for defeating the gym.
So as an example, say the guild leader is a really experienced player and has high level items that most lower level players couldn't afford, he could place one of them as a prize if they defeat his gym (though he would have to set it fairly high)
at the moment I'm tired and can't think of any more ideas but I'll come up with more another time.
-
I personally would like to stay the leader of my clan, and I think everyone should be able to. It's not fair that you make a clan and can be overthrown. Unless everybody wants yo out or inactive.
-
With the concept of being able to overthrow a leader, it is a bad idea...
If the clan wants someone out they can set up their own battle to prove it, but the leader should not be forced out of his own clan if he is not wanted, the fact is he created it and he is in charge.
-
I agree. Also people should be able to ask, and the leader decide. Also, I think there should be 2 or 3 admins for each Guild. The leader can recruit them. Also maybe they can trade, like someone give the leader a PKMN in return for ownership, or money. If the leader chooses to do so.
-
What if you end up the leader of all the guilds wouldn't you just combine them to one then?
-
No one would be able to be the leader of every guild.
-
You can only be leader of ONE guild, due to being able to be in one guild.
-
I agree with the others who say that this would be a bad idea.It would get pretty complicated.I mean one guild alone is alot of people.Maybe a guild could have allies with other guilds instead of combining a couple of guilds together.Also what if a member of a guild wants to be leader and they want to battle the leader to take his spot,but what if the leader is never online or is on vacation or something.
-
If that's the case, I would say one of these:
1) the guild disbands after the Leader is absent after 6 Months
or
2) The Highest Contributor not including the Leader takes the role of Leader after 6 months..
-
Or, there could be a coleader and when the leader isn't online for a long time,the colead would become the new leader.
-
I guess when the Pre-Beta comes, We'll find out then?
-
Ya, everyone will find out in good time.
-
Where would there be a Guild-station?
The guild-station being a station for creation, and guild maintainence
-
I would say in some highly populated city that is the center of most activities. Not sure if there will be transportation like Ship Voyages and Railway systems with accessible trains, but a Port city or a City that connects all other Railways would be a good place to start to think about a Guild-station.
Or it could be found in every city. I personally prefer choice #1.
Also I really like guardianAQ's idea:
it's definitely an interesting idea and a guild/clan system would be very good to have for a game like this...
But there would definitely need to be an instanced area for guild members to meet, and a tournament system would be interesting although I'm not sure how that would work if battles were to be on such a large scale.
What if your guilds instanced area was a town, that only your guild and invited guests can access, in the beginning it is just a blank area but if you build up enough currency then you would be able to populate it with common buildings such as a pokecenter, a shop which with currency could be upgraded to house higher level items (pokeballs and other things of the sorts)
Heck maybe it could go as far as to be able to set up your own personal gym, which guild members would be able to practice on, the leader of the guild would be able to set up the AI and which pokemon they use and possibly even what skills they have so that the guild members and guests could practice, they would not be able to gain and xp but the guild leader may be able to set prizes from his own inventory for defeating the gym.
So as an example, say the guild leader is a really experienced player and has high level items that most lower level players couldn't afford, he could place one of them as a prize if they defeat his gym (though he would have to set it fairly high)
at the moment I'm tired and can't think of any more ideas but I'll come up with more another time.
Since player housing is a possibility, and creating your own guild center is also one, why not have a Guild City under the Guild's control? The price to be paid would have to be really really high though. But it could be worth it with all the customization that would be available. But don't make it only accessible to the Guild members and invited guests. Why not make it accessible to all, so that whatever they do (Buy potions in a Guild Managed Mart, etc.) would be a good income for the Guild.
- While we are at the Guilds and Marts, why not also include Guild Merchandize... T-shirt with Guild Logo (in-game of course) Guild Logo hat, etc.
Cheers, Genbor
-
Well about leaders:
I think once a semester there should be a vote for the leader battle. I mean there are quite a lot leaders sitting on their fat ass, doing nothing. In this way leaders have to keep their members happy, which makes the position of leader less interesting (who cares since it is a bad idea to have half your guild wanting to be the leader), but it makes it fun for the member.
About the city idea:
It's great, but the guild will need its own financial leaders which are mappers, this should be a very high function (just under the leader)
-
Well there should be votes every so often to see who should become or stay as leader its only fair its fun aswell your worst enemy could be apart of the same clan and wants you out of the leaders seat. Just makes everything interesting you need votes from your fellow members but at the same time cant trust everyone.
-
If it's the leaders... sure no problem. But like it's been mentioned before, I would say the Guild Master stays. He created the guild, his word is final. So if you don't like it, leave and go to another Guild, and get revenge! 8D
Cheers, Genbor
-
If that where the case everyone would make their own guild just so they could stay as a leader therefore this whole guild idea would be pointless. In the case of over throwing the leader you either need to be nominated by so many people in the clan or the top 3 people etc should be able to challenge the leader for it.
-
Many people will want to make their own Guilds either way (myself included), the difference is, that if they are not prepared to put a lot of effort into it, than less people will join their Guilds - or stay in them - and they would have less benefits. So people, like in most MMORPGs even now, would still join the already existing better Guilds. So just the appeal of being able to be the leader of an already existing Guild wouldn't stop people to make their own. Besides, in my experience, people are lazy so they most often than not, join an already existing Guild with good reputation, and stuff to offer.
Of course I agree that if a Guild Master is inactive for a long time, there should be an option to replace him. But even that should be only possible after a set amount of inactivity, and the replacement candidate should contribute the same, or more to the Guild as the original creator/current Guild Master.
Cheers, Genbor
-
The only way you can threaten the leaders position is to be in the guild for so many days/months. If you win you become a leader and nobody can threaten you for so long and if you lose you either leave the guild or you get punished.
-
If more people want this system than I'll just state it: The Guild Master shouldn't be kicked out of the Guild because he lost. He gets punished enough by being Demoted. And being in the Guild for a certain amount of days is not enough for someone to challenge the Guild Master. Like I said, he should contribute the same amount or more to the Guild as the Guild Master so far has. That could mean coins, organizing Guild events etc., depending on how the Guild System will be like.
Why do I say this? Because a person must be active in the Guild to be able to even dream about challenging the current Guild Master. How so? Imagine a guy who just joins the Guild, gets all of it's benefits, but doesn't contribute at all to it and just exists within the Guild. That inactive member wouldn't be chosen anyway since nobody would want him, but he still shouldn't have the right to challenge the Guild Master's authority. This is not a barbarian tribe where the strongest becomes chief, even if he is as dumb as they come.
So if people would like the Challenge Guild Master option, I have to say:
- First, contribute the same or more amount to the Guild as the current Guild Master (nothing new there)
- Be chosen as a candidate by the Guild Members. (each guild member can vote once)
- And there should be a specific time of Guild Elections: a time where, if the current Guild Master
wishes to keep his post, should be able to prove his worth and not just the new candidate(s)
I still oppose this idea, but like I said, if more people want it, than it should be a little bit more organized. It would prevent a nameless new Recruit from being elected as a Guild Master (just for the fun of it), and would prevent people who weren't entirely serious about the role itself, but just wanted the name and the status it brought with it.
Cheers, Genbor
-
I guess the PU team will decide this in the end.
-
I would prefer it be something like official/unofficial ranking within the guild, so that only designated members can move forward to decide of the ownership of the guild, and decide whether or not to open votes and such in case the guild founder needs to be temporarily/permanently switched and things like that.
Pokemon battles are many a times based on luck and one match does not always mean that the winner is the best player. There's the element of luck which should also be considered.
But then, the easiest thing to do remains to quit the guild and form another.
-
Best 2 out of 3?
-
Guilds = Monarchy. If you don't like your guild or leader, leave.
/thread
-
not really the only point of this thread.
Theres more than just that
-
If that's the case, I would say one of these:
1) the guild disbands after the Leader is absent after 6 Months
or
2) The Highest Contributor not including the Leader takes the role of Leader after 6 months..
The option of a coleader may also give that person the same abilities and authority as the actual leader. The leader must be inactive for 30, 60, 90 or however many days before the co-leader can take over as leader.
About the cities idea. This can be an automated system instance that's paid for ingame. After a period of time, if not used, it's deleted.
If challenging the leader for ownership really is necessary, then have the tournament style-takeover automated with an NPC. The 4 or 8 people that would play the tourney must be decided by other members of the guild. After a maximum of 8 people signed up for the takeover-tournament and another wants to join, the first 8 to sign up at NPC will get the chance.
This means if lesser players sign up then they're easily dominated and booted from the tournament. Whoever wins the tournament and if they beat the current leader, there may be a limited time vote at the guild NPC for the members of the tournament to vote if they approve the new leader.
If not that, then only people that have contributed a certain amount close to what the guild leader has may enter the takeover-tournament to challenge him.
-
I like the Idea of a second in command.
-
Co-Guild Leaders exist elsewhere too so I guess that's plausible.
-
Im sorry i havent read all the post but as elemental elite`s creator i did not chose chad to lead the guild because of his prowess in battles.i dont think the guild leader in apokemon game should be determind by strength since a horrible trainer could become leader because he has all the right counter against someone few others could beat. I dont think leaders should just fight for their position there should be a test of something important and bfore that the guild should vote weather or not a person is worthy to tkae on the leader
-
Im sorry i havent read all the post but as elemental elite`s creator i did not chose chad to lead the guild because of his prowess in battles.i dont think the guild leader in apokemon game should be determind by strength since a horrible trainer could become leader because he has all the right counter against someone few others could beat. I dont think leaders should just fight for their position there should be a test of something important and bfore that the guild should vote weather or not a person is worthy to tkae on the leader
Deadae, I think you missed the point of this post lol. It also sounds like you're trying to say that you created EE...
-
She didn't? Didn't she start the 17 trainers thingy?
-
Im sorry i havent read all the post but as elemental elite`s creator i did not chose chad to lead the guild because of his prowess in battles.i dont think the guild leader in apokemon game should be determind by strength since a horrible trainer could become leader because he has all the right counter against someone few others could beat. I dont think leaders should just fight for their position there should be a test of something important and bfore that the guild should vote weather or not a person is worthy to tkae on the leader
Deadae, I think you missed the point of this post lol. It also sounds like you're trying to say that you created EE...
Wasn't the EE started by chad... and that's why he's the leader. If I'm wrong correct me.
-
No, deadae resigned his post when she thought it wasn't going to work. And now is trying to justify her leave... really people nowadays...
-
uh ur all wrong i never thought they wouldnt work i had to go to prison and i gave chad leadership that is all
shoot i even know the member order
deadae
chad29
roloc
stikman- but he is in prison now
these were the only four members of EE back when we hadnt voted on the name yet
the last thing i did was name the guild and hand it over to chad29 in case the game started i vanished because of prison :P blah but who cares im just saying aleader shouldnt fight for his position in a glorified rock paper scizzors game(no disrespect meant toward the pokemon games)