Forums » Bugs
guilds, is there something magic about them ? or just abuses ?
a while ago i saw Elite guild dissapeared. i was told it was disbanded because it went under 5 councilors. i say ok to that, fair enough, but then how come there are quite a few guilds on the guild webpage with just 2 or 3 members and only one councilor ????
cause that makes me wonder if that wasn't a deliberate act from someone, an act that i could clasify as an abuse?!
i realy am waiting for an answer on this one. thank you.
cause that makes me wonder if that wasn't a deliberate act from someone, an act that i could clasify as an abuse?!
i realy am waiting for an answer on this one. thank you.
it is my understanding that the guilds you have in question are left over from the beta testing. The members are no longer active (I cliked on many of the members and saw 0/0/0/0/0).
However if any of the members log on to VO the server will see that the guild is below the minimum and automatically disband them.
However if any of the members log on to VO the server will see that the guild is below the minimum and automatically disband them.
hmm, i would say your understanding is wrong and that should be verifiable. the guild was founded in the first or second day of FINAL RELEASE, although i am indeed playing since alpha.
the second phrase is sort of a mistery to me, but it may be my english that fails me. anyway, if it's what i think it could be, that means that guilds that are COMPLETELY inactive are way more favourized than the ones that are in fact active, and those TOTALY inactive guilds will be there for ages, as those players are in fact GONE for good.
then, if the guild system is unfinished and half-functional, how are commanders supposed to maintain their guilds? is the purpose of the game to discourage team-play? disable the guild feature alltogether! is it supposed to be cooperative as well ? give us the MINIMUM means to do so.. (there is a long and really old bug report about the guild feature issues)
anyway, thank you for the answer.
the second phrase is sort of a mistery to me, but it may be my english that fails me. anyway, if it's what i think it could be, that means that guilds that are COMPLETELY inactive are way more favourized than the ones that are in fact active, and those TOTALY inactive guilds will be there for ages, as those players are in fact GONE for good.
then, if the guild system is unfinished and half-functional, how are commanders supposed to maintain their guilds? is the purpose of the game to discourage team-play? disable the guild feature alltogether! is it supposed to be cooperative as well ? give us the MINIMUM means to do so.. (there is a long and really old bug report about the guild feature issues)
anyway, thank you for the answer.
Trust me, ratonu...there is no abuse involved. As sarahanne stated, guilds that were created in beta were coded differently than final release.
As the guild members log on, the program will disband them if they are below minimum if they were started in final release.
The ones remaining from beta will have to be manually removed by the devs. Something that can wait till they have a chance to breathe.
As the guild members log on, the program will disband them if they are below minimum if they were started in final release.
The ones remaining from beta will have to be manually removed by the devs. Something that can wait till they have a chance to breathe.
It is possible to add council members as long as you have 6 active council positions. Its tedious and difficult, but it can be done.
The voting "window" is based on the person being voted for, they must recieve 6 votes during the time that they are logged in. If they log out, the votes are reset. The people doing the voting can log in and out, but the person being voted for cannot.
For this reason I HIGHLY suggest that the people you put on your council be players who will stay with you, and who are going to be active players. Using "spare" characters, or getting random people just to help fill out the 10 people needed to start a guild almost never works for this reason.
While I agree that there is definitely need for a rework of the guild system, Game balance and some additional missions should probably come first. To me, the guild system is functional (if only just barely) and less vital than getting more content in.
I'm sure the developers are aware of the problem, as to the guilds with only a few members being formed after the game went live, I seem to recall the devs patching something on the guilds shortly after release, so they may not have added the code to disband non-viable guilds until then.
The voting "window" is based on the person being voted for, they must recieve 6 votes during the time that they are logged in. If they log out, the votes are reset. The people doing the voting can log in and out, but the person being voted for cannot.
For this reason I HIGHLY suggest that the people you put on your council be players who will stay with you, and who are going to be active players. Using "spare" characters, or getting random people just to help fill out the 10 people needed to start a guild almost never works for this reason.
While I agree that there is definitely need for a rework of the guild system, Game balance and some additional missions should probably come first. To me, the guild system is functional (if only just barely) and less vital than getting more content in.
I'm sure the developers are aware of the problem, as to the guilds with only a few members being formed after the game went live, I seem to recall the devs patching something on the guilds shortly after release, so they may not have added the code to disband non-viable guilds until then.
Guilds are meant to be long-term large-scale user-controlled concepts. If someone wants to create a guild using 'temporary' characters as Spellcast said, don't expect your guild to be managable.