Guild Leadership Changes suggestion

[Disillusiona]

<p>I couldn't not find right forum for outright suggestions to gameplay, so I had to pick one and address it here.  I am a "lifer" player of Everquest 2, but occasionally take a break away.  Being a guild leader I always make sure someone is left with the guild controls, but this takes a huge trust in whomever you give it too.  Since the beginning, this marks the third time coming back to find all the hard work and in game money gone because someone disbanded the guild, changed leadership, or demoted, forcing me to have to leave and start another guild because that is part of the fun for me and is also game content.</p><p>Currently the guild has a setup where you have to have a group to begin a guild, and sometimes you hear the familiar, "1 plat if you help me setup a guild for myself."  It appears that the game was designed for multiple leaders as a "checks and balance" for someone to abuse the guild for personal gain and status like I mentioned above.  The real problem is that a guild leader (s) often spend alot of time and platinum getting it moving and going.  However, if you don't know them in RL, you really cannot trust what others will do.  Currently, the game is setup so that all of the people with top guild leader status can boot and demote equals.  In other games, if a leader goes away, the game company sends an e-mail to that person after set time, only after a petition has been made to remove them or change their status back to peon.</p><p>I have read on the web of many situations, and met some who have been in the same flushed down the toilet after radical guild changes while they were away a little. </p><p>First I would like to suggest that guild leaders cannot shaft one another this way by removing their ability to demote or kick another out.  Second, to setup a petition system where that person can be e-mailed and get his "butt" active to show he really desires to maintain that position.  I know they are trying to keep it democratic, but come on!!  Too many you furors want to rise to dictator status and control everyone and guild meetings making decisions, that make peopl quit the game all together after being betrayed and burned. </p><p>I am not sure if the above method is the best way to prevent coming back to no guild, lost time, lost money, and lost status.  It is immoral and reflects the nature of the RL of some of these people.  Maybe Sony development could think over the guild settings a little more and save a lot of people a lot of grief.  Currently the only thing someone like me can do, is to bite it and accept it, start a new guild and this time be sure you are the only GL, harass the said parties that ruined your game (which isn't cool to do).  Or quit EQ2 forever.  Please help on this matter</p><p>FP</p>

[Wingrider01]

<p><cite>Disillusionary wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>I couldn't not find right forum for outright suggestions to gameplay, so I had to pick one and address it here.  I am a "lifer" player of Everquest 2, but occasionally take a break away.  Being a guild leader I always make sure someone is left with the guild controls, but this takes a huge trust in whomever you give it too.  Since the beginning, this marks the third time coming back to find all the hard work and in game money gone because someone disbanded the guild, changed leadership, or demoted, forcing me to have to leave and start another guild because that is part of the fun for me and is also game content.</p><p>Currently the guild has a setup where you have to have a group to begin a guild, and sometimes you hear the familiar, "1 plat if you help me setup a guild for myself."  It appears that the game was designed for multiple leaders as a "checks and balance" for someone to abuse the guild for personal gain and status like I mentioned above.  The real problem is that a guild leader (s) often spend alot of time and platinum getting it moving and going.  However, if you don't know them in RL, you really cannot trust what others will do.  Currently, the game is setup so that all of the people with top guild leader status can boot and demote equals.  In other games, if a leader goes away, the game company sends an e-mail to that person after set time, only after a petition has been made to remove them or change their status back to peon.</p><p>I have read on the web of many situations, and met some who have been in the same flushed down the toilet after radical guild changes while they were away a little. </p><p>First I would like to suggest that guild leaders cannot shaft one another this way by removing their ability to demote or kick another out.  Second, to setup a petition system where that person can be e-mailed and get his "butt" active to show he really desires to maintain that position.  I know they are trying to keep it democratic, but come on!!  Too many you furors want to rise to dictator status and control everyone and guild meetings making decisions, that make peopl quit the game all together after being betrayed and burned. </p><p>I am not sure if the above method is the best way to prevent coming back to no guild, lost time, lost money, and lost status.  It is immoral and reflects the nature of the RL of some of these people.  Maybe Sony development could think over the guild settings a little more and save a lot of people a lot of grief.  Currently the only thing someone like me can do, is to bite it and accept it, start a new guild and this time be sure you are the only GL, harass the said parties that ruined your game (which isn't cool to do).  Or quit EQ2 forever.  Please help on this matter</p><p>FP</p></blockquote><p>first, this is not a tech issue</p><p>second - why should they get involved internal squabling between players? A guild is a PLAYER run function. deal with it internally, SOE does not need to allocate any internal resources to it.</p>

[Disillusiona]

<p>How come is it that you cannot post in forums anything "The sky is blue" without someone arguing with you. In case it wasn't clearly stated enough for you.  This is a game design flaw, that I am requesting they re-examine the settings of the Guild Leadership.</p>

[PsiberDaemon]

<p><cite>Disillusionary wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>How come is it that you cannot post in forums anything "The sky is blue" without someone arguing with you. In case it wasn't clearly stated enough for you.  This is a game design flaw, that I am requesting they re-examine the settings of the Guild Leadership.</p></blockquote><p>You might want to try posting this in the Gameplay forum...  You might get a conversation going there.  I understand where you're coming from, but it's not a Tech Issue since the game is running as programmed.  Not making light of your situation, just trying to point you in the right direction.  Also, and I know a lot of people don't think it'll do any good, but you never know, try doing /feedback in game.</p>

[Karlen]

<p>Make a rank just below leader and use that rank for whoever is going to take over for you.  Give it all the same privileges as the leader, but they shouldn't be able to demote you or close up the guild.</p><p>Not really much you can do to prevent them from taking all the money unless you pocket it before you go.</p><p>I think that the appropriate tech is there and any changes to fix your problem might make it more difficult for the rest of us.</p><p>I haven't played a lot with the ranks lately -- are there many things that only a leader can do (that couldn't be done by someone a rank down with the same privileges)?  Do you have to have an active leader?</p><p>EDIT: possible tech change: Require confirmation from 2 leaders to remove/demote a leader.  A leader can always demote himself.</p>