The KGB Oracle Forums KGB National Announcements, News, and Help The KGB Sentinel Proposal: Creation of the UGC

I am not against an alliance but I am against one on this scale as KGB isn't always filled with active top leadership like Jet works alot and he can't commit all of his time and this would take a tremendous amount of time

I helped start out the SB faction and if anyone was there from the very day we created chars on treachery everyone will know what I am speaking about there could've been no way we could've had something like this without making KGB look like big asses.
We had alot of inner turmoil and lots of inner fighting

I know alliances are crucial but I think the focus needs to be on KGB And not some massive alliances with other guilds that we would be in charge of. KGB needs to fix and maintain KGB first not some massive alliance.

There are many who have issues with what KGB has to offer, some waiting a long time to receive their emails/websites etc.

I just dont hink that going into a game blind with an alliance like jet is wanting is a good idea straight from the get go.

I do have concerns as well.

I like the idea of having an alliance, and it worked really well when we were on Vengence SB. We worked hand in hand with our allies, listened to them, and they helped us just as much as we helped them. That is a way to build a relationship.

I know that WOW is a different game, but there were so many issues with leadership and allies that we had in that game. We felt like we were pushed around, which I personally did not feel. There were times that we were in TS and there was blatant disrespect shown to other guilds. We burnt so many bridges in that game that I feel that we could never mend them with those guilds. I feel that sometimes we believe we are so uber and know everything, and every other guild are just a bunch of retards that they dont know anything. At times during WOW i was very embarassed how things were handled, and if this continues it is even going to be harder for us to form alliances, and it will be us against everyone, not like it isnt already like that for the most part.

sounds shinny.

Not a bad idea. I would say go for it. Of course we will need to make sure KGB as a single Guild still runs as normal. So that there would be little to no problems should the coalition break up, and then we would return to our standard KGB guild.

Basicly be careful not to put to much effort into a coalition and then let things in side the guild begin to slide.


I wonder if maybe a less controled type of alliance will be better. More of a community... then an alliance. You find that any combination of groups who use the same Ventrilo channels and communicate often tend to be friendly to each other. Not because they are forced by some prior alliance agreement, but because they become friends, or atleast friendly.

I would like to see,... maybe not an alliance(or possibly so) but some sort of way to open up communication between "old school" guilds with semi-like-minded members. Starting with just a common forum and common Ventrillo services could easily lead to the most succesful alliance ever seen.

Good point Bishop, that's sort of the way I see it as well. A friendly community. About the importance of the alliance and the guild and all of that... definitely guild first. Additonally though I'd like some kind of safeguard to make sure guilds are pulling their weight in the alliance, and not going into other guilds' jurisdictions (like commanding other guilds' members what to do unless those members specifically go to fight in that Guild's party.)

I agree with Owain, and his point seems to be reinforced in games that are able to support this type of organization.

While i do think that this is good to discuss, i dont think that we should put a huge emount of time and resources into it before the next big wave of games have even begun beta. I think that with our past ties, weather friendly or unfriendly, and with our current communication in the games we currently play, as well as forums, that we will not likely be left out in the cold by ourselves.

If darkfall, or whatever game we dcide to play, has half as good of an alliance system as in EVE (which isnt perfect, but still works pretty damn well) then we shouldnt have too much to worry about. Because of the amount of gamers that agree with the goals that KGB usually has, it isnt too hard to make new friends, or to renew old alliances, and even make fiends out of old enemies. I mean its not like we have been the type of guild that EVERYONE hates because of how we play, if anything we might be the ones who people admire a little, because of the way we act. If you look at the darkfall boards, we had alot of haters and also alot of old friends that look forward to being allied, one way or another.

I think that we could start contacting some of our old friends and enemies to see what they think of the idea, and also just to see where we stand in their books so we can know what to expect. But i just dont know how much you can actually accomplish before the game has been played by anyone because of the lack of knowledge about how it works. Either way, we have a little time to decide, because i boubt DFO will be released in the next few months

Along the lines of what our BOS boys have already said... I like the idea of the UGC because as you've pointed out Jet, it's what made CoS gods of the server and we were just one of their puppets.

I'm not exactly sure how their alliance worked but for the UGC, preserving the internal structure, decision making power and ranks is critical for KGB, as well as any of the guilds that join the UGC.

We should focus on making it so that being a part of the UGC is not "combining" with a zerg army but rather you're signing up to be a part of a community that helps one another in times of need. When one guild is attacked the other guilds in the community mount up to help defend. Otherwise the guilds are basically ran as they always have been, they plan their events as they normally would, they do promotions as they normally would, they even pick fights with non-allied guilds if they want to.

Each guild must be left the freedom to start wars with new guilds if they wish, as well as plan PvE events or do internal promotions... the last thing we want is the UGC to be like "big brother" where if any guild in the alliance wants to go to war with another guild they must first submit in duplicate 5 different forms. These forms are then organized and lost then refound and filed away. After filing is completed all 10 guilds of the UGC sit at a table and vote "Heads Up 7-Up" style if Guild X of the UGC should be allowed to go to war with Guild Z. This we need to avoid.

Of course if we let guilds in the UGC be so free in what they do... how do we keep the alliance from getting misused? Simple. We kick out anyone that seems to go to war too often, kick out anyone that causes us to "mount up" and go defend them too often. Basically anyone not pulling their weight gets removed. And to remove people you need a chairmen like rank. I'm not sure if it should be KGB 100% of the time or we could let the chairmen rank rotate, with people voting which guild has a person in the chairmen spot.

A very good way to avoid having to remove any guilds is to only allow in guilds of equal strength or make two seperate catagories in the UGC... first catagory is: your a guild of roughly equal strength to KGB and so you can have more voting power etc, allowed to plan more events. Second catagory is a lesser one: smaller guilds that just want the protection but dont care much to have much say in the political dealings would join here. By being in this catagory there would be no cofusion, any time they fussed about not having a say in things we'd simply point out that they are in the lesser catagory of allied guilds. And of course if some small guild joins just to have us defend them from daily pk attacks... we kick them out since they definitely aren't pulling their weight.

Uhmmm, sorry Raek but the fastest way to ensure the destruction of an alliance, is to have its own individual member guilds wokring at cross-purposes, have different sets of standings, and set their own diplomacy. And why on earth would guild X want to save guild Y's ass when Guild Y set its own diplomacy, started its own little wars, and is getting its own little ass handed to it without taking guild X into any kind of consideration? If I were leading guild X I would tell guild Y to go grasp a clue from somewhere. As would most of long term successfull guilds out there.

Internal promotions and etc are of course different, as well as guild events. That is typically an understood, but then again there should be no reason not to be including your alliance-mates, who are presumably your friends in fun stuff the guild cooks up.

But the whole purpose of an alliance is to have one bloc of standings with the rest of the game, and work TOGETHER to achieve some goals- usually oriented in real pvp games around the control and use of in-game resources.

When it comes to diplomacy, people will also want to know how they stand with the whole alliance.