New Guild System Discussion

Discussion in 'Renaissance Discussion' started by Chris, Jun 2, 2014.

  1. Chris

    Chris Renaissance Staff
    Renaissance Staff

    Joined:
    May 14, 2012
    Messages:
    3,385
    Likes Received:
    6,195
    These changes should be ready by the Valentines patch, I was trying to get them into patch 73, but testing is probably going to slow us down.
    One, Erza Scarlet and wylwrk like this.
  2. Erza Scarlet

    Erza Scarlet Well-Known Member
    UO:R Donor

    Joined:
    May 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,896
    Likes Received:
    2,197
    Thats one of the best news ive heard in a while!

    Awesome, thanks for your work!
    PaddyOBrien likes this.
  3. Pirul

    Pirul Well-Known Member
    UO:R Subscriber

    Joined:
    May 16, 2013
    Messages:
    3,219
    Likes Received:
    2,468
    So if I-m reading this right, patch 73 will come in BEFORE the Valentine's Day patch?
  4. Lightshade

    Lightshade Well-Known Member
    UO:R Subscriber

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,894
    Likes Received:
    2,448
    So, this system allows for anyone that is above the rank of Ronin to vote for a new guild leader? Having had players try to infiltrate a guild and cause all sorts of trouble in the past, I could see this being an issue. I had a large group of people infiltrate on their alts on this server and cause complete havoc just because they could. It was a constant headache because of the anonymous nature of the internet....you could do nothing to prove it aside from wiping the stone and starting over.

    So, you go and start a guild that has a name you really like, but mistakingly trust some people that want that guild name, they vote you out, and you no longer have your guild? Is that how it works? They vote you out, demote you, and take everything from the "guild" buildings?

    Let's face it, its the internet....people are jerks just because they can be and need no more reason than that, sadly.

    As I read this, there's no "king" mode to keep people from stealing stones for giggles. If so....then I want no part of this system.

    For the record, I pretty much liked everything else, but this would be an absolute deal breaker for me.

    .
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2017
  5. PaddyOBrien

    PaddyOBrien Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2014
    Messages:
    3,250
    Likes Received:
    4,470
    Why not keep your own alts in your guild with voting rights to ensure youll stay the gm?
    One likes this.
  6. Erza Scarlet

    Erza Scarlet Well-Known Member
    UO:R Donor

    Joined:
    May 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,896
    Likes Received:
    2,197
    @Lightshade swearing loayality a new leader is possible for quite a long time now, and its working as intended... I even had to use it a few weeks back..

    Most of the small Guilds are pretty much a closed group of players thats been playing together forever, and the bigger guilds will have a ton of players voting for the GM, or the person they see fitting the most for a GM title anyways, which is a fair system in my opinion.
    There will always be some kind of grief potential though, but as i see it, thats a concern for new and small guilds which are unlikely to get infiltrated anyways...

    These changes also only influences the stone, every guildmember with the right mind should know asap whats going on. I dont see how this influences Guild buildings in any way either.

    The new patch should enable guild aliances, and also faction+O/C which is... to be honest.. AWESOME!
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2017
    One and PaddyOBrien like this.
  7. Lightshade

    Lightshade Well-Known Member
    UO:R Subscriber

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,894
    Likes Received:
    2,448
    I stand by what I said. If the system gives a bunch of jerks free reign to cause trouble just because they want to, then I want no part of it.

    You have no idea the kind of crap I had to deal with already because of the current mechanics. Any system that allows a group of people to negate 1,000's of hours of other people's work just because the system allows it to be done is a system that needs to be changed. I speak from having had to deal with the worst case scenarios. This is a problem with the current system and a problem that should not be included in the future system, or there should be an added feature to keep people from stealing stones. Its just grief potential and I can see no justifiable reason to force it upon people when you can just choose to disable the potential for grief. More options, not less.

    Nearly everyone on this server agrees that the old system of Housing where someone can steal your keys and then they would own your house is not a system worth having. Remember that from waaaaay back in the day? So if you agree that people shouldn't just be able to take your house, then why do you think people should just be able to take your guild? I'm sorry, there's just too much time and effort put into some of these guilds to allow for people to just take them and I can see no reason to force this same standard upon people in the future when we're working on the system. It should be an option and I will never run a guild under the current system again. I have been waiting for these changes hoping that they would make it easier to deal with troublesome players with nothing else better to do, but I see the same loopholes for griefing not being closed up and it upsets me.

    Love most of the other changes, but I saw this and my blood pressure immediately shot up.

    Again, this is a deal breaker for me.
    Last edited: Jan 12, 2017
  8. Lightshade

    Lightshade Well-Known Member
    UO:R Subscriber

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,894
    Likes Received:
    2,448
    That works if you run a guild of tamers, or PvP'ers....but having ran a guild of all types of players where people would put nearly all their players on the stone...it would literally take 3 people, or even less, working together to steal the stone. Like I said, there should be an option to disable that. If people want to run that kind of guild and take those chances, then let them....I'm just saying there is no justifiable reason to force everyone to run their guild like that....and to take those risks with their time investment.

    This issue is literally the only thing in UO, since 1996, that has caused me to quit playing for months at a time. I've gotten pissed off about all sorts of things over the years. Left servers when they were wiped, went on and on about changes that I hated, threatened to quit, etc...but the only thing to actually made me quit playing UO entirely for months at a time was this issue. I know I haven't really publicly talked about it, but this is the one thing that totally made me lose my shit in this game.

    If there's not an option to disable this potential for griefing, then I want no part of it.
    Mandevu likes this.
  9. Erza Scarlet

    Erza Scarlet Well-Known Member
    UO:R Donor

    Joined:
    May 24, 2015
    Messages:
    1,896
    Likes Received:
    2,197
    Again... this kind of loyality system was already intact when ive started playing here and hasnt been changed since lol.

    Did you, or anyone else had proplems like these it in the past?
    And again... any big and established guilds should know about most of theyr players.
    PaddyOBrien likes this.
  10. PaddyOBrien

    PaddyOBrien Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 12, 2014
    Messages:
    3,250
    Likes Received:
    4,470
    From what I understand Lightshade, isn't it the guildmaster that sets these rankings? If you're worried about it, don't set anyone other than people you actually trust with that ranking. I believe the option to keep guildstones is part of the guild changes, so in theory you could also keep your stone secure in another room / behind table wall and don't let anyone near it but yourself or when you recruit new players, and seal it off after that to prevent people from changing their allegiances. Like Erza said, it's already possible to switch guildstones but there needs to be enough people to switch allegiances, which is probably harder to do in a larger guild where people stay with their fealty declared toward the GM by default and when people go inactive, it's harder to get them to switch so you've got those "built in votes".

    When my old guild on osi got big enough, I never accepted "walk ins" after a while, but only people who I personally selected or someone in my guild could vouch for and avoided the "CAN I JOIN GUILD PLZ" type of people :)
  11. Blaise

    Blaise Well-Known Member
    UO:R Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2012
    Messages:
    7,706
    Likes Received:
    3,632
    Yeah, if you're paranoid about who you trust, don't trust anyone. The new system isn't forcing you to assign ranks to anyone, but it does allow you to.


    Ahhhh freedom.
  12. Pirul

    Pirul Well-Known Member
    UO:R Subscriber

    Joined:
    May 16, 2013
    Messages:
    3,219
    Likes Received:
    2,468
    Yes. Caught it in time, but to answer your question, yes.
    Erza Scarlet likes this.
  13. One

    One Well-Known Member
    UO:R Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    5,818
    Likes Received:
    5,097
    .
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2023
  14. Blaise

    Blaise Well-Known Member
    UO:R Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2012
    Messages:
    7,706
    Likes Received:
    3,632
    If there's really such concern, just request a toggle for the GM to allow or disallow fealty checks/voting.
    Lightshade likes this.
  15. Pirul

    Pirul Well-Known Member
    UO:R Subscriber

    Joined:
    May 16, 2013
    Messages:
    3,219
    Likes Received:
    2,468
    *Like*
    Lightshade likes this.
  16. Henderson!

    Henderson! Well-Known Member
    UO:R Subscriber

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2012
    Messages:
    327
    Likes Received:
    304
    This has been in the works for nearly two years. I feel like the time for debate and suggestions have passed. We're in the implementation phase and were given a date of when that's happening.
  17. Mandevu

    Mandevu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,595
    Likes Received:
    1,182
    Damn this this first I've seen this. I got excited, hoped it was a revamp of how factions worked in terms of drawing incentive. Instead it's a revamp of how the guild system works lol. Oh well, cool.
  18. One

    One Well-Known Member
    UO:R Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    5,818
    Likes Received:
    5,097
    .
    Last edited: Feb 5, 2023
  19. Mandevu

    Mandevu Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,595
    Likes Received:
    1,182
    Like a change to how factions actually worked. I.e. Something to entice players to want to join. Controlling towns just so you can hire some guards or place some vendors is kind of pointless whenever people have no problem obtaining those items outside of factions. And guards are useless unless there's an actual population of people to use them against. There needs to be a change to the system to make people want to play.

    I would try to come up with something if I didn't feel it would just be swept under the rug and never considered for implementation.
    One likes this.
  20. MikeK

    MikeK Well-Known Member
    UO:R Subscriber

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2014
    Messages:
    3,124
    Likes Received:
    1,787
    Looks great, not perfect but nothing can be.

    I do see some drama coming from people who attempt coups of a guild's leadership, for instance an officer could add tons of players and vote themselves in. Trash talk will have some content!

Share This Page