Tree of Savior Forum

At least one rank 7 class from each branch should have the ability to create a guild

General Discussion
#21

It is combat based, but templars hardly bring anything to the table when it comes to pvp like majority of the swordsmen class. I am a rank 6 cata debating whether I should go for a templar class instead of lvling another cataphract for the templar class. I use cataphract as an example because they are significantly better in pvp comparing to majority of the swordsmen classes.

I don’t disagree with what you saI’d completely but I am trying to get you to see things in a different perspective. Lets face it, every class will be gimped if they “sacrifice” rank 7 for the guild master class, the difference is, I can still play a class that is enjoyable to me instead of having to lvl up a swordsman for templar. It doesn’t really matter if an archer based templar is more powerful than a swordsmen bases templar, I wouldn’t create an archer for that reason alone unless it gives me a significant advantage when it comes to lvling.

Besides, there is a reason why the swordsmen class isn’t doing well in pvp. high def/hp or not, magic dmg melts faces.

and I have been a mmo player for over 15 years, this is the first game that gates guild creation behind a class.

#22

Well, it’s unwise to flaunt your experience around when you are 100% wrong. Lineage also gated guild creation into a class. It was also one of the most influential MMORPGs of all time, and people are still playing it to this day, almost 20 years later.

[sarcasm] I guess you should have been playing MMOs as long as me. Clearly you know less, since you haven’t been. You know, since we’re flaunting around experience and all. Because that doesn’t make you sound like a jackass at all when you say this kind of stuff. [/sarcasm]

#23

It doesn’t.

your whole account becomes the guild leader.

You have to lvl a swordsman, but you are not forced to use it after.

#24

I meant to say “this is the first game I have played to gate guild creation behind a class” not denying that type of system existed.

And I wasn’t “flaunting” my gaming experience at all, a certain game might be influential to some people, but not all people. Just cause a game mechanic works in that game doesn’t mean it will work in others. What was I playing when Lineage 2 came out? I was playing RO, was RO not an influential MMORPG? I was merely indicating that I don’t pull everything I said out of my arse.

Bottom line is, many people and myself included think guild creation shouldn’t be gated this way, especially when it is hurting the social aspect of the game. You had a bad experience with group pvp in archaege where as the best experience for me is an all out faction war/world pvp in WoW and Aion.

#25

I mean why do you need to advance to a rank 7 to create a guild?

Being a influential MMORPG doesn’t make all of its features good. If you tally up online games that had some type of Guild/Community system, I don’t think even 10% of them have gated guilds behind a class. Even cash shop items to create a guild is better then this. Why do you gate a community building system behind a singular progression point?

If you make it high amount of gold, people can pitch in. If you make it a drop that has low drop rate, people can farm in parallel to get the item. If you put it as cash shop, people can pitch in money to buy the item.

Make it behind a single class . . . what do you do share accounts? Take turns leveling the character? No you wait for that person to finish leveling up.

#26

I was actually ■■■■■■■ psyched to make a Templar because the costume was neat and Templars are cool as ■■■■. And then it turned out to not even be a real class, basically just having no abilities and being a waste of a rank so you can make a guild. Absolutely lame as hell. I would be fine with Templar being a swordsman-only class considering other classes get potentially very cool ■■■■ as well like Alchemists and Oracles and eventually Appraiser (whatever they end up doing) - you could say none of those concepts are as impactful as guilds, but I’d argue guilds don’t mean ■■■■ right now anyway and all of those features need to be fleshed out a lot more. Magnum Opus could end up being the most baller ■■■■ in the game, for example, and if Oracle gets some improvements or some amazing circle 3 stuff who knows.

But yes, as the Templar class exists right now - it might as well be a generic hidden class that anyone can unlock and take on any archetype. Nothing about it makes it seem like it was designed to be a swordsman class, it’s just boring and generic and exists to be a grind to make a guild.

Disclaimer: I already leveled my Templar and made my guild and will likely never touch the character again. I would ideally like to see Templar be a cool support-swordsman class concept with guild creation as its unique mechanic but not its entire purpose. But right now they might a swell make it available to any class, because no matter what you’ll never use that as your main character, so you might as well get to choose what waste of a character slot you turn it into.

#27

I was referring to Lineage 1, which predated RO by quite a bit.

And there are clearly many who think it should be gated this way. Among these people are the staff at IMC, who created the game.

That’s wonderful. It’s a good thing those games still exist so you can play them. Not EVERY game has to be a WoW-centric-casual-friendly-quest-fest though. You can have 99% of the releases that cater to your audience. Let the rest of us have this one, please.

#28

I think IMC doesn’t want a guild to become a “hub” to do all sorts of stuff and I also don’t like the idea of that kind of guild.

Guilds should be more objective focused, bigger groups it doesn’t have to be just pvp or pve but these 2 are the main ones.

A Guild can be;
PvE focused, be it boss farming / Try to complete earth tower or simply camp the grinding zones.
PvP/GvG focused
Economy Focused
Role Playing Focused

with 35 player restrictions, guilds will have some heavy restrictions on recruiting, at least the competetive ones.After a guild is formed with 35 objetive focused, most of the time online player, you can do all kinds of things.It’s 7 parties.With that much parties You can camp every boss(as some parties/guilds already doing it.), you can camp grinding spots, even fight with other guilds and compete for these spots.

Only role playing type of guilds may suffer from this penalty(small size=small events) but let’s be honest, how many devoted role players really out there…

I never understood those 500 people 800 people guilds.Who do you know there ? How do you even form a raid/dungeon parties from 800 freaking people…It’s almost same as recruiting random people for endgame dungeon, which you don’t need guild to do it in the 1st place.

#29

It doesn’t need to be absurdly high, but should accommodate different demographics of players. Our current cap doesn’t have much of a buffer for anything besides small, tight-knit, active guilds. And although I think the concept behind that is wonderful, it runs into plenty of practical issues when you have a group of people that doesn’t fit those criteria.

#30

I believe it’s so that people can’t simply create tons of guilds out of nowhere. With a level lock of over 200, people won’t grind up and make a guild for nothing. On other MMOs, I’ve seen this be a problem, names that seem random enough end up being taken by someone else because there are jsut that many guilds. I assume the goal is to keep a similar situation from happening, and possibly creating lag. (No idea how it would but it might.)

#31

There will always be guilds for casual players though. People will end up joining these when ‘better’ guilds fill up. When you have no (practical) limit on guild sizes, things get out hand quickly. If you have a small group of dedicated players, more people will want to join, and then this trend continues till it gets ridiculous.

I literally played a game where the cap was 1024, and I was able to fill that cap. It was just stupid. There were maybe 50 of us, at most, who really were close in any meaningful way. The rest of the people just wanted the advantage of being in a popular guild.

No matter what the guild cap is, there will always be a guild that easily fills it. This makes it VERY difficult for new guilds to emerge. We have a huge advantage, given how easy it is to hit rank 7 before launch. Imagine what would happen if you started this game when it went free-to-play and there was no cap on guilds. Everyone would already be in a guild.

A small increase could be fine, but I’d say 50 is the absolute highest it should possibly go. This is 50 teams, too, so alts really aren’t an issue, which is a nice feature that most MMOs don’t implement.

#32

I do see the reason behind gating guilds so we don’t have random guilds popping out everyday. But I have problems with them gating guild creation behind a specific class.

I do agree that guilds with 500+ members are ridiculous and they are pretty much a zerg fest with little skills involved. But I am speaking for guilds with a tightly knitted community with over 50 members. Which is pretty standard for games these days when raids require 10+ members in a party. Having more members in this game really doesn’t hurt the gameplay aspect of the game since boss drops are are based off the 6 individuals that did the most damage. The only thing that would be affected is the fps drop since ToS isn’t the most optimized game. Maybe that is another reason for the small amount of members.

Sadly their plan kinda failed because I have seen multiple guilds declaring war on the same guild so that totally defeats the purpose of the 35 player limit.

#33

I don’t think lag has anything to do with this. If your game can not handle a few thousand strings you have other problems to worry about.

Is there a problem with there being a lot of guilds? I mean you gate the guild system behind a 200 cap which is pretty high for your average run of the mil player. I play on a semi causal schedule of about maybe 4-5 hours a day give or take. Getting to 200 (I am at 170) would take about 2 weeks for me.

But during those 2 weeks, if I wanted to join a guild what happens? Oh wait I am not a swordsman. Well that is fine I’ll just join someone else guild. Oh wait they are all full. Solo time.
Yes over time the guilds will slowly grow in number but the start point of a game is very crucial since those are when you make game lasting community.

It is very hard to join a game and enter a guild and be super buddy buddy. Most games have very tight knit circles that are built at the start. Joining mid way after creation is pretty much useless as they just kind of float you around and become a party/trading search tool after that.

#34

Actually, somewhere between 50-75 depending on future content and player demand sounds ideal in my mind. And only to take into account the inevitable inactivity of valued or long-term members, really. In no way am I advocating for hundreds of players crammed into a chat roo- I mean guild. That sounds incredibly stupid counterproductive!

#35

If this game gets some sort of multi-party raiding in place, I’d be all in favor of expanding the limit upwards of even 100 members, but with the current content, there’s plenty of room for a few full parties.

1 Like
#36

Then just gate it behind level and money. Don’t gate it behind a class. I believe that’s what the topic poster had in mind anyway, since he suggested R7 variants of templar.

#37

Yup making it so one class has the ability to make guilds was really dumb. I mean what’s the problem with people at lower levels able to make a guild? If they lose constantly at guild wars that’s there own fault but there are people that just want to be in a guild with just friends and be under one name. They need to just make it cost a lot of silver and leave it at that. Right now people making Templar have to recollection an alt because using rank 7 for just making a guild they are at a huge disadvantage when it comes to dps.

#38

I think it’s pretty neat that it’s restricted to one class only.

2 Likes
#39

I personally dislike the class lock too, which is why all I did was respond to the question asked about why gate it behind r7.

#40

Should making potions be class-based? i mean it would be nice if every class could make potions.

You cant just say, dont compare combat skills with the ability to make guilds. The reason? That there no ability that can be put in the same category as forming a guild. Unless you think of it as another crafting skill(which obviously do not fit the bill either)
In which case my first question would have some validity.

  1. No, because on any fantasy story the general that goes into battle is normally a swordman, so yay it makes perfect anime role-play.
  2. Up to a limit, RO had 56 and that seem to much sometimes, as far i understand the limit in ToS is 30. Maybe 45?
  3. No, There is no need for a pointless feature like this one. Reason: That how it works right now anyways. Lest say guild A and B are allies, they can just both declare war on guild C. Like that A and B players would be able to attack C but not each other (alliance).

Instance GvG when it happens should be a free for all.