Yes, it would!This game would be a lot more alt friendly if guild memberships were bound to each character instead of to your account.
Hmmm... maybe so. On the other hand, account wide mailings do make it easier to buy stuff from guild vendors on your rich character, and take it on a poor alt without a step in between... but then, that is no biggie if other options exist, and it IS balanced by those annoying "congrats, you have reachet V6... again..." and so on. Which of course are also no biggie, since you can just delete them.Same thing with sending/receiving mail (would also mean you could mail stuff between your characters).
While I can appreciate the backgroundish reasons, account-wide banking is pretty nifty for people who craft on one character, gather on another. Or just wish to have their crafting stores available on all. Or want to have alts "inherit" bound gear. Or pool income for bigger purchases. And so on.Banking would be a bit of both, you'd still have the current account-wide bank, but also a character-bound bank. Would reduce the need for both extra bank space, but would also make banking alts more versatile.
This game would be a lot more alt friendly if guild memberships were bound to each character instead of to your account. Same thing with sending/receiving mail (would also mean you could mail stuff between your characters). Banking would be a bit of both, you'd still have the current account-wide bank, but also a character-bound bank. Would reduce the need for both extra bank space, but would also make banking alts more versatile.
Caius Drusus Imperial DK (DC) Bragg Ironhand Orc Temp (DC) Neesha Stalks-Shadows Argonian NB (EP) Falidir Altmer Sorcr (AD) J'zharka Khajiit NB (AD) |
Isabeau Runeseer Breton Sorc (DC) Fevassa Dunmer DK (EP) Manut Redguard Temp (AD) Tylera the Summoner Altmer Sorc (EP) Svari Snake-Blood Nord DK (AD) |
Ashlyn D'Elyse Breton NB (EP) Filindria Bosmer Temp (DC) Vigbjorn the Wanderer Nord Warden (EP) Hrokki Winterborn Breton Warden (DC) Basks-in-the-Sunshine Argonian Temp |
So you're suggesting making it so that if I'm on an alt I can't talk to any of my friends in /guild because that particular character isn't in the guild. How exactly is that more alt friendly?
But if guilds were on a per-character basis you'd need a guild invite for each character.So you're suggesting making it so that if I'm on an alt I can't talk to any of my friends in /guild because that particular character isn't in the guild. How exactly is that more alt friendly?
That would only be the case if you chose not to have that character in the guild. At the moment, that choice isn't open to you.
Caius Drusus Imperial DK (DC) Bragg Ironhand Orc Temp (DC) Neesha Stalks-Shadows Argonian NB (EP) Falidir Altmer Sorcr (AD) J'zharka Khajiit NB (AD) |
Isabeau Runeseer Breton Sorc (DC) Fevassa Dunmer DK (EP) Manut Redguard Temp (AD) Tylera the Summoner Altmer Sorc (EP) Svari Snake-Blood Nord DK (AD) |
Ashlyn D'Elyse Breton NB (EP) Filindria Bosmer Temp (DC) Vigbjorn the Wanderer Nord Warden (EP) Hrokki Winterborn Breton Warden (DC) Basks-in-the-Sunshine Argonian Temp |
But if guilds were on a per-character basis you'd need a guild invite for each character.So you're suggesting making it so that if I'm on an alt I can't talk to any of my friends in /guild because that particular character isn't in the guild. How exactly is that more alt friendly?
That would only be the case if you chose not to have that character in the guild. At the moment, that choice isn't open to you.
And does that mean that the limit in the number of guild members gets increased to 4000 in order to accommodate all of the alts people might have, or does it mean that the number of actual real people in the guild becomes more limited because people want to be in the guild with their alts as well?
How are guild officers going to keep track of the people who are helpful and trustworthy and maybe due for a promotion when instead of seeing the player name on the roster they see several different character names, and don't know/can't keep track of which characters are the same actual person?
If I'm doing an event on one character one day, and afterward someone else who was in that event wants to mail me to thank me/ask a question/ask for help for another event/whatever then what happens if I spend the next week playing a different character, so I never get that mail until way after the fact, and the player who was trying to contact me has no idea that I've been online on a different character?
Would we have to change the number of guilds you can join now that it's on a per-character basis, or is it reasonable that people could be in 40 guilds? Do we recognize that being able to be in that many guilds is ridiculous and leads to never having any meaningful participation in any of them and reduce it to 1 guild per character? But if we do that, then we're back to the problem of not being able to have all of your alts in the same guild, unless you're OK with only being in a total of 1 guild.
If the goal is to put up barriers to social interaction, making these things character-bound instead of account-wide is the way to do it.
SnuggleMePlease wrote: »Yeah, I have to say that I disagree with the bit about making guilds character-wide. In other games where you're only allowed to be in a single guild, you can expect a lot more from your guild members.
In ESO, and this is from experience establishing and managing my own clan, I have seen that it is a lot harder because people tend to be members of multiple guilds. You have to be understanding about this sort of thing and work with your guild members.
If guilds were only character wide, then I feel that people would have trouble managing to be anything more than roster filler for a potential forty guilds.
So you don't have any counter-argument to any of the specific problems I brought up that would be caused by this. Got it.But if guilds were on a per-character basis you'd need a guild invite for each character.So you're suggesting making it so that if I'm on an alt I can't talk to any of my friends in /guild because that particular character isn't in the guild. How exactly is that more alt friendly?
That would only be the case if you chose not to have that character in the guild. At the moment, that choice isn't open to you.
And does that mean that the limit in the number of guild members gets increased to 4000 in order to accommodate all of the alts people might have, or does it mean that the number of actual real people in the guild becomes more limited because people want to be in the guild with their alts as well?
How are guild officers going to keep track of the people who are helpful and trustworthy and maybe due for a promotion when instead of seeing the player name on the roster they see several different character names, and don't know/can't keep track of which characters are the same actual person?
If I'm doing an event on one character one day, and afterward someone else who was in that event wants to mail me to thank me/ask a question/ask for help for another event/whatever then what happens if I spend the next week playing a different character, so I never get that mail until way after the fact, and the player who was trying to contact me has no idea that I've been online on a different character?
Would we have to change the number of guilds you can join now that it's on a per-character basis, or is it reasonable that people could be in 40 guilds? Do we recognize that being able to be in that many guilds is ridiculous and leads to never having any meaningful participation in any of them and reduce it to 1 guild per character? But if we do that, then we're back to the problem of not being able to have all of your alts in the same guild, unless you're OK with only being in a total of 1 guild.
If the goal is to put up barriers to social interaction, making these things character-bound instead of account-wide is the way to do it.
I don't see why, other MMOs have had character-specific guild membership for years, and those MMOs have had much more socially active guilds than ESO with its multiple guild membership. The barrier in this game to social interaction is the ability to belong to 5 guilds (which in itself removes any real sense of guild community and loyalty) with many guild members disabling guild chat as they have no desire for social interaction and are only in the guild for trading purposes. Also, when the only choice open to you is between all your characters belonging to a guild or none of them doing so, some players will opt out altogether.
Caius Drusus Imperial DK (DC) Bragg Ironhand Orc Temp (DC) Neesha Stalks-Shadows Argonian NB (EP) Falidir Altmer Sorcr (AD) J'zharka Khajiit NB (AD) |
Isabeau Runeseer Breton Sorc (DC) Fevassa Dunmer DK (EP) Manut Redguard Temp (AD) Tylera the Summoner Altmer Sorc (EP) Svari Snake-Blood Nord DK (AD) |
Ashlyn D'Elyse Breton NB (EP) Filindria Bosmer Temp (DC) Vigbjorn the Wanderer Nord Warden (EP) Hrokki Winterborn Breton Warden (DC) Basks-in-the-Sunshine Argonian Temp |
So you don't have any counter-argument to any of the specific problems I brought up that would be caused by this. Got it.But if guilds were on a per-character basis you'd need a guild invite for each character.So you're suggesting making it so that if I'm on an alt I can't talk to any of my friends in /guild because that particular character isn't in the guild. How exactly is that more alt friendly?
That would only be the case if you chose not to have that character in the guild. At the moment, that choice isn't open to you.
And does that mean that the limit in the number of guild members gets increased to 4000 in order to accommodate all of the alts people might have, or does it mean that the number of actual real people in the guild becomes more limited because people want to be in the guild with their alts as well?
How are guild officers going to keep track of the people who are helpful and trustworthy and maybe due for a promotion when instead of seeing the player name on the roster they see several different character names, and don't know/can't keep track of which characters are the same actual person?
If I'm doing an event on one character one day, and afterward someone else who was in that event wants to mail me to thank me/ask a question/ask for help for another event/whatever then what happens if I spend the next week playing a different character, so I never get that mail until way after the fact, and the player who was trying to contact me has no idea that I've been online on a different character?
Would we have to change the number of guilds you can join now that it's on a per-character basis, or is it reasonable that people could be in 40 guilds? Do we recognize that being able to be in that many guilds is ridiculous and leads to never having any meaningful participation in any of them and reduce it to 1 guild per character? But if we do that, then we're back to the problem of not being able to have all of your alts in the same guild, unless you're OK with only being in a total of 1 guild.
If the goal is to put up barriers to social interaction, making these things character-bound instead of account-wide is the way to do it.
I don't see why, other MMOs have had character-specific guild membership for years, and those MMOs have had much more socially active guilds than ESO with its multiple guild membership. The barrier in this game to social interaction is the ability to belong to 5 guilds (which in itself removes any real sense of guild community and loyalty) with many guild members disabling guild chat as they have no desire for social interaction and are only in the guild for trading purposes. Also, when the only choice open to you is between all your characters belonging to a guild or none of them doing so, some players will opt out altogether.
I like the idea of the bit of both banking.But how would it work?This game would be a lot more alt friendly if guild memberships were bound to each character instead of to your account. Same thing with sending/receiving mail (would also mean you could mail stuff between your characters). Banking would be a bit of both, you'd still have the current account-wide bank, but also a character-bound bank. Would reduce the need for both extra bank space, but would also make banking alts more versatile.
I like the idea of the bit of both banking.But how would it work?This game would be a lot more alt friendly if guild memberships were bound to each character instead of to your account. Same thing with sending/receiving mail (would also mean you could mail stuff between your characters). Banking would be a bit of both, you'd still have the current account-wide bank, but also a character-bound bank. Would reduce the need for both extra bank space, but would also make banking alts more versatile.
Like this maybe::
Account Bank
Your bank
guild bank
Guild store
That might work.