Moreso, it should be 10 guilds because of it. Having "only 5" guilds means if I want one guild for PVP and one for PVE then my remaining 3 gives me very limited access to a small market of players.

I would trade every guild but one for an AH.

I like it. The guild I'm in utilizes the system well with many sub guilds. We've got all kinds of guilds for different things, even enchanting.

AH would be nice though.

Disregarding the Auction House argument, (that is a conversation that has been had a bajillion times and I have no need to revisit it), what is the argument against the option to join five guilds? It seems to me like the argument against optional nameplates. I don't want nameplates, but how does the option for others impact my life negatively? Same thing here. You only want to be a member of one guild, you join only one guild, how does other people having the option affect your life?
Again, I ask this only of those who oppose it for reasons other than that they don't want to use guilds as stores.

While I don't think it needs to be 'used in every MMO', I do like how different it is, and how it creates a large collection of different 'markets', rather than just one big AH.

I don't believe that the 5-guild system was built for replacing the auction house. I believe the vendors in Cyrodiil keeps were meant to replace the AH, but aren't implemented well.

What I do believe is that I, as a player, associate with many different groups and organizations. I'm a PvPer, a roleplayer, a dungeon runner and a crafter. I've always felt limited in games because I had to essentially limit my characters to one specific purpose, or join a guild that tried to do it all ... and often, unsuccessfully.

I have NEVER fit in one social group. So to compensate, I've had to use out of game tools and techniques, joining multiple forums and social groups and chat rooms, etc, etc.

ESO takes that away. I can be in a dedicated PvP group for PvP, or a dedicated dungeon group for dungeons. Both are essential for the 'serious' players in any aspect of the game. And any roleplayer will tell you, it's better to have people of like mind around than people trying to mess it up cause they don't care for it.



Players complain about not being able to 'hide' from their guilds on other characters. I believe this could be an option set in that characters options menu (and heck, you could set it in your chat channels, too). Then if you log into an alt that doesn't PvE, you don't have to worry about your dungeon-running buddies asking for your help.

Others complain about the lack of guild 'belonging', due to players being able to split their time between guilds as they see fit. This, I feel, shouldn't be hard-coded restriction in the game. This is a fault of the guild itself. Building player loyalty shouldn't be about making it harder on that player to hang out with others, it should be about making your group worth hanging out with.

Finally, nameplates, tabards, etc? These could easily be implemented so that your character can put a guild of choice up on their nametag as a primary option. Most of us wouldn't put our crafting guild there, but might put our friends-and-family guild we feel the most apart of (even if we do most of our playing on the PvE guild).

AlienDiplomat wrote: »

This poll is:

[ ] Representative
[ ] Unnecessary
[ ] A total farse
[x] Needs an option "Isn't enough, please make it 10 guilds."

Nice.

I like being in 5 guilds. My previous MMO only let you be in 1 - and that ended up splitting up friendships. Blach!

why stop at 10? make it 50 guilds. The game already locks out people who only want a guild for themselves and a few friends or family members. membership requirements only add to chat spam while players jump from guild to guild to find out they are locked out of all functions or the guild store is way out of wack. Lets see how big we can make this pile of manure go.

Dusty5 wrote: »

why stop at 10? make it 50 guilds. The game already locks out people who only want a guild for themselves and a few friends or family members. membership requirements only add to chat spam while players jump from guild to guild to find out they are locked out of all functions or the guild store is way out of wack. Lets see how big we can make this pile of manure go.

Locks out people? By not allowing a guild bank or store? Sure, I would support ADDING a feature for small guilds that opens, say, 100 bank slots. That would be nice. But I would not say you're locked out.

As far as players jumping guilds and whatnot? Standard fare, even in single-guild systems. Seriously, how is it different? Understand that I come from EvE online, and view the limited security options on guild banks and stores as a major negative, not as a good thing. There should be MORE ranks and guild restrictions we could put into place, to help vet members who might steal or otherwise cause harm.

Hlaren_shortsheath wrote: »

i hate it, it's complete disloyalty and disrespect for your guild leader as well as your clansmen. you dishonor yourself with this huge Mess.
join a guild , 1 guild. and help it grow and members grow and help eachother in pvp. the 5 guild thing is just rediculas.

You can still join just a single guild and be loyal. Nothing is stopping you at all.

But why do you feel it necessary to force others to do so? I mean, if you want to require them to do so, advertise it in your guild listing. Make it clear: if you join this guild, you're not allowed to join any others.

Nothing wrong with being honest about you're requirements, and nothing wrong with being loyal.



Now, just my personal preference, but I always avoid guilds that I feel go overboard on trying to enforce personal ideals on others. That's just me. I'll happily be 'loyal' to a guild that shows loyalty in return. Once you start enforcing loyalty, it stops being loyalty and starts becoming obedience.

Hlaren_shortsheath wrote: »

any one can twist and turn words into different meanings. the fact remains that it is total disloyalty.

I think you are confused with the definition of the term 'disloyalty', as well as 'fact'. While English is a wonderful language with many degree's of interpretation, there still remains a standard form which is covered in generally-held 'definitions', to help us clarify many miscommunications.

You're opinion seems to hold that a player (or is it just a character?) being allowed to participate in two different social circles (something a player can do with any game that allows alts, or any character can do using vent/forums/chat), is being somehow disloyal to the guild their character is attached to.

My point is that I've found ways to do what ESO allows me to do, whether they were mechanics in the game or not, while still feeling completely loyal to the core group I play with. And I still feel completely loyal to the core group I play with in ESO, even if I join in some fun with a different social circle for a little bit.

I no longer feel compelled, but I feel what you are suggesting is forcing, or compelling others to only play with you and no-one else. Which is again, something you can't even do in other games.