I kinda cheaply used the support forums to put forth my idea because I didn't know if GW actually looked at this. But here is the post. Tell me what you think. I would really like to get this put in ASAP and I don't believe it would be very difficult to implement.
Our guild currently has 100 members who have logged in the past week. We love and treasure every member we have. We are a rapidly growing community and want to include everyone in our guild. Therefore, I want to ask is there anyway that I don't know of to increase guild capacity?
If not, will something be added in the future? Just so you see the point of view from my community:
We feel that this limit has greatly stopped us from making the guild wars community a better place. Our guild has never turned down any respectable person(we don't like to take in people who disrespect players often). We want to continue to offer this safe-haven, but the guild capped has forced us to stop recruiting. I know you will just say, you could split into two guilds, but our guild finds that a hard option to swallow. We love members to socialize and play together with the efficiency of the guild list. We also feel that imposing this limit, you limit communities who try to help those players who no one helps because they are "elitists" and take only the best players. We reach out to the new people and teach them how to play. We know that this was not intentional and would like some way to expand our guild. We are willing to pay pretty much any price, from game cash to real cash. What we thought was reasonable so far is to make sigils increase your capacity from 5-10 members each time you gave it to a NPC. We also thought that maybe it would cost 1 platinum to invite a member after you had 100 members. If these are allowed it would also be very much appreciated to show how many people are in the guild and your current max amount. Please hear the cry of a community who just wants to do good.
-BlueFire
So there you have it. If you want our website I'll hand it over to you so you can see our activity. I'm not sure if it counts as advertising so I won't put i on now. Thanks for your time.
Increase Max Guild Members?
WNxBlueFire
Alone)
/signed.
Even though our guild has less than 20, I have an understanding on what you mean by having a growing community. I'm hoping that this can also decrease the number of "useless" guilds out there, saving time. By useless I mean guilds that don't do anything except just wear a cape. That's just me though.
Even though our guild has less than 20, I have an understanding on what you mean by having a growing community. I'm hoping that this can also decrease the number of "useless" guilds out there, saving time. By useless I mean guilds that don't do anything except just wear a cape. That's just me though.
WNx Ojan23
i agree with bluefire on this subject...
areanet keeps saying and emphasizing how GW is focused on team game play and community interactions by having to forms parties to do missions or explore areas and to do PvP, and that you cant solo most missions or even do some with only henchmen... but there is a cap to the ammount of people you can have in your guild???
i dont no if areanet ever considered this but some guilds were established in other games, and might have a good chunk of their members all over the world and not just within the US, so guilds like this are penalized b/c they have alot of members but b/c of the times differences along with people having to do things in real life, people in your guild wont always be on to help you in your missions or PvP groups
our guild is currently full with all members signing on within 1 week of today... and atm(when i typed this) only 4 people are online including myself...
areanet keeps saying and emphasizing how GW is focused on team game play and community interactions by having to forms parties to do missions or explore areas and to do PvP, and that you cant solo most missions or even do some with only henchmen... but there is a cap to the ammount of people you can have in your guild???
i dont no if areanet ever considered this but some guilds were established in other games, and might have a good chunk of their members all over the world and not just within the US, so guilds like this are penalized b/c they have alot of members but b/c of the times differences along with people having to do things in real life, people in your guild wont always be on to help you in your missions or PvP groups
our guild is currently full with all members signing on within 1 week of today... and atm(when i typed this) only 4 people are online including myself...
Skyslash
I also agree with what bluefire said. There shouldn't be a cap as to how many members are in a guild. Each different guild is a community of members, and as a community of gamers, members of a guild come together and form friendships. Guild Wars is a wonderful game that can bring someone from Europe and someone from America together as friends though a guild. Guilds help get players though the game by providing support. Sometimes 100 people isn't enough, especially when worldwide guilds are formed.
Secondly, it is up to the owner of the account to decide if they want to be in a guild or not. If over 100 people want to join that guild, but its full, then why the cap? Anyone can just leave and start a new guild, but if they choose to be part of the 100 person guild, then I don't see what is wrong.
Secondly, it is up to the owner of the account to decide if they want to be in a guild or not. If over 100 people want to join that guild, but its full, then why the cap? Anyone can just leave and start a new guild, but if they choose to be part of the 100 person guild, then I don't see what is wrong.
Mark of Rodgort
WOW, people are struggling with 10 active members, and youre guild is overflowin with sum.
WNxFuTuReGrEeKPaPaS
i totally agree on this manner
we are haveing a problem is this is a very easy to fix it. I think it would promote more competivness and will give the guild more flexability.
we are haveing a problem is this is a very easy to fix it. I think it would promote more competivness and will give the guild more flexability.
Sample Attack
I have to kick some one to bring someone that's so sad.... Bring Raise the bar 
hotspur
Bluefire a good point well made. I didnt even know there was a member cap. What a daft idea.
My guild has about 30-40 members but I sure wouldnt want it to stop at 100.
My guild has about 30-40 members but I sure wouldnt want it to stop at 100.
smurfhunter
i think his guild is like the only one with that problem... so im not sure anet will put a high priority on that.
btw i love hotspur's avatar
btw i love hotspur's avatar
aron searle
I have to agree.
Our guild has 50-60 ish members, but the problem is that with everyones playing times being diff we only have about 5-8 on at the same time. So i can only imagin that most guilds with 100 or less members are only going to have a small percentage on at the same time.
Our guild has 50-60 ish members, but the problem is that with everyones playing times being diff we only have about 5-8 on at the same time. So i can only imagin that most guilds with 100 or less members are only going to have a small percentage on at the same time.
MSecorsky
I think, reflecting, that the point is to prevent there from being a small handful of uber-guilds with 1000+ members at the expense of having more guilds and greater variety.
Although having > 100 sounds good on the surface...
/Not signed
I've seen too many games with similar guild/countries/empires become dominated by an all-powerful few with no hopes of anyone competing with them. Join one of the few or be outcast.
Although having > 100 sounds good on the surface...
/Not signed
I've seen too many games with similar guild/countries/empires become dominated by an all-powerful few with no hopes of anyone competing with them. Join one of the few or be outcast.
neoteo
i didnt know there was a limit ???!!!
/completely signed
imo there should be no limit . if a guild would reach 100 000 members , there was a reason for it ...
now, for pvp matters this could be a problem for small guilds ... but for a small guild to compete with a 100 person guild is already a problem so ....
stop trying to balance everything .. and let guilds grow !!!!
/completely signed
imo there should be no limit . if a guild would reach 100 000 members , there was a reason for it ...
now, for pvp matters this could be a problem for small guilds ... but for a small guild to compete with a 100 person guild is already a problem so ....
stop trying to balance everything .. and let guilds grow !!!!
lyra_song
well it sucks that for a Guild intensive game, theres not enough guild management.
I personally miss the guild management in games like RO, where the guild gets experience points taxed from members and you can use XP to do things like increase max number of members, etc.
Also why do we have a guild hall when theres nothing there for us except battle? I would LOVE a PvP mini-arena in every guild hall for practice. Basically you take on 4 members of your own guild in one of the arenas but you return to guild hall when finished.
I personally miss the guild management in games like RO, where the guild gets experience points taxed from members and you can use XP to do things like increase max number of members, etc.
Also why do we have a guild hall when theres nothing there for us except battle? I would LOVE a PvP mini-arena in every guild hall for practice. Basically you take on 4 members of your own guild in one of the arenas but you return to guild hall when finished.
Mr Wolfmaster
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by MSecorsky
I think, reflecting, that the point is to prevent there from being a small handful of uber-guilds with 1000+ members at the expense of having more guilds and greater variety.
Although having > 100 sounds good on the surface... /Not signed I've seen too many games with similar guild/countries/empires become dominated by an all-powerful few with no hopes of anyone competing with them. Join one of the few or be outcast. |
My guild doesn't have many active members, but I'm among friends so it's cool. You have plenty of active memebers and prolly some friends as well so I don't see why you're unstatistfied.
emil knight
I have to agree with Wolfmaster... having more than 100 would stifle so many smaller guilds.
So many people seem to believe that more people = better guild, when that's not necessarily true. And as he mentioned.. eventually you'll be back here asking for the limit to increase... where does it end?
Be glad you have such a full guild with such a large number of them active. There are many other guild that have trouble finding and keeping quality members.
So many people seem to believe that more people = better guild, when that's not necessarily true. And as he mentioned.. eventually you'll be back here asking for the limit to increase... where does it end?
Be glad you have such a full guild with such a large number of them active. There are many other guild that have trouble finding and keeping quality members.
deadly shadow
/signed i agree completly with bluefire i believe that guilds would dominate for 3 weeks tops as you can see in gvg and hoh spike goes up spike goes down totally pwnage empire goes up total pwnage empire goes down anet would nerf it in some way like different ladder or less rating from wins dont worry
Xiombarg
/not signed... when a small guild starts up it becomes hard to get new members.. when people are just asking how many members u have and you say 10 or 20 they are just like "" no thanks im looking for something bigger'"" but bloody hell.. im just sick fo big guilds overtaking us small guilds.. with no member cap then us small guild will die unless we recruit every night.. wdf we want to play the game aswell... ya have to see it in both ways dude.. it gets hard for small guilds.
Rome
Rome
Fantus
It doesn't really concern me since our guild is smaller than 100 and we'd like to keep it that way, but I can see that some people want to build larger communities as well and that this is quite reasonable for them to do so. So:
/signed
/signed
Mumoto
I disagree, this is about 'balance' in the game, if one guild can have unlimited members, what will happen if one guild is superbig and takes in lots of players?
Won't be good for the balance, the better guilds would suck up all the players ;p then the purpose of 'Guild Wars' will dissapear and besides how are you going to pick the best members (for fights) ... I don't think anybody can easily compare 100+ members lol.
Won't be good for the balance, the better guilds would suck up all the players ;p then the purpose of 'Guild Wars' will dissapear and besides how are you going to pick the best members (for fights) ... I don't think anybody can easily compare 100+ members lol.
WNxBlueFire
First off, realize there will be a cost for increasing guild size. That way fewer large guilds exist. Also, notice that only 10 people can goto tournaments, this means that players wanting to be in this tournament will be discouraged from large guilds. Also, a lot of players like smaller guilds, but I don't think we should punish people looking for larger communities just because some people like small guilds.
Also, notice that one guidl can't dominate. Only one GvG team can be going at one time, Sure with more members, you can run more often, but so can peope with 8 members. Also, small guilds don't have to deal with these disadvantages:
-Factions risng
-Picking only 10 people out of 300
-Some way of organization
-Large servers
-They have to pay large sums of money to increase guild size
(I figure some kind of forumula where it costs more and more to add additional members to you guild) I.E: Maybe 3 sigils for 30 members then 6 sigils for 30 members and then 8 for 30 members.
Also, notice that one guidl can't dominate. Only one GvG team can be going at one time, Sure with more members, you can run more often, but so can peope with 8 members. Also, small guilds don't have to deal with these disadvantages:
-Factions risng
-Picking only 10 people out of 300
-Some way of organization
-Large servers
-They have to pay large sums of money to increase guild size
(I figure some kind of forumula where it costs more and more to add additional members to you guild) I.E: Maybe 3 sigils for 30 members then 6 sigils for 30 members and then 8 for 30 members.
kalaris
Lol, Of Course I'm gonna /sign this.... since its my guild and all...
See we had a problem from the start, we don't actively recruit, we come from a multi-game Clan of around 1500ish members, every time one of them wants to join guildwars, we absorb them, so even without active recruiting we hit the 100 member cap a LONG time ago... we split the guild in 2, NA/ and Euro... but we lost our sense of full community, now we have to do it again...
I think charging us out the Wazoo would be fair, and I know we're not the first guild to have this problem... I mean rather then have us chew up 2-4 spots on the guild ladder, perhpas just expand it a little?
And selecting members for PVP is never a problem, we have fun because we can play a few teams in HoH at a time and as soon as someone quits we have another member to rotate in, it actually makes Playing the PvP Aspect of Guildwars more pleasant
We're not asking for infinete guild size, just make all guilds that want to expand pay for it.
As Guildwars gets more and more popular, I think the need for larger guilds could become an issue...
There are a few thousand little 1-10 person guilds, we're just trying to do our part =P
As for an Empire of PvP Dominbility for having 200 members? -- Yeah... look at all the top PvP Guilds I bet you most of the top 20 are small well orginized people....
Since you 8 people for GvG you can bring your best 8 and we can bring our best 8 ... no more... we're on equal footing =P
See we had a problem from the start, we don't actively recruit, we come from a multi-game Clan of around 1500ish members, every time one of them wants to join guildwars, we absorb them, so even without active recruiting we hit the 100 member cap a LONG time ago... we split the guild in 2, NA/ and Euro... but we lost our sense of full community, now we have to do it again...
I think charging us out the Wazoo would be fair, and I know we're not the first guild to have this problem... I mean rather then have us chew up 2-4 spots on the guild ladder, perhpas just expand it a little?
And selecting members for PVP is never a problem, we have fun because we can play a few teams in HoH at a time and as soon as someone quits we have another member to rotate in, it actually makes Playing the PvP Aspect of Guildwars more pleasant
We're not asking for infinete guild size, just make all guilds that want to expand pay for it.
As Guildwars gets more and more popular, I think the need for larger guilds could become an issue...
There are a few thousand little 1-10 person guilds, we're just trying to do our part =P
As for an Empire of PvP Dominbility for having 200 members? -- Yeah... look at all the top PvP Guilds I bet you most of the top 20 are small well orginized people....
Since you 8 people for GvG you can bring your best 8 and we can bring our best 8 ... no more... we're on equal footing =P
Ollj
100 member guilds exist?
I met tons of 60+ pve guilds with 2/3 barely being online for days.
Im just curious who wants to organisate a horde of 100 players.
comon practice is to make 2 guilds out of that, dividing players simply by online time.
I met tons of 60+ pve guilds with 2/3 barely being online for days.
Im just curious who wants to organisate a horde of 100 players.
comon practice is to make 2 guilds out of that, dividing players simply by online time.
Pevil Lihatuh
hehe my old guild *waves to old guild buddies*
I agree AND disagree. It should be raised slightly. The thing is, with this guild, they have a HUGE clan over many games, so they get a lot of people from other sections trying out GW, and loving it. hehe. With the huge community GW has, then yes, it would be nice. When I was in the guild, we had to be split into two guilds. Timezone based. All very nice, but annoying when I wanted to play with my American guildies. I had to add them to my friends list (which is way too small)
However I also agree a cap is needed, otherwise you end up with 3 huge guilds, and then a few 1-man guilds.
The new guild I'm in has around 70 members. There's barely ever more than 8 of us on. But that's enough for GvG. Maybe if the cap was raised to 200 that'd be ok. But trust me, there will never be enough space for WNx, they just keep on growing!
I agree AND disagree. It should be raised slightly. The thing is, with this guild, they have a HUGE clan over many games, so they get a lot of people from other sections trying out GW, and loving it. hehe. With the huge community GW has, then yes, it would be nice. When I was in the guild, we had to be split into two guilds. Timezone based. All very nice, but annoying when I wanted to play with my American guildies. I had to add them to my friends list (which is way too small)
However I also agree a cap is needed, otherwise you end up with 3 huge guilds, and then a few 1-man guilds.
The new guild I'm in has around 70 members. There's barely ever more than 8 of us on. But that's enough for GvG. Maybe if the cap was raised to 200 that'd be ok. But trust me, there will never be enough space for WNx, they just keep on growing!
Guizzy
I dissagree with the need to increase the max player size of a guild; but I agree there should be a better mecanism for communities.
Alliances is what I'm talking about. Add another chat channel for "Allied Guilds", and allow to see who's online in allied guilds. It would fit in perfectly with the "Host" system. For instance; your small guild is in alliance with another guild. You want to do a GvG but there are only 6 players online for your guild. You simply have to "borrow" 2 members from an allied guild to fill those slots! It's already possible to some extend with Private Messages and out-of-game mecanism, but a formalised way for these guilds to contact each other and exchange information as to who is online would be great.
Alliances is what I'm talking about. Add another chat channel for "Allied Guilds", and allow to see who's online in allied guilds. It would fit in perfectly with the "Host" system. For instance; your small guild is in alliance with another guild. You want to do a GvG but there are only 6 players online for your guild. You simply have to "borrow" 2 members from an allied guild to fill those slots! It's already possible to some extend with Private Messages and out-of-game mecanism, but a formalised way for these guilds to contact each other and exchange information as to who is online would be great.
Warskull
The guild limit is most likely due to someone thinking "No one will ever need more than 100 players" just like they though "Oh no one will ever need more than a gig of hard disk space."
The option of forking into two guilds exists, however it has major problems. For example the loss of guild chat between the two forks. Bluefire's sigil idea is quite good. A few sigils is no big deal for a 100 person guild. (Have each person walk out and find a bag of 50g, that is 5000g right there.)
As for massive guilds overtaking smaller guilds compeltely issues do exist with larger guilds.
Larger guilds:
-More difficult to manage
-More likely to develop cliques and splinter into multiple guilds
-When people leave, they tend to do so in small groups
-Unless well managed will feel impersonal and not foster loyalty
As a guild grows in size it isn't all good. Having 500 members doesn't mean all 500 members know each other, are friends, and get along.
The option of forking into two guilds exists, however it has major problems. For example the loss of guild chat between the two forks. Bluefire's sigil idea is quite good. A few sigils is no big deal for a 100 person guild. (Have each person walk out and find a bag of 50g, that is 5000g right there.)
As for massive guilds overtaking smaller guilds compeltely issues do exist with larger guilds.
Larger guilds:
-More difficult to manage
-More likely to develop cliques and splinter into multiple guilds
-When people leave, they tend to do so in small groups
-Unless well managed will feel impersonal and not foster loyalty
As a guild grows in size it isn't all good. Having 500 members doesn't mean all 500 members know each other, are friends, and get along.
Mumoto
Mr Wolfmaster
If an "allied" guild can do anything with it's other guild, than what's the point of not just increasing the members? 
One thing I'd like to stress is the fact that you mentioned you're prolly the only guild with this problem...Well one or 2 guilds having the same problem isn't exactly a big issue considering the fact that there might be downflaws. From what I understand, your guild won't be satistfied untill there is no player cap, or the player cap is so high that it doesn't even matter. Personally I support the forming of new guilds, and I have a heart for the smaller guilds that are trying to grow. I don't want big bossy guilds that rule the community. This isn't a game of nobles and newbs.
One thing I'd like to stress is the fact that you mentioned you're prolly the only guild with this problem...Well one or 2 guilds having the same problem isn't exactly a big issue considering the fact that there might be downflaws. From what I understand, your guild won't be satistfied untill there is no player cap, or the player cap is so high that it doesn't even matter. Personally I support the forming of new guilds, and I have a heart for the smaller guilds that are trying to grow. I don't want big bossy guilds that rule the community. This isn't a game of nobles and newbs.
Mumoto
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mr Wolfmaster
If an "allied" guild can do anything with it's other guild, than what's the point of not just increasing the members?
One thing I'd like to stress is the fact that you mentioned you're prolly the only guild with this problem...Well one or 2 guilds having the same problem isn't exactly a big issue considering the fact that there might be downflaws. From what I understand, your guild won't be satistfied untill there is no player cap, or the player cap is so high that it doesn't even matter. Personally I support the forming of new guilds, and I have a heart for the smaller guilds that are trying to grow. I don't want big bossy guilds that rule the community. This isn't a game of nobles and newbs. |
besides... why'd you need guilds bigger than 100? :S being in a guild is for GvG or maybe some party in missions and stuff like that, don't need over 100 people to do that.
Idea for that 1500 members-guy... just make 15 departments ;p ... same cape and stuff ... name with Dep.1 or something in it ;p
emil knight
You know... instead of asking for a larger guild size, you guys should be asking for what this game REALLY needs:
The ability of guilds to form coalitions.
It's an idea that has been suggested here and actually has WAY more merit than just randomly increasing the guild max.
This way both (or mulitple, as the case may be) guilds would have access to more people than just the ones in their guild and some of the smaller guilds would be able to find people they need for certain things without having to merge and lose thier identies.
Think about it a bit... coalitions are a win/win situation and would solve this issue.
The ability of guilds to form coalitions.
It's an idea that has been suggested here and actually has WAY more merit than just randomly increasing the guild max.
This way both (or mulitple, as the case may be) guilds would have access to more people than just the ones in their guild and some of the smaller guilds would be able to find people they need for certain things without having to merge and lose thier identies.
Think about it a bit... coalitions are a win/win situation and would solve this issue.
WNxArchmage
yep, and then u would still only have guilds of 100 or less, so it wouldnt upset the ladder. with 2 guilds in a coalition, u can have them play in each others guild matches, but only one of the guilds gets the win/loss (just like with the guest thing they implimented). its perfect!
all the positives without any of the negetives :-)
all the positives without any of the negetives :-)
Ristaron
I am in full support of the circulating 'umbrella guild' idea I saw a month or so ago on here. The principle of it is that one guild forms an alliance with another guild, and they recieve 'Umbrella Guild Chat', as well as another roster they can view that includes all the guild in the umbrella guild, and the members.
This would work very well for guilds who have more than 100 members and are spread out in several different guilds, as they could maintain contact in game without having to use PMs.
This would work very well for guilds who have more than 100 members and are spread out in several different guilds, as they could maintain contact in game without having to use PMs.
Mistress Develion
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by smurfhunter
i think his guild is like the only one with that problem... so im not sure anet will put a high priority on that.
btw i love hotspur's avatar |
not treu our guild is fast approching the cap and has even made a second guild just to keep it going
Jczech
I agree that the amount of people in a guild should be much higher.
While one large guild could have thousands of members, unless they can keep everyone in line and have everyone feel like "part of the team", then more likely than not fractions of the large guild will split off and form a new guild.
Plus, look at it this way: would you rather have 1 rediculously large guild have the top spot in GvG, or 15 smaller guilds all in the top 30?
While one large guild could have thousands of members, unless they can keep everyone in line and have everyone feel like "part of the team", then more likely than not fractions of the large guild will split off and form a new guild.
Plus, look at it this way: would you rather have 1 rediculously large guild have the top spot in GvG, or 15 smaller guilds all in the top 30?
Knight of Eternal Darknes
/signed
Ggraphix
Definetly need to take the max member cap OFF. Our guild has just reached max capacity and I have more active players who want to join.
I've seen somebody advertising a guild with 150members and 2 halls. Was that BS? If not I want to know how.
Our guild is well managed and we get along, usually at least 20% on at all times. But it is a mostly PvE guild, with others who like to do PvP and GvG too.
So we randomly group up for different things.
We should NOT have a guild size limit.
WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE MULTIPLE HALLS!!!
!!ANET please change this rule!!!
I've seen somebody advertising a guild with 150members and 2 halls. Was that BS? If not I want to know how.
Our guild is well managed and we get along, usually at least 20% on at all times. But it is a mostly PvE guild, with others who like to do PvP and GvG too.
So we randomly group up for different things.
We should NOT have a guild size limit.
WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE MULTIPLE HALLS!!!
!!ANET please change this rule!!!
TheLordOfBlah
/notsigned
100 people is a lot what the hell do you need anymore for?
100 people is a lot what the hell do you need anymore for?
Living Legend
/signed
they should have no limit, or make the limit to like 500 or 600
they should have no limit, or make the limit to like 500 or 600
quickmonty
Our guild once had over 80 members. Didn't even know who half of them were and those members never did anything with the guild. New requirement: all guild members must participate with the guild. We now have around 40 members. I know them all and they all participate with other guild members.
Conclusion: Bigger is not always better.
Conclusion: Bigger is not always better.
Dougal Kronik
From Jczech
What do you want me to choose? Because you could have both.
100 population is cap is plenty. Branch off if you have to due to your growth.
/not signed
Quote:
| Plus, look at it this way: would you rather have 1 rediculously large guild have the top spot in GvG, or 15 smaller guilds all in the top 30? |
100 population is cap is plenty. Branch off if you have to due to your growth.
/not signed