-
Dear forum reader,
To actively participate in our forum discussions or to start your own threads, in addition to your game account, you need a forum account. You can REGISTER HERE!
Please ensure a translation into English is provided if your post is not in English and to respect your fellow players when posting.
-
We are looking for you! Always wanted to join our Support or Forum Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
Take a look at our recruitment page for more information and how you can apply:
DeletedUser110195
I know you're well aware the advantages being in a high level guild gives, and no they would not be able to compete just for the sheer lack of goods available to do so. There have already been documented cases of guilds being stolen from players, them having to start over and many just flat out quitting, all the work they put into making that guild as good as it was, gone in an instant.
I'm only continuing this discussion here because I believe it to be academic only, Inno will never do this and only a microscopic portion of the playerbase will ever support it.
I'm only continuing this discussion here because I believe it to be academic only, Inno will never do this and only a microscopic portion of the playerbase will ever support it.
Vesiger
Monarch
I'm not very aware, I'm afraid - the whole world of guilds spying on each other, taking and releasing sectors, placing mass sieges and so on is beyond my ken.
(So far as I'm concerned, the main day-to-day advantage of being in a guild is a few extra FP per day and a slightly reduced build time for the military - and I don't have any experience of being in a high-level aggressive guild.)
I don't see that it will produce the OP's claimed advantages...
DeletedUser108827
This is a very poor idea.
As a guild leader I work hard with my lieutenants to maintain my recruitment and continualy improve the calibre of our members as people leave and filter out innactives
A good guild deserve all the members it get and constiute its future strengh
to level all the guild system toward the botom because some guild leaders cannot work hard enough to maintain active numbers and recruit new members is ludicrous
As a guild leader I work hard with my lieutenants to maintain my recruitment and continualy improve the calibre of our members as people leave and filter out innactives
A good guild deserve all the members it get and constiute its future strengh
to level all the guild system toward the botom because some guild leaders cannot work hard enough to maintain active numbers and recruit new members is ludicrous
potatoskunk
Master Corporal
I'm in a guild with under 30 people (Ghost Walkers, Mount Kilmore). It's a good guild. We're very strong in GE and active in GvG on multiple maps. There's nothing wrong with small guilds, and a small active guild can have a more friendly feeling than a large one with 80 people. We may not be able to compete on an even footing with the top GvG guilds, but that's OK, we're building up and having fun.
BTW, one reason to not have the guild open for anyone to auto-join is that you can get people coming in to spy on you before GvG battles.
BTW, one reason to not have the guild open for anyone to auto-join is that you can get people coming in to spy on you before GvG battles.
potatoskunk
Master Corporal
That said, I think chopping the limit to 40 people just isn't a good idea. 80 is small enough to make sure we don't have 2-3 guilds dominating every single GvG map, but large enough to allow a guild to grow reasonably large.