This is completely debatable. Don't just say you don't like it.

There seems to be a misconception to how my suggestion works so I am rewriting it to better explain the purpose of it.

To understand where I am going with this suggestion, let's start with the definition of a guild.

The term guild relates to a medieval association of craftsmen or merchants, often having considerable power. Obviously, medieval is not applicable to this game but the rest of it does have relevance. Basically, guilds were the early versions of modern day unions. The general definition is an association of people for mutual aid or the pursuit of a common goal.

Good examples of guilds of the time were Carpenters Guilds, Blacksmith Guilds. In modern gaming, guilds were applied to playing styles, to include such things as Warrior Guilds, Thieves Guilds, Craftsman Guild, Mage (Magic/Wizard) Guilds, etc.

Now, in Pirates Glory there are two features in this game that match the definition of "an association of people for mutual aid or the pursuit of a common goal." Those features are GUILDS and NATIONS. That is correct, a NATION in Pirates Glory is an association of people for mutual aid and/or the pursuit of a common goal. Since both of these features apply to this definition, the root meaning of each must be used. Nations are a collaboration of people with different skills/jobs such as traders, bankers, manufacturers, military, etc. Guilds are a collaboration of people of the same skill/job, player role, or that lean towards a particular game playing style. Guilds must serve this purpose, as it cannot serve the same purpose as a Nation, and a Nation cannot be made up of just one type of playing style. If both serve the same purpose, then one feature is unnecessary and can be eliminated, as it has no benefit or significant purpose.

Building on this, there are theoretically several types of applicable guilds that can exist currently in the game. However, as a set guild structure has not been developed in this game as of current, guilds are technically all the same from a game perspective, and serve no additional purpose that a Nation already serves. The only differences between guilds are defined outside of the game by players. Currently, user defined roles for guilds include Merchant Guild, Nation Guilds (although not many exist), and Privateer Guilds. Each guild has its own set of rules, defined by the guild owners. So there are, for example, merchant guilds that do not tolerate plunder battles outside of nation missions, while others may not be as strict.

Now on to my suggestion. To better enhance guilds as a whole to include future development, Guilds should be defined by Type. The type is just a baseline for the guilds purpose and allows for Guild specific bonuses to be applied when implemented. Rules/Laws are still player defined and can be implemented similarly to Nation Laws. As stated above, Guilds should lean towards or favor a particular playing style or game role. This does not prevent players that use different styles or games roles (bankers for instance) from being in any particular guild type, they may not receive a benefit that suites there playing style or role.

+1 but I think you should add a 4th, a Training Guild, it would be designed to teach how to be a pirate, a merchant and general knowledge of the game. it would also help new players decide what they would want to become, and move on to either join a guild to suit their play style, create their own guild, or become a teacher in the future for new players themselves.

-1, many guilds enjoy diversity in their ranks- and this stuff is pretty much already in the game. Merchant guilds and training guilds all frown upon fighting- pirate guilds have some traders but focus on raiding and plundering. Restraining a guild to be a certain type whenever it can already be whatever it wants is not a good idea.

-1 and I agree wth Ferdinand it's not necessary and no it's not possible for guild to change on a whim because that guild would destroy itself that way. although guilds have some sort of "leaders" all of them talk with it's memebers about major changes.

Ferdinand wrote:-1, many guilds enjoy diversity in their ranks- and this stuff is pretty much already in the game. Merchant guilds and training guilds all frown upon fighting- pirate guilds have some traders but focus on raiding and plundering. Restraining a guild to be a certain type whenever it can already be whatever it wants is not a good idea.

The types listed are just the most common seen in the game. If you have one that you think applies, please add it. Locking a guild type doesn't prevent you from being diverse. You can still be a merchant and belong to a different nation and still be expected to fight in any guild. The point is to allow structure for future game development, such as certain guild types may have added bonuses, that other guilds may not receive. You can't do that in the current setup as there is nothing that differentiates different guilds other than the guild owners words.

Meliva wrote:+1 but I think you should add a 4th, a Training Guild, it would be designed to teach how to be a pirate, a merchant and general knowledge of the game. it would also help new players decide what they would want to become, and move on to either join a guild to suit their play style, create their own guild, or become a teacher in the future for new players themselves.

The guilds listed are just a representation of the common setups of guilds within the game and are not necessarily the only types that will be available.

Wolfie wrote:-1 and I agree wth Ferdinand it's not necessary and no it's not possible for guild to change on a whim because that guild would destroy itself that way. although guilds have some sort of "leaders" all of them talk with it's memebers about major changes.

Actually yes it can, it may destroy the nature of the guild, but there is no mechanism to prevent the owner from changing the point of the guild.

DezNutz wrote:

Wolfie wrote:-1 and I agree wth Ferdinand it's not necessary and no it's not possible for guild to change on a whim because that guild would destroy itself that way. although guilds have some sort of "leaders" all of them talk with it's memebers about major changes.

Actually yes it can, it may destroy the nature of the guild, but there is no mechanism to prevent the owner from changing the point of the guild.

The USA guild went down with the nation. It was a guild that only had members because of the payouts I assume. Might I ask what classifications you would give to existing guilds?

Most are merchant or fighting guilds. There are a few nation style guilds; however, the guild owners would be able to select the type that they think applies to what the guild is for. Currently there is no real guild structure. The point is to force a structure, if you have no structure to differentiate guilds and there uses, guild development is extremely limited. A good reference point in game development is guilds providing game benefits. If the game didn't have a defined structure on guilds all guilds could gain the same capabilities, thus making the development pointless.

DezNutz wrote:Most are merchant or fighting guilds. There are a few nation style guilds; however, the guild owners would be able to select the type that they think applies to what the guild is for. Currently there is no real guild structure. The point is to force a structure, if you have no structure to differentiate guilds and there uses, guild development is extremely limited. A good reference point in game development is guilds providing game benefits. If the game didn't have a defined structure on guilds all guilds could gain the same capabilities, thus making the development pointless.

Sounds like you are trying to limit guilds and control what they do. We've seen what that can do in real life with businesses let's keep guilds great again lol