Rebalancing guild members limit


#21

Having to make factions to fill everyone in does mess the buffs up for everyone. 1000 limit or if possible no limit would be nice. Iconic wont have a limit issue because I like to keep the guild active and small. I can see how it could be an issue for some guilds tho.


#22

At 30 members, you are out of space already if everyone has 3 or 4 alts. At least discount alts from counting towards the cap


#23

Yeah also doesn’t work. The cap when some people take breaks would be perfect to delete member cap and add a cap on how many can use buff at same time so only active players use buff and non active can stay in it to complete the aligned settlement


#24

and right here is a big reason why we need higher caps we (PS) are starting to have to enforce a kind of heavy “be active in the guild or get kicked” rule in order to stay with the current guild cap


#25

Hey Psh! not a great way to advertise us XD


#26

its true
im also eyeballing the no endeavor members but i cant do it
so full is full atm lolz


#27

yea tbh i really hate to have to shine the light on this us like this but this needs to get out that the cap is now starting to really hurt guilds


#28

we where already a guild like you guys but now the game forces the aquatopians to make little guilds i dont care that much about buffs if they could add no cap on members and cap the people we give buffs all this is sorted


#29

Not saying I agree with the cap but I don’t think the only reason for it was to limit access to buffs. I think they were looking at guilds as tight knit communities who play the game in a similar way to you. So I don’t think just finding a way to limit buffs solves the design goals of the system.

I do think a cap at 100 is too low, but a side effect of this is it exposes how few active players have Gleam Club. Honestly raising the cap to 200 and having Gleam club add 300 instead would achieve the same overall number but is more likely to help relieve some of these tensions.

The reason I don’t think they will remove alts from counting anytime soon is that would require a completely different backbone to the current system. The game treats your “alts” as full fledged characters, they only add them to your friends list since you can’t meet them in game to do so. Otherwise they are not limited, and do not share anything with your other characters by default. Cubits, coin, cosmetics, and guilds all work at the character level not the account level. It would require at least a fair bit to move any of those to the account level I think.


#30

Has there been any dev response on this?


#31

nothing yet


#32

Guilds are tied to buffs which means they must be balanced with limits. It’s a double edged sword.

What are the use cases for going over the current limit? Like what features do you miss out on or get frustrated by when your guild is capped? Knowing those can help the devs plan adjustments to fit your intended use cases, or explain why the game balance prevents them from happening.

Focusing on the guild limit number itself will create an endless tug of war between the social guilds and the buff guilds


#33

Again, make buff costs scale with member count, make small guilds viable at the same time. Atm I’m not enjoying guilds one bit since if I want to benefit from the buffs I’m forced to have a big guild as my main. There are too many problems the cap introduces to work around all of them when there’s a simple solution.

  • Not all players in a big town fit in the same guild so the settlement gets broken up
  • Guild chat becomes useless if players are in overflow-guilds
  • Guild tags become cluttered when they can’t be duplicates and big guilds start making overflow-guilds
  • Permissions in beacons become hard to manage with overflow-guilds

These are just some from the top of my mind, there’s probably a lot more I didn’t think of. Making extra systems to work around these problems sounds counter productive.

But we still don’t have a developer citated reason for the limit, so we don’t even know why the limit exists. Could @james or another dev please comment on the reason?


#34

I guess I am still missing something in all of this. With about 360 players at peak each day lets say we have 2000 active players playing the game each week (not those just fueling beacons put playing). Should more than 25% of these be able to be in one guild? Remember the player counts include alts. How much of the player base should be able to be in one guild and getting the buffs from that guild?

I would have thought the point was to have a focused group of players in a guild not half the population in the game. The games I am aware of that have higher limits to the guild members also do not have alts but they do have many thousands more active players. Are players asking for higher limits to guild membership because we are not using them as intended? Is it because we are using them for permissions due to a lack of a better tool to do the same thing?


#35

thats one off the issue our town has alot off betaplayers and they been playing so long that they go on breaks from time to time our are waiting for updates
i can ping them they come in allign and continue the break
now if i kick out these players the issue with inactive plots in town becomes even bigger i was given rights to places to cleanup the roads and infrastructure
and just want settlement on one guild for bulding and also mentally have everybody that build it in one group etc


#36

we are not saying give us even 1K player cap just someting a bit bigger so more then 20 people can join a guild


#37

I know you think it should be more than it is now and I am not necessarily disagreeing with that. But that actually did not answer my question. I am honestly interested in how many players/characters should be allowed in a guild? If not 500 then what 600 or 700 or more? The problem seems to be players joining and having all their alts joining. Since every player can have 10 alts, but they may have none also, how many characters should be able to join a guild? In theory, if every player had an average of 5 alts then you could have up to 100 players and all their alts under the current limit. So if my 2000 players is close to accurate 5% of the players in each guild.


#38

If they don’t change it, then maybe guild leaders will have to consider rejecting alts from joining the guild unless there is a functional or good reason for the alt to join, and keep it to the main Character only.

„I want buffs on all my characters“ would not be a good reason in my book.


#39

yea sorry shod not have made that post right has i was wakeing up…we are asking for higher caps cuz of the way the guild system is set up join a guild alin the beacon guild gets points for it and in some case’s the guild also needs perms to it with PS we have to make sure eveyone who owns a gateway is in the guild so that any portal masters has the ability to maintain them unless someone drops alot of plots to get multiple worlds on one char that alone is a big sink(10,20 chars) and i know with big citys they would prefer all the people liveing in it be a part too so the city can maintain its name.

has for the cap tbh i dont know what would be fair looking at the current cap 100 + 500 paid i would say eather make the 500 a perm unlock that you can drop a 1 time fee for or remove the “paid” part and just have the current cap be 600

the thing with that tho is a lot of the bigger “open” guilds would have to then be manual invite and come up with some way to verify each char joining cuz has it stands right now its inpossable to know who is a alt and who is a main


EDIT 2: nvm its not really P2W


#40

not impossible, but maybe hard in some cases and may be time consuming, if the guild is having problems with the cap, then it may be worth investing the time, if the devs refuse to change the situation.

If I am understanding the objection and situation correctly, which i might not be. I didn’t scream P2W because it is not quite P2W, it is nothing the guild owner can control, it is the member who is joining the guild that it effects, therefore I see it more as a „manipulative“ way to get more people to buy GC.