Guild Battlegrounds - Restrict Member Rights

Proposal:


That guild members need to be granted rights to allow participation in GBG


Reason:

Pacts and alliances are being compromised by guild members not obeying what their guild leadership has agreed to,


Details:

As GBG develops, it is becoming more and more diplomatic, with alliances being formed for the duration of the battle or temporary pacts agreed not to attack this or that province. However, there are maverick or inexperienced players who are continually compromising agreements. I have seen this across the four worlds that I play in. It continues to happen despite guilds putting up threads detailing what provinces are or are not to be attacked. This may be because of inexperience or selfishness. Whatever the reason, it is causing guild leaderships a lot of grief. So I propose that guild rights be extended such that members can be excluded from playing if the guild leadership so wishes


Summary:

If this proposal were adopted, and the default for existing and new members being "allowed to play", then there would be no apparent change at the outset. But it would then give guild leaders the flexibility to deploy it if they feel it is necessary.
 

Thrawnf

Private
-1 for this and every other person who has suggested the same thing
I think you are good to be in a single man guild

In a proper guild when we have strategy and plan, we need to have some type of order....and what is lacking at the moment in GbG is a way to find who do what and do not...specially the player who put flag everywhere, or siege enemies, that confuses the lazy players who don't read message and so spend their attrition on the 1st flag they saw.

So knowing who do that, give us the possibility to 1st send them a gentle reminder of the rule in place of the guild, and then kick them, or in the proposal removing the right to do GbG (so reducing nuisance)

It's not a dictatorial thing, it's just simple rules to live together and work together as a team.

In a team, we need to be in the same direction and agree of the same direction. (we can even vote in some guild)
Then even the person who disagrees, need to follow the majority or leave....

and at the moment, we can't spot the player troublemaker.

I think Inno need to do this like in GvG.
In GvG the lof tell us who siege an ally and we can delete the siege, and block the right of this player.
GbG need to get a similar restriction.
 

Cursedveggie

Forum Ambassador
I think you are good to be in a single man guild
I'm in a top 10 guild on one world and run a rapidly climbing guild on another.

In the guild I run I do ask people to attack certain sectors but do not get upset if they decide to do something different. Everyone is an individual and has their own reasons for doing what do
 

Agent327

Emperor
In a proper guild when we have strategy and plan, we need to have some type of order....and what is lacking at the moment in GbG is a way to find who do what and do not...specially the player who put flag everywhere, or siege enemies, that confuses the lazy players who don't read message and so spend their attrition on the 1st flag they saw.
What we have here is a contradiction in terms. If you were in a "proper" guild with a strategy plan you would not have this problem.

- 1
 

richc2000

Private
+1

This idea is consistent with another thread - see: GbG Who has attacked a Province

They propose the sectors have an attack log so guild members can see who is doing the fighting/negotiating. In the first instance this would be enough to resolve any isues like guildies accidentally attacking an ally. I support this idea as the next step from that - a last resort. Seeing as GvG has a specific right allowing players to participate, having the same for GBG is not unreasonable.