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

Not just 1 chairman, maybe a "security council" like in the highly ineffective U.N. :P

Yeah often small guilds will be a group of RL friends, so together they can actually fight pretty well. 5 guys aren't going to help us destroy 500, but they do contribute sligthly.

That's a good idea though, the protection category, and then the policy-making category.

Thing about the alliance though is I see it as more of a way to defend our community. I didn't see it as a way to make offensives.

You see, say KGB is at war with guild A, our allies B and C are at war with guilds D and E, respectively. If it goes on like that we'd technically be fighting the whole server. For offensive campaigns I would see it as more of a decision of who to war. We invade their territory and then split it up equally. That way our alliance is only fighting a few guilds at once.

As far as guilds in the alliance go, obviously our friends need to be chosen carefully. We assuredly do not want guilds that cant/wont pull their own weight. We are not an MMO babysitter service.

By the same token size is not necesarrily an indicator of power/effectiveness. Many successfull alliance do NOT allow small guilds in, it simply dilutes the overall leadership structure,creates to many chiefs, makes it more of a political hassle , etc.

On the other hand, some alliances are comprised largly of smaller guilds. Some are even successfull. Another factor is the level of specialization, highly specialized guilds can be included in otherwise large-guild only alliances. It depends.

There are plenty of small guilds out there that are great. Alot of the time they are very tight knit groups of players that perhaps are all friends IRL, work well together or have played previous games together etc etc. Some of these small guilds I would rather have in my alliance than many of the large guilds out there.

I agree with derid... size is not an indicator of power/effectiveness. I've said this in another post and I'll say it again here, I've seen small groups WTFOWN larger groups time and again so can we please stop this GD zerg mentality. Yes there are some MMO's out there that are just a #'s game, well find a way to work around out and use it to your advantage.

Also IMO Raek I wouldn't use KGB as the norm, if they arnt as big as us, if they dont do things our way, etc etc etc. I'm sure we have plenty of room for improvement. Another thing you cant just have guilds in an alliance just running around doing whatever they want. Guild A attacks Guild X and X is friendly to B and A and B are in alliance together. Uniform ideas, enemies and friends.

Derid, Hydr, I can see you favor the "fill out in duplicate 5 different forms for the ability to take a shit" alliance type vs the "community" that pulls its own weight and has the freedom to do what it wants that I'm suggesting.

That's cool, we're all welcome to have our own opinions. But this is a game and the fastest way to suck the fun out of a game is to have people controlling your actions. If I was a guild in this UGC and was having problems with a neighboring guild and so wanted to war them but couldn't unless I went through all the official channels getting the "ok" from big brother KGB, then i'd up and leave the UGC and say so long suckers, enjoy your bureaucracy.

At most a guild in the UGC should only have to "listen" to the opinions of the other members. They can choose to ignore it though... and what keeps this in balance? Like I said before, if they go against what guilds we think they should be at war with AND on top of it can't handle taking care of themselves in these wars we don't support... then we kick them out. That's the checks and balances, but only works if the chairmen or whatever leadership committe we have, has the Balls to kick people out.

I should also mention I know of the power small elite groups can provide. I've lead, been part of, benefited from, allied with, saw with my own eyes as a spectator their power. My main message was, guilds should only stay a part of the UGC and have the freedom to do what they want as long as they pull their own weight. Pulling your own weight can be done in many ways, be it by having 500 members and able to win through numbers alone, or be it because your guild has 20 super active well trained pvpers and if even 10 of them are online those 10 guys can pull their weight by killing an enemy group of 50.

Id like to see a UGCommunity form with the possibly of developing into a UGCoalition in the future.

I have no problems with small guilds being part of the alliance, and indeed, the KGB does have a long tradition of defending the little guy. If they intentionally start a fight with the idea that the alliance will back them up, consideration should be given to cutting them loose, but if they are being attacked because they look like low hanging fruit, ready to be plucked, then the fist of the alliance should land hard. Smaller guilds can be unstable, and we have frequently picked up new members from guilds who were formerly under our protection.

We cannot fight the whole world, but we should try to police our own neighborhood.

no no, that's officer chat you're thinking about :P

"Derid, Hydr, I can see you favor the "fill out in duplicate 5 different forms for the ability to take a shit" alliance type vs the "community" that pulls its own weight and has the freedom to do what it wants that I'm suggesting."

Hmmm. Noone said anything about bueracracy. Just simply, if you dont even have the same diplomatic standings in an alliance, it wont be effective in a real PvP game. Pretty soon there is drama about who is doing what, whos friends with who... it gets ugly.

If guilds dont want to stay on the same page and work together, the alliance will fail, period. It isnt about asking permission, its about being cohesive. It isnt about filing forms, its about the respective guild leaders and members deciding what to do as an alliance.

What is the benifit of being in an alliance that requires you do go defend someone constantly because they are dumbasses? What if the respective guilds in the alliance can't coordinate defenses because theyre all caught up in their own thing? Its not a chance, its a garuntee unless the alliance works cohesivly.

Honestly your better off just mass recruiting in that scenario. The successfull alliances that hold territory are going to be the ones that work as a group for the common interest. Not the ones with guilds that just do whatever they want, and expect backup when they get in trouble.

Having guilds that communicate, but do whatever they want, is just having friends IMO. Friends can be a good thing to have, but it doesnt need its own name. Having friends is good. Friends are just friendly though, an alliance works together.

Maybe we could ally ourselves to a few established well organized guilds, like we did with CoS in later years of SB, that was easy enough we would meet up for the big fights and do well. We could protect any little guys we wanted, but not include them in the alliance necessarily, there will probably be some conflicts of interest somewhere though. But an alliance for major events should work well enough, especially if we are allied to well organized guilds.