Player Associations Archive
Thread: New PA system idea
Page 1 of 1
coldreboot
Wed Jun 22, 2005 8:40 am
#1
This isn't really a 'new' idea per se, but a use of an OLD idea.
In case anyone didn't know, guilds were originally formed IRL to group together people of the same proffession.
I'd like to see more of this in SWG. Player guilds should have to specifiy what proff their guild is uniting, and the more people they get with this proff the more bonuses each member gets based on this proff.
Example:
A player decides to start a Merchant's guild. He get's five members to start with, two novice merchants, one master merchant and one in the middle.
Now for every bit of merchant xp those novice players get, they get addtional, say 5% bonus for every sale they make. BUT the only reason they get 5%, is because there is a Master merchant member of their guild. They get an additional 5% bonus for every master member that joins, but it caps out at 30%.
Addtionally, for every member that has NO skills in that proffession, I would suggest either a penatly, or alternativly they just cant be made members.
This idea could also be expaned to include other forms of 'guild'. If you start a player association, and specifiy you only want one species to join it, It becomes a 'clan' and you get bonuses for that.
Mixed player associatios (as they are now) would still be allowed, but wouldn't get the bonuses. They also wouldn't be called 'guilds', Just 'groups' or some other equivalent.
Also, guild leaders cannot form player cities. I think it's important to keep the two things seperate.
Some people may say that crafters prefer to go it alone, rather than group up to make the most profit, but Crafters would be drawn to a guild I think, purely because going it alone would mean you would go bankrupt if a guild decided you were on its 'turf'.
Essentially, crafters would join the guilds for protection they can offer and a garunteed income. Woe to the crafter who steps on a guilds toes! Hehe.
The crafters competing against each other would continue, but on a much large scale. It would be guild vs. guild, rather than crafter vs. crafter.
Perhaps guild Amay go as far as paying off the player city's mayor that is the closet proximity to their rival, guild B in order to allow guild A vendors within the city right on guild B's doorstep.
Perhaps Guild B decides to hire bounty hunters to take out some of guild A's members? Or hire smugglers to slice their produce in order to gain an upper hand in the arms market?
Endless possiblities!
Cannar
Wed Jun 22, 2005 8:59 am
#2
this is a ridiculous idea, in SWG, they are Player Asociations, and in the case of MEK, act as mini nations with multiple cities, and an internal economy..... no thanks.
Rothin
Wed Jun 22, 2005 9:42 am
#3
It isn't a rediculous idea, but this is more of something that would be appropriate to player cities for bonuses when it comes to professions or xps. Then of course, guilds could band together to form the city to meet their goals. I'd ask for this as a player city idea in the politician forum. 
Cannar
Wed Jun 22, 2005 9:51 am
#4
I would support that, zabrack or twi'lek only cities, but I don't see how it can be implemented, SOE touts their sandbox style of play, no one left out, ect. Not to mention all existing cities would have alot of purging to do if they wanted to go this route, but prof specific city bonuses might work, if only in the form of a more specific bonus than are already inplace, and much much more expensive.
coldreboot
Wed Jun 22, 2005 9:55 am
#5
Cannar wrote:
I would support that, zabrack or twi'lek only cities, but I don't see how it can be implemented, SOE touts their sandbox style of play, no one left out, ect. Not to mention all existing cities would have alot of purging to do if they wanted to go this route, but prof specific city bonuses might work, if only in the form of a more specific bonus than are already inplace, and much much more expensive.
The sandbox style of play is still there, but there are bonuses for saying that you are specifically a 'clan' (race)and sticking to those rules, or guild (profession) and sticking to the those rules.
Like I said you would still get the mixed ones we have now, they just wouldn't get the bonuses the specific ones would. They don't lose anything, they don't gain anything.
Cannar
Wed Jun 22, 2005 10:02 am
#6
nah, I don't like that policy of favoritism, MEK, a guild of all races, all factions, all profesions, is much more powerful and achieved much more than any guild that adheres to an exclusionary style of play. Guilds are free todo what they want, but should'nt be favored by SOE for it. I think implementing diff 'types' of PA's, allowing the GL to set the type, would open diff possibilities to that guild. PvP guilds could get the ability to make alliances, and have the "relations" option I talked about in the other thread, Race only guilds could have some sort of bonus, ect ect, but I don't support any type of status policy, or lets reward these players for playing a certain way, and leave the rest out.
Rothin
Wed Jun 22, 2005 10:11 am
#7
Restricting PAs to a specific species or profession isn't ever going to happen by the system itself. If you want to restrict it yourself, thats perfectly acceptable and your choice. I know many profession specific guilds, species or gender specific ones. That's certainly your choice, but would not be something that would be healthy for guilds imo.
But if you want specific bonuses to certain professions etc.. you can try that idea in the politician forum as a specialization idea.
But if you want specific bonuses to certain professions etc.. you can try that idea in the politician forum as a specialization idea.
Page 1 of 1