World of Warcraft®

Hi,
At first I would like to thank a lot for quick help. I have really good experience with Blizz help with solving some problems with game and I don't have any reason to complain, however.
However there is one thing that I really don't understand about working of guild.
I had two times same situation: somebody invite me to guild, then promote to guild master, then I end in a guild that i didn't want, with no members and it's ok, really no problem if guild is low level enough to disban, but otherwise it is a little bigger problem.
I understand that Blizzard had some reasons to create such a rules, but when I today read in help "the easiest method of living a guild in such situation is to give it to another player" I started to be a little confused.
So my question is: why are you suggesting as a solution of problem shifting it on somebody else? I don't act this way so finally I have to spare my time for searching information about solution.
Maybe, for example, would help if owner of character could accept promotion to GM somehow, but it is just an idea.

Best wishes

31/01/2012 10:25Posted by Dakapa

So my question is: why are you suggesting as a solution of problem shifting it on somebody else?

Guilds shouldn't be taken over due to GM inactivity. Without 100% his will.

31/01/2012 10:45Posted by Bruceelee

So my question is: why are you suggesting as a solution of problem shifting it on somebody else?

Guilds shouldn't be taken over due to GM inactivity. Without 100% his will.

Blizzard and many other players disagree with you, spamming threads that have nothing to do with it is not going to change anyone's mind.

@OP If this happens to you again and the guild is a decent level (5+) drop me an ingame mail faylanna@eonar I'll take the guild off your hands for you!

Thanks.
I know about petitions, used it today :), and how I said thank a lot for quick help.
But why somebody can make me guild master while I don't want to be? Making good guild takes a lot of work. People make it for fun or to check how it looks, then instead of sending petition leave it to someone other, cause it is easier.
I am questioning because, as I understand this is discussion forum, I am still learning about wow and really love this game, and this is sth I just don't understand.

Well I don't think being a guildmaster is generally considered a *handicap* as such; so I don't the developers thought people being made guildmaster against their will would be a very big problem.

I wouldn't join just any guild if I were you; but actually you can sometimes try selling these higher level guilds for in-game gold to other players if you're clever.

31/01/2012 11:07Posted by Dakapa

But why somebody can make me guild master while I don't want to be?

you do realise that if it has anything with it then its not such a millstone afterall right?

just sell, in trade chat, the next one you get 'lumbered with'.

31/01/2012 11:07Posted by Dakapa

But why somebody can make me guild master while I don't want to be? Making good guild takes a lot of work. People make it for fun or to check how it looks, then instead of sending petition leave it to someone other, cause it is easier.

Well maybe the solution is too easy to overlook for Blizzard. They already got this "block guild invite" on the interface so maybe add a "block guild leader promotion" and unless you untick it you can not be promoted to a guild leader but include in that also that your toon will not see the dethrone feature. And maybe program into it that you must have had it unticked for 30 days or more BEFORE any dethrone feature so it stops the opportunists who see a "quick buck" with getting hold of inactive guilds.

Well before you say "why", the answer is simple. A leader gets 30 days before they are deemed inactive so make it that a player can ONLY be considered for takeover after 30 days AFTER un-ticking such a feature as a setting that says "block guild leader promotion". It may also give people a chance of thinking things through before clicking on that button to accept the takeover making them a leader.

This plus what I said before in another post I made about when a person takes over a guild that they cannot change its settings for 90 days, cannot remove any gold from the bank for 30 days, and more importantly they cannot kick any existing guild members from the guild for say 7 days, and have it that if in the first 30 days after you took over the old leader logs on and wants their guild back, they got an option of "Reclaim Leadership" and they are back as leader and you are returned to your old rank in the guild.

The dethrone feature should also be used for non-paying FROZEN accounts where a guild leader has stopped playing totally (30 days at FROZEN, then countdown to 30 days later when they are dethroned is a better option I think).

In the case of the OP, a player chose to give the leadership to another player. Another player should have the choice to accept or decline by default offers of guild leadership, and to regulate the dethrone feature better the settings should set to "block guild leader promotion" so that this has the added bonus of excluding more people from taking an advantage of the dethrone feature.

The missing link in the dethrone feature is the "Reclaim Leadership" which should be available 30 days after any dethrone happened. This way there's both a feature to allow people to determine if a leader is inactive as well as a feature for a leader to say "I am active actually, but I was just away for a while". Also maybe to stop people to just use "Reclaim Leadership" as a glorified "log on 5 minutes every month", give leaders just three times to use it thus making it "three strikes and you're out", because on the fourth time logging on you would not find the feature there anymore and the game system now says "you tried 3 times to prove you're active but we're so now we're not giving anymore chances", and it is THEN that you would have permanently lost your guild, and if you think it about it, this is 3 times once every 30 days, so this would be the ideal feature to make it 90 days instead of 30 days to face permanent dethrone, and up to 90 days is just "temporary dethrone".

This topic is not about dethroning or the dethrone feature. There are many many other topics about that. Please SPEW dethrone RUBBISH into DESIGNATED threads.

01/02/2012 14:05Posted by Luria

This topic is not about dethroning or the dethrone feature. There are many many other topics about that. Please SPEW dethrone RUBBISH into DESIGNATED threads.

I was not talking about dethrone for the sake of bringing up this topic, but including it in my post to show HOW the OP would not have had gotten lumbered with an "unwanted" guild if what I suggested had been included as a key Interface feature similar as the "Block Guild Invite" feature is currently.

So, Luria, I could spew this information I thought about in response to the OP's post all I want in those "designated threads" BUT then it would not have been relevant to what the OP was posting about and therefore not highlighted an important point from the OP "that there are people who get given a guild via single click of a button as the OP points out because they are too lazy to petition a GM to disband such a guild instead".

The points OP makes RELATES to the issues with dethrone and it is relevant to that subject as well because I think there must be a feature available that forces people to think "do I or would I want to take leadership of the guild I am in or that I just joined if the dethrone feature became available to me?". And then you untick something to confirm it and THEN AND ONLY THEN you can have the dethrone function show up for you.

So no it is NOT rubbish I am spewing, nor am I to be told by you to "shut up about something". I care about the fact there are SOME people out there who seem to be getting lumbered with losing a guild they obviously care about but they loose it because they want a taste of real life for a while instead of always playing this game. Then, like the OP, others get made a guild leader without wanting this role. So make something that is meant to protect the guild members of a guild where a guild leader gone missing in action into something better and not something that, as I stated before, just makes out that a player who is paying subs but on holiday is all the sudden a person who is just inactive. Nor make it so easy as it is now for players to grab a guild in a dethrone process but make them aware it is a task with responsibility and that they need to think it through so therefore as I said only give a person a chance to click the button 30 days after they joined a guild so they HAVE to think "would I want to lead this guild?" The extra stuff about restricting access and permissions is also to give the original leader the chance in the 30 days after being dethroned to come back and be the guid's leader again. As I said there needs to be a "temporary dethrone" before the permanent one.

And also in addition there SHOULD be the ability to say "NO NO NO I DO NOT want to a guild leader of ANY guild I join" as what the OP is saying about which this feature I am pointing out ALSO deals with and sorts out. People like the OP who do not want to get made a leader of a guild 5 minutes after joining one because the original leader does not petition a GM for a guild disband, would benefit from this feature with TWO functions: 1) protection against dethrone by people who only see dollar signs when they get the option to take over a guild AND 2) something to make it possible for a player to say NO to being "in charge" of a guild. Okay, shall we go through every post from a person who said "I was dethroned unfairly", Luria and count up HOW MANY of those posts would NOT exist right now if my suggestion was in existence. You seem by the way you worded your post directed at me fed up seeing posts about dethrone. The " many many other topics" would be maybe "few topics" if the feature had been designed A LOT BETTER.

At the core what I was saying before and here is BOTH relevant to dethrone AND to the situation that the OP raised, Luria. I raised a relevant point to this post so do not bother attacking me with this claim that what I am saying is rubbish...

OMG you are now spamming this drivel in other threads

31/01/2012 10:25Posted by Dakapa

I had two times same situation: somebody invite me to guild, then promote to guild master, then I end in a guild that i didn't want, with no members and it's ok, really no problem if guild is low level enough to disban, but otherwise it is a little bigger problem.

Just happened to me.

Got invited to a lvl 4 guild, got promoted to GM and the previous GM left the guild. Now I'm stuck in a guild I dont want, am the only one in it. Cant disband it either as/gdisband doesn't work on lvl 3 or higher guilds.
I could easily dumb this on another poor sod, but that's not a nice thing to do.
Opened a support ticket. They have asked me to wait 48 hours after which Blizz can delete the guild.

01/02/2012 18:27Posted by Iluvcritters

And also in addition there SHOULD be the ability to say "NO NO NO I DO NOT want to a guild leader of ANY guild I join" as what the OP is saying about which this feature I am pointing out ALSO deals with and sorts out. People like the OP who do not want to get made a leader of a guild 5 minutes after joining one because the original leader does not petition a GM for a guild disband,

Agreed. Atleast a confirmation box. The current system is just plain abuse.