Right. Sure we could allow unlimited members, but only allow 10 to receive the perk, but that makes things way too complicated for moderators.
Printable View
Ah okay Dirks, that makes a lot of sense.
And whether or not to bring back the Power Groups is up to you both I think. It seems popular, maybe a steady reintroduction? Bit by bit perhaps? So just the groundworks first, registering them, then setting up whatever subforums you think are necessary, then doing the incentives later, if there are any.
You hit the nail on the head.
I would quite like to have an informal system, to be honest. Perhaps have a list of Althy recognized PG's that are "canon", maybe once in a while do a featured quest involving them when activity picks up. But for now, there is nothing stopping us carrying on the status quo. The Bro'hood of Bro's carries on regardless.
I'm not too sure on the "10 members only" thing, but the rest of it sounds good. I've always liked the RP aspect more than awards, either way. Not sure ten members only would be a great idea; it could basically be like "Sorry, but you can't join because we already have max players." It seems a little unnecessary and maaaaybe uncool?
I like everything else though.
PG's returning under the discussion to this point... yes. If we can balance everything out, then, hell yes. I think the 10 member cap is quite generous. It keeps things fair between PG's, and it doesn't send the mods overseeing into a head spinning flurry.
Also, by having the max at 10, it allows each clan to be fairly balanced on people. In the past we had clan wars that had one clan with like 20 people for the war where the other side was forced to have mercenaries to evenly match the sides in the fight. 10 people would mean 10 people, and therefore no need for added mercenaries to even things out.
I'd be fine with PGs having a member cap on perks, but telling someone "Sorry, but you came too little too late" seems a bit mean. Regional bonuses seem like a good idea as well, or PG specific awards, but not super magic items of doom like we used to have with the IK.
How about the 10 most active get the rewards for the month. sorta like the "post here to keep the HQ" thread that happened monthly, members who have not been active in threads that month don't get that month's rewards? Those who are active, and more active at that, get the rewards. If theres 15 people in a clan, 12 of them are active in a thread, 2 of them are only in one thread while the others are in 2+, they 10 most active get in on that month's rewards?
Personally, I don't particular miss PGs. All PG interactions I've had have left a bad taste for me. Whether it was just the PG fizzling out or other stuff, PGs have never been good for me.
That aside, I can't agree to a member cap, for similar reasons already stated. It becomes exclusionary and that's not a good front to put up when recruiting new people. I can, however, see a member cap for wars. Limiting the number of people that can sign up to a participate in a war will eliminate the problem Black Shadow mentioned about winding up with uneven teams. Let there be as many people involved in a PG as the PG wants to allow, but when it comes to wars, the PG essentially forms a "war team" of up to X many members of the PG. How it's decided who's on the war team would be up to the PG members to figure out, of course.
Totally agree with Sei, Shadow, and Chelley.
Another idea is that instead of a perk cap, PG admins can give a monthly perk to the member that contributed the most. It would be just as much as a perk as a reward. Different categories for separate "not-free-perks/ earned awards" could be given to different players too. Like... The person who completed the most PG quests get an EXP Booster for a single thread of choice. A helpful moderator gets a cool new IC item (not overpowered.) Something like that?