Ranked Quads (Like in Domination)

[Kaz]

At the moment there are large differences in membership between the guilds.

I didn't turn on the Quad module because it's currently not tied into GM privs or the guild screen in any way.

However, the screens work and could perhaps allow for a way to have warfare without involving a whole guild.

E.g. If a guild has a quad (or quads), then it's saying that quad for quad warfare is an option that wont initiate full blown guild war.

Would you like quads turned on, or not until they can be managed by GM's

[Masta]

I guess I don't understand.

GMs can't manage the quads from their logins?

But they could direct certain members to ally up and form a quad, and direct them as how to fight (ie: warchat), and therefor have a quad vs quad war instead of total war?

Would there be a way to have a quad vs quad declaration of war or would we need to declare guild war for the quads to fight it out properly? Because the single war declaration per realm system is a problem when you are talking about quad or guild wars.

If you are just saying that the GM can't put the quads together and would need to instruct the members to quad themselves up, then it sounds like it would be fine that way for now, to me. I would like for the quads to be able to declare quad war instead of guild war though, to keep things from getting out of hand, say if one quad that is from a large guild starts losing, and a guild war declaration is up, it could get ugly. Besides that, sounds good to me. And honestly, if I have to declare guild war to make it work, that's fine too, because I know I personally will not allow any of my members to interfere with the quad war itself, if they did they would be immediately booted and fed to the heathens, but it would be best if there was a quad war feature, just to keep everyone honest. Besides, is anyone actually willing to take my word for it that I would keep my non-quad guys out of the fight? Probably not, even though I would. Just a thought.

Funny you bring this up, when a small guild is obviously scouting and looting the hell out of 5 JustBlind realms...

I was planning on just using the guild war declaration and only fighting with the same number of realms as the enemy, if it came to that later in the age ya know... Not that I was thinking of it today or anything. It was a "Just in case" thought. Purely hypothetical of course.

[Kaz]

This suggestion has nothing whatsoever to do with JustBlind, any activity you have with smaller guilds is totally coincidental. If you're at war with a guild then guild war would be more appropriate. If you're at war with a shadow guild, quad war 'could' be an option. But only if the shadow guild has created a 'Ranked Quad'. Otherwise they are just normal UG kingdoms.

I posted it for two reasons, the first being the huge variety in guild membership numbers, the second being that my intention has always been to have 'Ranked Quads' built into the guild system.

I'm not talking about 'Alliances', I'm talking about 'Ranked Quads'. Yes a quad is the traditional name given to an alliance, but 'Ranked Quads' are a bit like guilds. You create one, give it a longname and shortname and players can apply to it. It can decalare war, but only against other 'Ranked Quads'. It can't declare against any 'alliance'.

At the moment there is nothing in place to limit applications from non-guild members from joining a Quad with guild members, because the system as currently standing was not designed with Guilds in mind. There are several issues to the quad system that make it fall outside of full GM control, including the ability for someone without 'War' priv to declare a quad war because they 'own' the quad.

Another issue is the lack of 'Quad' being shown in UB.

But, all issues aside, the system 'could' bring an additional element to the game.

[Gili]

Is there a point though? Can't a quad just register a guild? Having a different structure within the guilds game seems to be at odds to the Guilds element itself.

I can see the potential issue with 3 big guilds and a number of small guilds...but we're still gaining numbers and hoepfully things will even out a little.

[Masta]

Kaz, I apologize, I did not mean to imply anything other than the mere coincidence of the incident. It was truly an amazing coincidence, and I thought that what you proposed could potentially solve the issue of a 6 member guild provoking my 18 member guild, and yet not being able to really fight any kind of "fair" war with such disproportionate numbers. I truly did not mean anything by what I said, and I never for a moment thought it was anything other than a coincidence. My apologies if I came off like a jerk, I tend to do that sometimes on these boards. However, you should know that I truly appreciate all you are doing and have done for the game. I find your continued perseverance and search for ways to create a better game, truly admirable.

However, that said, I have to agree with Gili on this one, that the entire system seems to be in direct conflict with the philosophy and stability of a truly "guilds" game. I would like to see guilds game remain guilds game, without ranked quads. But that is just my 2 cents.

As far as the problem with the 3 big guilds and the 3 or 4 small guilds... Well I for one will consider splitting my guild into two separate, completely autonomous, guilds with about equal membership. It seems that two Leto guilds of between 8-12 members each, or something close to that size, would bring a great deal more balance to the game. I am not ready to commit to this yet, but I will think hard on it, and depending on how things shake out, I will make the appropriate decision that best benefits the game overall, and not myself or my faithmates. I started a Leto guild in order to bring balance to the game (it was the only faith without a guild, or a large guild more specifically,) not to increase disparity. I know i could do it, I have the proper people to form two separate guilds if need be, but I am going to give the game more time and see how things go before making that decision. I'm sure it would be an unpopular decision with my guildmates, but most of them would understand in the end why it is simply the right thing to do. We shall see.

For now, I think it best to let the quads register as guilds, and function within the guilds game system as best they can at their given size. UG quads have the advantage of not being declared total war upon, they must be picked off one by one, so they can uphit and put up a good fight, however their status as a non-registered quad lacks a certain unwritten rule concerning rules of engagement during warfare. So there are pros and cons to both ways of operating, and I think it would be best to leave it up to the quads themselves, whether they want the advantages of being registered or vice versa.

But as always, thanks for trying to make the game better all the time, and asking the opinions of the players, instead of just implementing changes. Whether or not I agree with the idea or the outcome of the implementation, I am thankful for your efforts, always.

[Jokingjoe]

I see where you're coming from, Kaz. A shadow guild might be more likely to form a quad (we probably would) and that would have given Masta's crew an ability to quad war against us. As it was, their big beaters suddenly became too large to declare on the smaller shadow kingdoms and couldn't do much more than scum them. Perhaps that's a built in protection to shadow guilds, though.