Added

I know this has been mentioned many times in the years since...since this game has existed. I just wanted to insure the devs know the demand is still here.

Free the guild structure.

Allow guilds to set/name in-game ranks and the privileges/responsibilities that come with it. Those guilds who want to keep the default can select the "default" option.

I liked this on Ragnarok Online and a couple generic Korean MMOs I played. We can't currently see guild titles outside the guild window, but it would be nice to have customly-named ones just the same. And settable privileges (invite, kick, remove from GH, change title/rank?) would be useful as well in my eyes.

Would it be helpful to take a cue from RO in this as well, and have the number of ranks available change based on something the players can work for? Some sort of guild level? (RO says the guild leader can choose to take a certain percentage of the members' exp to apply toward the guild's level. Set based on title.)

I'd like to see the guild title visible, too, if your suggestion is implemented, but that would be yet another method to potentially break RP.

Oh, I love the idea of basing the number of ranks on a Guild Level...that players can work for. Maybe make that an added dapper sink.

Guild levels in WoW have made it an almost futile exercise to start a new guild as you'll never get enough members to get anywhere.
The perks/benefits high level guilds have are such that hardly anyone will want to join a guild that doesn't have them (and trying to gain those in a guild with 2-3 people in it, which is what you'll end up with, takes years).

I'd not want the same to happen in Ryzom.
As is, the number of officer and high officer slots is already dependent on the number of members a guild has.
Thus as guilds grow more members can be recruited to officer and high officer status (of course with free accounts able to join guilds it's easy to work around this system and generate officer slots by having everyone create a few free accounts and join up all the toons as well, a workaround that won't work in WoW where free accounts can't join guilds and just being in a guild won't yield the guild anything if you're not active).

That's not to say some form of guild benefits for activity isn't a nice idea, but such things shouldn't turn into a situation where low level guilds find it impossible to recruit members, all of whom flock to the high level guilds only to get those benefits (in WoW again, faster levelling, more resource drops, etc.).
Gaining cosmetic benefits like a title for being in a guild, which gets unlocked at higher levels, might be nice though, and more in line with the Ryzom system.

This of course comes close to the original idea of guild missions, the completion of which would yield the guild certain benefits such as reduced training cost or better prices at vendors.

I agree Iala.

On the otherhand, some people like the challenge and the slow grind...not the instant gratification. NS is a small guild and we welcome any chance to work toward goals the devs want to place before us...no matter how long it takes. We play for fun...not to show off our rank or stats, so a long grind is our forte.

But, please dont forget the point of this suggestion was allowing freedom in guild structure. The rest is just idle chatter and speculation.

I really wouldn't like if guild leader could make custom titles and give it to ppl to set as their own title since this would just work demotivating. For instance why wouldn't a GL make a group juggernaut and give some ppl that status and title instead of ppl having to lvl h2h till 250 to get the title. Another example is plain stupid group/titles that some ppl would to the groups and then ppl would get those stupid titles like for instance a group called "prince of yrk" or "king of the trykers" this would go in directly against the current lore or titles like "champion of atys", "killers", ...

The idea for groups and names for these groups in guild I do like but I really wouldn't wanna see those group names in title form

One thing though, is that this could eventually become an argument similar to the one we see occasionally about PvP and faction points. A benefit intended as a nice perk suddenly becomes the focus for doing <something>, so when people do <something> the perks should be bigger and better, to prevent abuse, or tedious grinding, etc.

I'll freely admit that I'd love to have a silly title instead of my usual titless of Homin or Kami Disciple ("Village Idiot" is a favourite), but Sub is right.

We enjoy our membership in the guilds we have because of the people and friends in those guilds, so I don't think we should try to provide incentives above what we already enjoy right now.


I do agree 100% with Lory that the internal guild structure, permissions, ranks, titles, etc. should depend on the will and needs of the guild, and that one size does not fit all. Let them be set up as they are currently by default when the guild is created, but allow them to be customized.

We can work-around this now to some limited extent, but that really does abuse the reason that F2P accounts exist. Abusing free accounts also doesn't address the full scope of this idea.

I would be interested to know the purpose of the system of O/HO slots being based on guildie count; a completely free system would abolish it, and I won't claim that to be the best option until I know why it was instated in the first place. :)

However, I would at the least like to be able to customise the powers of Os and HOs (and perhaps also members - it would, for example, be useful to be able to allow members of storage guilds to place things into and remove things from the GH without having to mess about with getting exactly the right number of alts, etc).

I completely agree with those who don't wish to see functional advantages for bigger/more active/higher level/richer guilds. Big guilds already have advantages simply by virtue of being big; why exaggerate that?

However, aesthetic, fun perks - which could be achieved by guilds actually doing something, not just by the simple fact of being big and powerful - would add a bit more variety to the game in terms of challenge. Guild missions would fit the bill, I think, and while careful thought would have to be given to the rewards, it'd be possible to come up with something cool, I've no doubt - perhaps guild-specific individual titles (Whispers of Aria Champion Yubo Kicker, for example); or silly non-functional trophy weapons like the yubo or the candy cane. The fact that guilds don't have much visibility independently of their members makes it difficult to come up with truly "guild" rewards, unfortunately. We could maybe also stretch to insignificant mechanical advantages - 50 extra bulk in GH for example (oh, wow, five stacks of cats, how amazing...), which just create a symbolic incentive for guilds to partake in the activities.

Since all I asked for was freeing the guild structure, this is once again a side off-topic discussion, but clarifying that...

Concerning guild ranks:
Dont get me wrong, I do not think big guilds should be rewarded on virtue of being big. They should be rewarded because the players did x amount of "work" or "grind" to raise their "guild level" (whatever that may mean), same as any guild. Saying that big guilds have more advantages is true and false. While they hypothetically have more power, they are also more prone to self destruction and drama (possibly related). So, while they may have advantages in power, that which gives them that advantage also makes them more work to manage. We are all able to go join or create large guilds to compete with the ones we currently fear have too much advantage, so we should not fault them for doing so.

Concerning cosmetic titles:
I support what Iala suggested, standard cosmetic titles based off some form of guild rank, but I also agree with Suboxide, a title created by guilds scares me...I say that is a kitin nest not worth kicking.

Respawning this one...it is a huge one for me. I do not understand why they would NOT do this (and I remember people asking for it make in 2006).

If "they" want us to work toward it...allow us to finally get "Guild Exp" and spend those points on additional HOs and Os.

Personally I like this idea, but it currently is not practical to implement.

As a "halfway point" we have decided to drop the restrictions on the number of HO's and Officers you can have in a guild. This covers a lot of the ideas and suggestions posted here.

Yay! Reallocdev rocks! WOuld you consider as a further comprimise (and if possible), a button or checkbox that is only modifiable by the GL that toggles the enforcement of the HO and O limits? This way guilds who do not want this added choice/responsability do not need to use it?

(Oh, or even a /chatcommand would be great!)

Has this been un-accepted? We have had a patch since and this has not occurred. I am not trying to rush anything, or tell anyone how to do their job...just curious if we should still look forward to it?

the patch (I didn't notice there being one, btw) was probably merely addition of the halloween content.
Version numbers did not change.

Oh, good call lala...thanks for the correction.