To Encourage Guild-Like Behavior

[DeletedUser109146]

I really like the idea of Epic Battle. And I would give just that section about GvG a +1
The GE part is a different story. Having to fight the 24v24 in an hour could, at times, be impossible. In my guild, like others, we have players from all over. We are from -8 to +18 GMT .So, that could make it difficult. Also alot of penalty for something that is supposed to be a competition. For that I say neutral as it can be worked out.

 

[DeletedUser110195]

I really like the idea of Epic Battle. And I would give just that section about GvG a +1
The GE part is a different story. Having to fight the 24v24 in an hour could, at times, be impossible. In my guild, like others, we have players from all over. We are from -8 to +18 GMT .So, that could make it difficult. Also alot of penalty for something that is supposed to be a competition. For that I say neutral as it can be worked out.

Oh, yeah, hmmmm....yes that needs cut out. If the playerbase were all in the same timezone that would be a different story, but we're not, further, we progress through GE at different rates and some don't fight at all, so someone may be available, but not have what's needed to do such a thing.

Probably one of those things I read, translated as I dislike this and filed it away.....I had a bad habit of doing that, forgetting why I dislike something, just that I know I always have a good reason to so bleh.

And another one from the US! My we're cropping up all over the place around these forums.

 

[DeletedUser103370]

Elaborate, how would that fit with the theme of increasing the social cooperativeness in guilds (so our mods don't see fit to archive this)? Should this be a separate proposal?
Is this part of GvG, GE, separate, what are we looking at here? Is this a competitive map in a single sector that we are talking about (like a zoomed in map)?
I personally believe that the best way to increase the guild aspect of a guild is to tweak what is currently popular rather than to roll out something new and untested

Well, to simply put it'd be a new map (Competitive Map), where these rules would apply!

 

[DeletedUser105579]

Well, to simply put it'd be a new map (Competitive Map), where these rules would apply!

Again, and not to rain on your parade, but It's always best to work with what already exists rather than to add new concepts.. What would having a ton of different activities do to guilds? Wouldn't it make the game and the guild experience more of a chore? (a negative in my opinion)

 

[DeletedUser105579]

I really like the idea of Epic Battle. And I would give just that section about GvG a +1
The GE part is a different story. Having to fight the 24v24 in an hour could, at times, be impossible. In my guild, like others, we have players from all over. We are from -8 to +18 GMT .So, that could make it difficult. Also alot of penalty for something that is supposed to be a competition. For that I say neutral as it can be worked out.

That's a valid point that I hadn't thought of, there's really no proper way to salvage this idea, different timezones would make it painful. Just throwing it out there, but a GE map that the whole guild can participate in that is all 24 vs 24? It'll be some way to pull guilds together more.

From the general commentary, I'm getting the sense that 24 vs 24 is wanted, and the rest of the modifications are debated.
Would it be best if I separated 24 vs 24 into it's own idea or let the idea stand as it is?

 

[DeletedUser103370]

Again, and not to rain on your parade, but It's always best to work with what already exists rather than to add new concepts.. What would having a ton of different activities do to guilds? Wouldn't it make the game and the guild experience more of a chore? (a negative in my opinion)

I'm not sure, I mean a competitive map with emphasize on cooperation could involve a different set of guilds, as far as I see even if we made twice as many maps than there it is now, there would always be someone to take it.
And in principal the concept would be the same, conquer and keep sectors for rewards. The difference would be that if rules are carefully made, then instead of a couple of strong players bringing their entire guild on their backs, and single-handedly winning wars, in these maps only those guilds who can mobilize the most of their people would be successful.

Not sure tbh., just brain-derping

 

[Prinza the Hunter]

Epic Battles / 24 vs 24 Battles
There is something to this. I like that it only needs three players (the minimum standard for a viable guild). I've not thought through the exact mechanics. I think it needs posting as a seperate idea to thrash through.

Changes to GvG
Don't care. As an app player, I can't even play GvG, so I see that as the biggest barrier to any kind of interaction.

Changes to GE:

No for two strong reasons:

1. The very idea of holding back some guild members because others are not completing encounters (while on holiday, studying for exams, ill in hospital, or just plain busy) is not conducive to friendly cooperation.
2. FoE is not a game where people should be expected to be online all the time! Some very successful players only access the game once a day (while others might be on holiday, etc.) so insisting that something happens within a short timeframe (one hour!) is utterly out.

Abuse Prevention:
--N/A--

You are having a laugh, right? The intercine spy wars and sabotage efforts will fo through the roof with some of these proposals, inevitably leading to abuse.

 

[DeletedUser103370]

Epic Battles / 24 vs 24 Battles
There is something to this. I like that it only needs three players (the minimum standard for a viable guild). I've not thought through the exact mechanics. I think it needs posting as a seperate idea to thrash through.

Changes to GvG
Don't care. As an app player, I can't even play GvG, so I see that as the biggest barrier to any kind of interaction.

Changes to GE:

No for two strong reasons:

1. The very idea of holding back some guild members because others are not completing encounters (while on holiday, studying for exams, ill in hospital, or just plain busy) is not conducive to friendly cooperation.
2. FoE is not a game where people should be expected to be online all the time! Some very successful players only access the game once a day (while others might be on holiday, etc.) so insisting that something happens within a short timeframe (one hour!) is utterly out.

You are having a laugh, right? The intercine spy wars and sabotage efforts will fo through the roof with some of these proposals, inevitably leading to abuse.

Yeah it's not easy to find a way to motivate, but in the same time don't compromise.
I agree that individually playable features must not suffer because of any third-party's fault. Still I think many of the options would be viable, if introduced as separate "co-op based" features. That way they would simple be opportunities for the willing.