Home > Carbon Combat > Content > Discussion: What about a guild/team/clan system?
What about a guild/team/clan system?
39 Comments - 91687 Views
Submitted By lagging on 12/05/05
Carbon Combat, lagging, Discussions 
This Discussion originally posted in the "Carbon Combat" Group

Hey all!

the discussin i'm opening  with an idea i had almost identically posted in the ideas&suggestions thread.

The reason why i am reposting it, is because i'm wanting to know what do other players think about this idea (some told me their opinion ingame already) but without flooding the ideas/suggestions thread.

I'm a fan of team death matches, which are imho under/exploited.Most often, any team who gets the better player wins with more kills, i haven't seen once a team tactically organising a defense vs a stonger player.

My point being: proper team organisation would add a whole new layer to CC, but is obviously impossible to handle in "ready-steady go" matches with teammates that you don't even know the level of, nor if they actually speak any language you can communicate in.

Also if there are any drawbacks to CC, imo are:

-the fact that stronger players are nowhere to be seen most of the times, and when they appear it looks like they are from another planet, out of not being used to play vs them.

-the fact that newbies are basically serving as dead meat for credits for more experienced players, making many leave before they woudl even learn how to play properly.

 

There comes into play my big idea- organsing a guilds system, not meant to provide us with wars over the usual matches, but to add a new layer- the chance for predetermined matches with studied tactics.

In imagining it i have tried to use most of what is already available in CC- so it shouldn't be too far from doable.

Of course other ways are possible.. I just found myself imagining these rules:

 

  • each guild leader would be required to register a free forum on some advised free forum hosting service to exchange information amongst guild members. Should be also advised the use of any voip servise(skype, msn, teamspeak etc etc) to coordinate the movements ingame
  • Guilds should have a maximum number of registered players on their roster( 20?30?40?). There should also be a timeout for any player exiting a guild (of his own free will or being kicked by the king for inactivity or foult behaviour or any other valid reason)wanting to enter anothe guild, to prevent swarms of people unsubscribing from a guild and moving to help their firends in another guild for a specific match.(1 month?)
  • To grant a fair chance to everyone, at the moment of founding the first guilds, would be great if administration took care helping to spread the power(top ranking players) to all of the first founded guilds, not to have a single guild with all the players ranked top 20  and everyone else suffer their power. For sure, in time only a few guilds would prevail, but better not to start completely unbalanced.
  • Guilds would have organized fights(password protected team matches, possibly longer than usual, maybe 30 mins, making it a proper challenge also concentration-wise) to earn the “ownership” of a map- as if it were a territory. If a territory were to be free, any guild would have the chance to claim it, and it’s claim would become “ownership” if no other guild would challenge it for 24 hours.
  • the number of maps with the possibility to be “owned” should be limited, in order to create some competition for the territories available (if there are 200 maps available and only 10 guilds, there wouldn't be any competition, nor fights. it feels like the right proportin is around 1:1  number of guilds:number of territories for the taking)
  • once a guild would “own a territory/map” or had claimed from less than 24 hours, it wouldl be required to defend it vs any attacking  guild “besiegeing” it. When a guild leader would set a siege on a territory, the defending guild would have the opportunity to set the time for the match to defend the territory, amongst the following- 23 hours later, 24 hours later, 25 hours later from when the territory was attacked. If the guild leader wouldn’t set the defense time, there should be a default time setup for defending (24hours later?).
  • all Territories’ ownerships would reset at the end of “Seasons” (3months long?) to give everyone a breather(1 month break?) but also a new chance for everyone. Also there could be a rotation of a different set of territories from season to season, with different characteristics.
  • At the beginning of the match, both guilds could have 50 seconds in which they would be  invisible to each other, as on separate servers with the same map- That would be the time to position themselves on the map according to their strategy(not to start only and always with cramped up dogfights at the respawning point). Only then the fight would start.
  • Each guild member would get +1times extra daily credits bonus for every territory owned by his guild, (1 map owned= 200% daily bonus total,  2 maps owned= 300% daily bonus total etc); more intricate bonus systems could be implemented too, like a bonus for when a member of the guild owning a territory fights on that map(hp regen? Or bonus in coins/kill?).. but that could affect the balance of the game so it’s a tricky thing to define,  and maybe not all that fundamental. I feel the reason for challenges amongst guild should be the challenge itself, not the benefit, but a little motivation never hurt anyone.
  • during the guild fight, killing the 3 top ranked players of the opposing guild would give 2 points, any other kill would be worth 1 point.
  • actively, only 10 players of a guild should be allowed to enter the fight. they could do so also after the beginning of the siege, by spawning from the spawning spot directly into the game. Passively a max of 2 players/guild can take the role of scouts, using the “Roam mode” mechanics, to help detect flaws in the opposing team’s tactic and invisible sharpshooters. A nice implementation, would be if drones could plant  beacons lasting  cca 30 secs, visible ONLY to one own’s guild members even through the horizon, as direction markers, to help communication.
  • it would be nice if the fights would be recorded from a bird’s view angle, and watchable in retrospect (also with the beacons of both teams?)for 24 hours by anyone interested, by paying few credits.
  • atm long distance sharpshooters have the upper hand ingame.      =>For a proper teamwork to exist, the items available in the shop should be fine-tuned by the game management to remove current advantages using 1 build or the other(for example Ninja invisibility armor should maybe offer less protection, the toll in damage payed by the sprinter body kit should be reduced to make it usable, heavy armor could in fact become even heavier… not to shift the power balance, but to create the chance for clear roles/builds, and not 1 big advantage for one or another.)

 

On the long run, it would be very likely that specific builds would  appear within the guild strategies for specific roles [long distance sharpshooter with ninja invisibility armor, close combat fighter with heavy armor,close range weapons of choice and good “out of vehicle” skills], another build with the task to start from the close range once an opposing sharpshooter is identified, and get him asap, while being offered cover fire... etc).

Hopefully in time every guild would exploit the freedom to choose their own preferred fighting tactic according to the besieged territory’s characteristics, or simply to impose their own usual tactic.

Hopefuly this  would inspire m2ap designers to make maps giving a big advantage to one or to another kind of build( a maze like map making sharpshooting impossible, a map like a half pipe giving a strong advantage to earth fight vs air fight, a map like doug’s floating islands or battle island- ideal for sharpshooting  etc etc etc) thus forcing the guilds to prepare properly for the upcoming fights. I’ve read that helicopters are going to be implemented.. so God knows how many possible scenarios would emerge…

 

Benefits in terms of growing the CC community would be that
 
  • there woudl be a reason for top players to keep motivated in playing a bit more often (i guess it can get boring to at some point to find online mostly newbs/weaklings whom you easilly snipe)
  • the avarage level of the new recruits in the guilds/clans would rise..
  • there would be a reason for new recruits to be brought up by more experienced players, and not serve simply as dead meat for credits - meaning less noobs leaving before they woudl even learn how to play (and a higher chance of somebody buying credits....)
  • team playing would develop to a whole new level in relation to the maps

 

I'm looking forward to feedbacks from everyone,  hoping something good can come out of this :)

» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 5,977v
Posted 2012/05/05 - 18:22 GMT
Ok, I only had about five minutes till I had to leave when I wrote this, so could you summarize it into a paragraph or two? It's just a little time consuming for a quick read... I read a bit and it's pretty good as far as I've read. : D
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
2 days - 6,069v
Posted 2012/05/05 - 18:24 GMT
Lagging,
 
This is a great idea. I love the idea and the base principles associated with it, but there are still a few small flaws with the implementation, mainly concerns of other players, not myself.
 
The major flaw behind a clan system is that players are nervous that it would cause rivalries, fights, and could eventually escalate into an all-out clan war. Now, people may be thinking "Sweet! Let's bust heads!" take a look at the game Mars Explorer. After a club war, things started to take a serious downward turn: ultimately the reason that I left.
 
As well, the "ownership" of a map, I do not quite understand. Let's say that your clan owned Battle Island. Does that mean that I am not allowed to play on it as a single player? Please elaborate more.
 
Out of personal opinion, I like this idea and I would love to see it implemented into Carbon Combat. Other people probably have different opinions, but I am a fan.
 
Sincerely,
[Mod] Apophis
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
12 hours - 3,932v
Posted 2012/05/05 - 19:19 GMT
Apophis,
thanks!
 
about rivalries and getting outraged:
 
  • the guild system wouldn't be compulsory. A player could just keep playing once in a while as of until today, on the fly, outside guilds.
  • in the system i imagined there woulnd't be wars, nor war points -so no special awarded points for killing other guild memebers in normal open matches. All the confrontation should happen in those "password protected matches"/sieges.
  • imagine playing basketball/football/volleybal(....etc): You might personally like/dislike both the people on your team and the people on the other team (of course is better if you're firends with them, and ultimately you'll seek a guild where you feel comfortable), but what matters is your committment to play at the top of your skill for some time with that team.
  • the good part is that in ball games, the matches are pre-set, to form a season, here the season will be self determined.
  • Guilds should have a set of rules, some compulsory(same for all guilds- preventing all out wars outside sieges) and other rules setting the personality of the guild, decided by the king. Both should be enforced by the king of the guild, who should have some moderating ability in that respect, and should be kept at least partly responsible for he behaviour of his guild. If a king isn't enough to keep at bay a large guild, some guild officers should be set to help.
  • In the end,  it's not needed to hate your opponent(in fact if he/she keeps killing you ,  you would be better off learning something from him/her). being sporty is welcome, saying "good match" at the end- is just as welcome.(a possible guild rule -LOL)

About "ownership"

HMMM. it probably is an unfortuante term, but i can't think of a better sounding one.I'm not a mothertongue english speaker, so possibly it exists... hmmm

maybe the ownership should be changed by saying that a specific guild is the "defender" of the territory.

By in eg."a map being owned by guild XXX", all i mean is that guild "XXX" is the one who gets to be challenged on that territory by other guilds, and until it keeps winning, thus "retaining the territory"(if very succesful at that, until the end of the season), its memebers will enjoy the +100% of daily bonus generated by the ownership of a land.

 
----------
I have not played much Mars Explorer....my background are fighting MMORPGS, where the issue usually is that "the richest guild/player wins". CC seems pretty immune to this, skill means A LOT- almost everything, so i think proper team matches woudl be a real enjoyment.
 
In fighting MMORPGS preventing all out wars and offensive behaviour by guild memebers is under the responsability of kings and officers and only in extreme cases mods.
I have seen peopl ekicked from guilds because of that, but also guilds deprived by the adminsitration of all of their territories for constantly badmouthing others.
 
Let me say tho, that CC is better off, by having 2 guild memebers from different guilds fighting each other in an open match, than having them both on separate servers sniping newbies almost at the respawning point.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
12 hours - 3,932v
Posted 2012/05/05 - 18:25 GMT
UDICTED2MARVEL: Lol i'm italian=> unable to be synthetic. sorry about that  :-P
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
13 hours - 534v
Posted 2012/05/05 - 18:34 GMT
I am lazy so I have not bothered to read it all. So are you basically saying that there could be different garrisons?
 Also would they have different names? And could you move up into better ones?
Oh, and great idea by the way! :D
 
 
 
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 week - 32,767v
Posted 2012/05/05 - 18:59 GMT
No. In principle there is nothing wrong with this idea.
 
BUT, in practice, clans would be disastrous. Just look at what clubs have done to Mars Explorer.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
13 hours - 534v
Posted 2012/05/05 - 19:15 GMT
What HAVE clubs done to mars explorer?
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 5,354v
Posted 2012/05/05 - 19:32 GMT
CT: *Puts entire idea in next version of CC*
At first: * Happiness, Epicness, Hooray*
After a while: *Clan wars, flaming, the Noob wars, CC is abandoned like Mars Explorer*
CT: FUUUUUUUUUUUUUU!
CT: *Makes new game that's similar (like Syn3h to Marsxplr)* OR *Abandons game completly*
 
Meh, just saying... that's exactly what could happen.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
12 hours - 3,932v
Posted 2012/05/05 - 19:32 GMT
Pancakes ,
 
from the little i know about mars explorer, it feels like a much more peaceful game than this one.
i do not know what happened with guilds there BUT in MMORPGS(where people do get outraged MUCH more than ehere) as long as those who are responsible to keep the order do their job, things work out...
Those who feeling outraged tho usually have a good motivation to improve their skills.
 
i've added a longer reply to Apophis' question, maybe that would clarify better what i'm proposing.
 
 
Brae, you might be lazy, but i think "garrisons" is a better word than any of the ones i've used :)
 
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 5,354v
Posted 2012/05/05 - 19:39 GMT
Not really. CC is way more peaceful, and let's face it, Aubrey (the creator) abondoned (no more updates) it and it's a fact. He's making a new game called Syn3h that's supposed to be better. I tried it out and it's pretty good, still very similar to marsxplr though.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 5,977v
Posted 2012/05/05 - 23:38 GMT
i WOULD HATE for CC to fall into the hands of n00bs and CT to never come back because of clans...
 
 
i say screw 'em
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
12 hours - 3,932v
Posted 2012/05/06 - 0:10 GMT
shrugs... who wouldn't?
 
for sure a poorly managed guilds system gives poor results.... in fact about anything managed poorly does so.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 5,977v
Posted 2012/05/06 - 1:33 GMT
Thats the thing though, huh? But from what i have seen, CC learns from other mistakes people have made and try to improve evrything we do, from bugs, good sportmanship, to even grammer on the forum. :)
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
12 hours - 3,932v
Posted 2012/05/06 - 13:45 GMT
I was talking with Brae ingame and the following idea popped out:
 
What if, instead of making long-lasting guilds with forums etc, we'd reduce the thing to "teams" that are reshuffled every season?
a bit like organising a game of basketball with the same group of friends- once you're with one, once you're with another.
 
that way, for sure a bit of the drive coming from guilds would be lost, but the danger of an all out war between guilds would be eliminated  - it woudl be clear that the focus isn't fighting for/against a flag, but a sporty organised fighting with a team against another team, with no emotional value attached to them.
 
i am not sure i like it as much as having long lasting guilds.
It wouldn't benefit the noobs as much, but it would at least keep the top players more active.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 5,354v
Posted 2012/05/06 - 16:01 GMT
Would you be able to choose your team? Or would the "leader" of the team choose you and you'd have to be on their team.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
12 hours - 3,932v
Posted 2012/05/06 - 16:54 GMT
Tropalflight2,
 
good question.
I'm guessing there are more ways to go about it.
 
The most fair and impersonal would be that at the beginning of the season all the players who would be up for being part of the game would apply for it. Administration would then spread the power about evenly amongst the teams... and that woudl be it.
 
I think starting from there, it shoudl be possible to indicate a preference as in "i'd like to play in the same team as player  "aaaaaa" and if possible/alternatively with player "bbbbb"  -but it woulnd't be always possible to have your wish granted.
 
this would put a lot more work on adminstration's shoulders, respective the idea i originally posted.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 5,354v
Posted 2012/05/06 - 17:16 GMT
Power would be distributed evenly, sort of like a democracy right?
 
P.S. I accidentally clicked flag at first instead of reply. Sorry. My mistake.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
13 hours - 534v
Posted 2012/05/06 - 18:22 GMT
TeeHee! I do that all the time! xD
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
12 hours - 3,932v
Posted 2012/05/06 - 20:30 GMT
my idea of distributing evenly power would be based on ranking.
 
thetop 20(+ someextras and some offshoots, aliases, second characters etc) ranked players are on a whole different level than the rest of CC.
All i'm saying is that by distributing them and the runner-ups evenly amongst the guilds, you'll get tighter(more fun) matches and maps will switch hands faster from team to team because the outcome will be less predictable.
 
 
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 5,354v
Posted 2012/05/06 - 21:05 GMT
Oh... So you mean all newbs would be against newbs. All average would go against average. And all pros would go against pros. I think it should be that players should be distributed based on level. For example level 10 players go against level 10 players. Level 5 players vs. level 5, and you know the rest.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
14 hours - 1,726v
Posted 2012/05/07 - 0:20 GMT
the lvl thing would not work there are to many rank farmers.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 5,977v
Posted 2012/05/07 - 0:31 GMT
I havnt seen one of those in... pfft, i dont remember... maybe i just dont see it cuz i come... idk...
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
12 hours - 3,932v
Posted 2012/05/06 - 21:11 GMT
i meant mixed levels, spread around guilds, not a guild of only nooobs and aguild of only powerful people.
who goes against whom, and who offers support to whom during a fight, depends on team tactics
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 5,977v
Posted 2012/05/06 - 21:29 GMT
I think this topic is becoming a great idea for CT... Wouldn't you say?
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
6 days - 15,285v
Posted 2012/05/07 - 2:54 GMT
I think it could work if carefully organized. As lagging said, "a poorly managed guilds system gives poor results..." Most of the groups on mars explorer had no management, so naturally some of them went off course. Well, the "club wars" ended a long time ago, haven't they?
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 5,977v
Posted 2012/05/07 - 3:50 GMT
yes, but its better to learn from mistakes and not repeate them...
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
13 hours - 534v
Posted 2012/05/07 - 7:05 GMT
Hmmm. I only have one problem with this. How will we get everyone in a clan together to fight everyone in another clan? Will there be a PM sent out to all of the members by the leaders? And even then we will need to think up a time that will suit everyone. Different time zones and all that...
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
12 hours - 3,932v
Posted 2012/05/07 - 7:38 GMT
Having a garrisons/guilds/clans wih a forum(as in my original ida) in that respect would be much more reliable..
One of the factors that can decide which of the 2 teams wins a fight IS how many people do show up.       In other games this is also a tactical factor for the king/guild leader in deciding when to besiege another guild's teritory (you know you're attacking a guild of mostly american players with a  guild of mostly european players- you choose the time of the day that will suit your guild best).
 
To soften this up, i originally added a choice about when to defend (23, 24 or 25 hours later), MEANING: once a guild's territory is besieged, the leader should contact his guild pretty swiftly, and check who/when can be on.. It should be enough time to come up with a tactic. worse case scenario,  you loose the territory and you re-siege it at a time that fits yor team.
It's better if territories pass hands often, it makes things more lively.On the other hand, if everyone wouold feel this way, than we could lenghten the challenge<=>game dealy from 24 to 48 hours(so the king can choose between 47,48and49 hours later), but this is already "fine tuning" and could be even changed after a "test season".
 
I GUESS ,with the partecipants consent in giving emails to admin when registering for the next season, a system of automated emails sent to everyone on the roster of both attacking and defending guilds when a challenge is set could be also implemented. This i would also consider to be "fine tuning", after seing if a system works.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 3,651v
Posted 2012/05/07 - 16:03 GMT
The problem with this is that it seems rather hardcore to Carbon Combat. There is a lot of commitment, and would attract a lot of more experienced players looking to expand their game. There lies the problem: if a guild of all good/great players formed they would dominate, until another guild of good/great players formed to challenge that. Should one player of less skill join, I don't know exactly what would happen when they have to commit for 1 month and try to stay up to par with their far superior guildmates. The player could benefit and improve their game, or they could be overwhelmed by how far the game is being taken and not absorb most of the content. Plus, when it is encouraged for guilds to battle each other then I don't know how exactly how positive the guildmates would be to a player with a K/D ratio of 0.1. I say we need to tone it down a bit, remove some competitive features to guilds (such as private forums and territory wars) but allow some options on how exactly you want your guild to operate (such as time allowed before leaving and how it would be acknowledged by other guilds). To close, don't forget that CT is one person and further straining him with having to manage guilds would be hard.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
12 hours - 3,932v
Posted 2012/05/07 - 18:52 GMT
FatCatAttack, i'll try to answer bit by bit to your questions:
 
i'm happy you see (as i do) that a guild system would keep ingame the more experienced players.
 
From my experience, it feels like it's widely acknowledged by all the strong players, that there is a lot of skill involved in this game, so there is a "learning curve" that can't be avoided.
 
If a player of less skill would join a very skillful guild, it might well hapen that he might just be a reserve (while learning how to play with it's "seniors' guildance)  =>remember in my original proposition the guilds woudl be made by 20-30-40 players, but matches would be played by a team of max 10 (+ 2 in roam mode) , team  for the match chosen by the guild leader- not unlike a coach of a football team.
In case the newbie shows up for a team match for defending a territory, and some of the more skilled don't show up:  a less skilled player who shows up for sieges is worth more than a skilled one who doesn't show up=> at laast he committed.
Guilds allaw for a whole other dimension of understanding people's committment, not relating to power. A guild is meant to give a purpose to the skillset you've built in a game you like, not the only reason to play. But of course a good guild leader means a lot in negotiation all the situations that appear.
 
i'd rather see no guild really dominate 100%, usually when this hapens the guild system ceases to have a use.
There is an inbuilt failsafe tho: the guild system is meant to provide better players with a challenge, and less skilled ones with an opportunity. If the powerful players were to find themselves all in one guild, they would find boring any challenge of the other guilds, and often fail to show up for matches. I've seen it happen.
But yes, a reshuffle of players every now and then is a good thing.
 
Territory wars are a way to "localise" clearly defined matches, that will help preventing all out wars between guilds outside those fights.
 
I think time before leaving a guild is up to the single person, one should be allowed to leave even the same day after having joined , if the guild he has just joined is in his opinion full of rude people.
But to prevent people moving around from guild to guild too much, i've suggested the 1 month timeout for anyone leaving a guild, but i'm open to any suggestion, it'll also clarify what you mean by funcioning of the guilds.
 
Also, i'm not sure about what you mean by "how would it(the time spent in a guild) be acknowledged by other guilds"?
 
"To close, don't forget that CT is one person and further straining him with having to manage guilds would be hard."   DITTO
 
for that reason such a massive implementation should be carefully planned in advance with many rules etc., andpossibly widely discussed.
There are tons of good and sh***y games that boast "a unique guild system" etc. and they work better exactly thanks to that. 
 
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 3,651v
Posted 2012/05/09 - 18:39 GMT
Nice job defending your agruement, I can give you that. Let me start by answering your question:
 
For how a guild will be acknowledged, I was thinking something on how it would interact with other guilds. This would include if it would participate in territory wars and with what other guilds (think divisions, like sports), how it would let it's players battle on their own, and how it could interact with non-guilded players. This idea would sepperate those who don't want to be with each other and encourage players who don't want the full guild expirence to still join up. So players who want to do full guild wars can still do that and play Carbon Combat but they don't have to hinder the players who want a more civil guild system. Let's face it, the MMO/multiplayer junkies out there are a huge target audience and we will have to appeal to them somehow.
 
Now to address your points, from top to bottom:
 
i'm happy you see (as i do) that a guild system would keep ingame the more experienced players
 
Indeed, and for the rest of you reading this post, are you not a little bored of Carbon Combat right now with everything bought from the shop and no more goals to achive? If players could fuel the game themselves instead of relying on CT for updates we could get a lot more content out there.
 
From my experience, it feels like it's widely acknowledged by all the strong players, that there is a lot of skill involved in this game, so there is a "learning curve" that can't be avoided.
 
Hmm...all right.
 
Long responce that would clog this post about new players joining guilds
 
I didn't see that point. Still, I don't know if all strong players would be up for training new ones. It's the internet, I can only expect the worst from people.
 
Another long responce that would clog this post about guilds dominating
 
I'm not exactly confident on your failsafe, for grinding n00bs and exerting dominence seems to be even more enjoyable than a fair match to some people (you know who you are). How exactly to prevent this though I have no idea myself so anything is on the table now.
 
"To close, don't forget that CT is one person and further straining him with having to manage guilds would be hard."   DITTO
 
With this I was mostly suggesting that guilds be a bit downsized so that it could be automaticly handled by the game should they be implemented. I know CT was thinking of adding a guild system a while back and was shot down but to be honest I am starting to get bored of Carbon Combat and am willing to accept anything to give the game something new.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
12 hours - 3,932v
Posted 2012/05/10 - 19:51 GMT
:)
this is definitely going somewhere, thanks for your feedback.
 
 
if it would participate in territory wars and with what other guilds (think divisions, like sports), how it would let it's players battle on their own, and how it could interact with non-guilded players. This idea would sepperate those who don't want to be with each other and encourage players who don't want the full guild expirence to still join up. So players who want to do full guild wars can still do that and play Carbon Combat but they don't have to hinder the players who want a more civil guild system.
 
LOTS TO TALK ABOUT  AND DISCUSS in order to give a decent reply to this. I find it's possibly a bit early to find all the answers; it definitely opens a very wide field of possibility.
 
The only one i'm  a bit sceptical about, is "divisions": in order to organise divisions/leagues we'd need quite a number of guilds, and for now i think it's better to approach the guilds idea step by step. at some pont it could become doable.
 
How would a guild interact with each other and how would they let their players interact with others:
I'm not sure -as of "yet", but let me explain my thought process.
 
The system i described in the first post is an integration of rules that work in other games and things that coudl work in CC, based on what i'd like to see happening(so a very selfish motivation, i'm aware fo that)
 
In pming with some people we have figured out that there shoudl be some kind of a roadmap introducing guild life in CC, and the management of the guilds. The  rules concearning them could potentially change in time in order to first "educate" the systme and than gradually open more possibilities. This mirrors also the necessary rhythm of development/implementation of updates, while clearing out any unfair explolits identified.
 
At this stage i feel it's also important to think about things the community definitely doesn't want happenning(an all out war between guilds seems to be the first priority) and figuring out which are the rules that woudl prevent that from happening.
 
In other words, your'e asking me about the DOs, while atm i see a very wide field of potential DOs that i have troubles focusing on -as of "yet"-, while it seems it's very likely taht some DON'Ts can be figured out pretty easilly. ALSO the system should let some space to the guild leaders to figure out some of the DOs, or all the guilds will look alike in their personalities.
 
If ANY of you have ANY idea concearning BOTH the DOs and the DON'Ts     -  PLEASE don't hesitate to feedback.
 
Long responce that would clog this post about new players joining guilds
 
I didn't see that point. Still, I don't know if all strong players would be up for training new ones. It's the internet, I can only expect the worst from people.
 
Nobody is expecting more. if good players are given a reason to train weaker ones (because else they will be bond to loose vs other guilds training them), they will do it :) (feelign sneaky here rofl)
But let me say so far i've met most of the top 20, all have hammered me, but with 1 exception, all have tried to give advices and helped me train, now i might be better at taking the deaths vs a stronger opponent than most, but still this is a fact.
 
I'm not exactly confident on your failsafe, for grinding n00bs and exerting dominence seems to be even more enjoyable than a fair match to some people (you know who you are). How exactly to prevent this though I have no idea myself so anything is on the table now.
 
Reshuffling the teams to balance them is definitely the only answer i can think of, at this point.
 
 
ABOUT THE LAST BIT- i'm thinking more along the lines of "going step by step" than downsizing.
 
FEEL FREE TO PM ME WITH THE LONG REPLIES THAT WOUDL SCARE THE PEOPLE AND FLOOD THE DISCUSSION
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 week - 32,767v
Posted 2012/05/07 - 23:54 GMT
I like the idea of having official guilds/teams/clans, but I don't know about having some of your procedures.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 week - 20,818v
Posted 2012/05/08 - 0:19 GMT
1: Like Plexpedia? :P
2: They should be able to leave if they want, but the inactive thing seems wrong. And booting should be allowed.
3: Sounds okay.
4: Yup.
5: If it happened yes.
6: O_o
7: Sounds fair to me.
8: We need that with clans or not... Sounds cool.
9: Maybe
10: What??!
11: Don't we already have team balancing?
12: Recording, yes. Paying, nah.
13: Nah
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
10 minutes - 10v
Posted 2012/05/17 - 15:15 GMT
Hiya!
 
I'm the mysterious guy that's become a pro within the day.. lol..? .. right.. yye.. mhm....
I guess that makes me an exception of the "basically dead meat".
 
Anyway back to topic, guilds seem like fun even though there is no guild/friend funcion within the game. This does increase the social aspects in the game which is definitely a bonus. Can't be that hard to add these functions since the accounts are already made (programming-wise).
 
Should be fun to have a team of goodies and baddies kicking eachothers asses :)
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 3,651v
Posted 2012/05/17 - 18:31 GMT
Wow, this is shaping up nice. Looking at the U.S. Senate I never thought compromise between two different groups was possible, but I guess it is!
 
For you lagging, I pretty much could agree with everything you said in your last post. I never thought about how little guilds there could be, and that since if you train less skilled players they would end up helping the guild, making it beneficial for all. Nice work.
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
12 hours - 3,932v
Posted 2012/05/17 - 19:48 GMT
FatCatAttack,
 
LOL i always thought it would have been possible to mediate- and i think the job is far from done..
politicians are representing a whole bunch of particular and personal intrests which not always are aligned.
in this case, we players have a very simple common interest- trying to help in making the game better.
on this premise it's doable ;)
 
 
let me add one thing, after the discussion "Dear mods of CC"  everyone's feedback in that post(including yours) and CT's answer, i've been starting to think that a proper guild system should wait for full mods functionalities(so for a messaging system enabling a reporting system) and potentially for some kind of sub-mod funcitonalities for guild leaders, who would have the responsability of keeping their guilds at bay too.
 
Before then, the garrisons should maybe really reduce to reshuffling teams playing seasons (call it "pro series" or something), in order to give CT the chance of implementing elements gradually (organised team matches on a map, how to set chalenges, etc etc etc) .
That would then become the base for a guld system, were CC to go in that direction after full mod functionalities will be introduced.
 
 
 
 
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
13 minutes - 135v
Posted 2012/06/25 - 14:08 GMT
COOL! Exactly what I was thinking lagging...but that would require a whole lotta code...carpal tunnel anyone?
» Reply to Comment
Re: What about a guild/team/clan system?
1 day - 5,354v
Posted 2012/06/25 - 15:33 GMT
A bump... Hooray!


GenTime: 0.0723 seconds

Site Design and Graphics Copyright 2002 - 2021 by Aubrey
Use of this site constitutes agreement to our » Legal Stuff