Rejected guild perks alternative approach

[beelzebob666]

Reason

I liked the basic concept of the guild perks feature, but the costs were out of proportion to the benefits

Details

- the guild HQ has different "buildings" - each focused on different bonuses (stables for recruitment time, treassury for coin/supply boost, training hall for attack/defense boost... - number of buildings, and effects up to devs)

- each player can each day invest up to X "build points" into those buildings - build points costing certain resources - alternatively costs could grow exponentially instead of a hard cap of X

- each building has multiple levels and every level needs more build points to build than the one before

- every week (or month) all buildings lose a level (maintenance is needed) - this timing would ideally be dynamically dependent on the time of reaching the current level of the respective building (every level up resets the timing) - alternatively, it could be a hard timing like "every monday" or "every first of the month" or the like.


that way the guild may decide if they want to focus on a certain boost or if they want to spread out their investment

Balance

up to the devs
bigger guilds will have an advantage over smaller guilds - the difference is kept from going out of proportion by the ever increasing costs per building level

Abuse Prevention

when properly implemented there should be no abuse possible

Summary

improved (?) version of the guild perks

Have you looked to see if this has already been suggested?

yes

...

 

[terim]

i like it and In my opinion, to achieve the advantages, each player must represent a percentage of the total as in the guild expedition, so that to obtain it, all members must contribute.

sorry,
my english is pretty bad

 

[Goldra]

I like the idea, but carefull with the maintenance. Hard maintenance can avoid players to continue the work.

 

[DEADP00L]

In my opinion, to achieve the advantages, each player must represent a percentage of the total as in the guild expedition, so that to obtain it, all members must contribute.

I agree !!!

 

[Thunderdome]

Like most games that have guilds, corps, and groups, I agree with this. This will get guild members to actively take part for the duration until all is maxed out. Larger guilds will max out faster than smaller (or 1 person) guilds on such.

Do we know what boosts would be associated?

 

[Dessire]

this would be better: levels are permanent if you don't activate the bonuses. when you activate a bonus, the level will be decreased by 1 after X days or weeks. or even better. In order to activate the bonus, you must pay the same cost of the cost to level it up for the last time. so for example, if the max level is 10 and the cost for it is spend 100 G of gold then, after X days or week it will be deactivated and you must spend again 100 G to activate the bonus.

here are some ideas for the bonuses:

- when you fail a battle or negotiation, you have X% of chance to have the enemy military units attack and defence reduced by Y% or 1 extra turn in negotiations.

- you have X% of chance to get your next reward in GbG multiplied by 2. if this effect is activated a 2nd time just after the first time, you get your reward multiplied by 3.

- once per day, members of the guild have X% of chance to receibe an special item. activate this item to reduce to 0 the attrition. the chance should be very low. Each member has his/her own chance, so it could received by 2 players, or 40 players, or 23 players, etc. it is random.

- the military units of your guild members defeated in any type of combat have X% of chance to have all their units killed resurrected.

 

[punita]

Poll?

 

[terim]

and iagree with deadpol in another thread

Because it is clear that to create one, at some point we are alone.
But that some create a guild to benefit from the advantages instead of remaining alone without a guild is an aberration.
Why don't various guild perks or effects activate once the guild has X members?

 

[one day flower]

I like the idea, but I'd prefer to see having guild members having to do quests instead of the introduction of separate build points.

On big disadvantage is that large guilds will have much more power than small guilds.

 

[Nickneck the Lion]

I like the idea, so the guild gets more sense again, because it offers better advantages. The guilds are also encouraged to actively work on these advantages through maintenance. But they shouldn't be bonuses with x% chance of something, but get x% on (attack, defence, less time to heal, goods production +1 (5 instead of 4 goods) or other).
I am for it

 

[DEADP00L]

If the system takes into account the participation of all members and not that of a few AND if a guild consists of at least 3 members to be able to participate, I think it is normal that the biggest guilds earn more. It is more difficult to motivate 80 players than 10. It would therefore be normal for the advantages to be proportional to the size of the guild.

 

[Fire Witch]

Poll?

Added.

 

[DEADP00L]

Inno could have recycled the Hub to make advantages of guilds where each pontoon would represent a type of quest with a type of bonus but where each level would be validated by the participation of ALL the members of a guild.
Bearing in mind that the bonus would be proportional to the number of members, as for groupings in Guild Expeditions.
1 pontoon to improve the goods, 1 pontoon for the attack, 1 for the production of FP, 1 in connection with the antique dealer, 1 in connection with the GbG and 1 in connection with the colonies.
Without any harmful effect, except the reduction of points on each pontoon each week without participation of all the members.
100% member participation each week for all guilds containing between 3 and 50 members. (no bonus for guilds composed of less than 3 members, it's a collective game not a solitaire). 1 "joker" for guilds from 51 to 60 members, 2 "jokers" for those from 61 to 70 and 3 "jokers" for those from 71 to 80. The jokers being the possibility of ignoring ONE member of the weekly compulsory participations.
For bonuses and quests, there had been very nice proposals when the subject was open for discussion.

 

[Velvet Thunder]

At this point of time we are not accepting ideas related to the guild perks.