I am very shocked of how the price is for how much you expand your guild hall. Already, my guild has to pay 100k crowns just to keep the guild. Isn't that a bit much? I mean, some of us cannot come on Spiral knights for a reason. So my suggestion is, to extend the upkeep to a month. This will give guilds much time and less stress to get crowns.
A month is enough. I know someone suggested this, but we want to extend the time for it.
I agree with you, but here is a little balancing to keep this a suitable crownsink
Monthly
Double Upkeep
You have to pay 2 weeks of Upkeep in 1 month, Deal OOO????
Let me just fix the title for you:
Three Rings and Spiral Knights, foolish players will become angry players next week because of the Upkeep. Extend the time
No-one's forcing you to max out your guildhall. Buy what your guild can afford.
Exactly what Hexzyle said.
100K is hardly anything even if you only have 10 players. 10K per person, is that so much to ask? That's 1.2 KoA runs per week per player.
Besides, the crown sink known as Upkeep is a very healthy novelty for the economy.
~Sev
I think you're right that we're going to have a lot of angry guilds in the next few days because of upkeep. However, I also agree with Severage that the crown sink is a needed boon to the economy. It's not OOO's fault that people are buying what they can't afford, and I don't think its anything intrinsically wrong with the system. Be responsible with your guild funds.
I will say, however, that OOO's introduced a whole new, much more complex economic factor with the guild hall than was previously present in the game. They could have done a better job of providing tools to facilitate more fiscal responsibility among players and guilds.
An idea that just came to mind is giving the guild masters the option requiring dues from guild members, and attach an automated penalty to the guild member if it's not paid by a certain date. That would turn the guild hall into a much more effective crown sink for OOO's, and it would help so that the entire financial burden doesn't fall on only a few people.
Making each individual member pay? Oh hell no. Then GMs could just max off GHs and not have to worry, becauase all his minions will get charged. What about the players who only log for a few hours a week and don't use GH? It's not fair to ask them to pay.
No, the current system is absolutely fine; leave the upkeep to be donated from all members, and simply ask that all active members take an hour a week to do a group run of FSC to pay a chunk of upkeep.
If people buy upgrades and can't afford them, then they really deserve to go into default. I mean it's not that hard. You don't come out of your minimum wage job, go into a Ferrari shop and buy up three of them, then rage at the car company for not giving you sufficient warning that you'd be in debt. You get plenty of warning what the prices and upkeeps will be, and even then it's really not that hard to pay even 400k upkeep between your guild.
/graveyard, now.
I know it's frustrating. I had someone in my guild saying we were poor because all those guilds had four floors.... four empty flours at that. I told them and told them that the upkeep is very expensive PER WEEK. I'm trying to do right by my guild the best i can. I'm making them take it slow and raise the money. Most of these guild are in a rush to have the best stuff first. But they forget in a few weeks they'll be completely broke if they don't play it right. I've already heard of many guilds that are broke and thinking about charging each member.
What I'm telling my guild is that we have a minimum per upgrade that we want in our guild funds at all times. I'm making this number like three or four times more than what it should be. I don't want to struggle from week to week and I don't want to tax them a week to be in the guild. So if they want something in the guild then they will need to help keep it up and cover the costs. I don't want to hear complaining from people who don't donate... and with the report record... I can see who is and isn't donating. I'm not going to hold it against them or anything... it's that that if they don't like they way the guild hall looks then participate in donating. Make yourself have a say in it.
It is rough when you aren't paying attention to the costs and how quickly it adds up. That is just how life is. Costs come... it adds up faster than you think.
I mean okay spend one dollar a day... which makes it 7 dollars a week... which is 28 dollars a month... 336 dollars a year. Think about all the things you could have bought with 336 dollars.
I've laid it out where we decorate a room at a time. When we get those decorated and the funds back into the guild then we'll work on updating to the next level... decorate that... replace funds... and so on. It's learning how to budget. It's a good life lesson for all those youngsters out there. :D
Edit:
I REFUSE... absolutely REFUSE to tax my guild. If they had the option in the game I would set it to 0. If they want it... they should save for it.
@OP:
Doesn't look like Toki will become an angry player. That's really the way to do it~
Just because there are some guilds that can afford to max everything off and not worry about upkeep doesn't mean that every guild should be doing that. Guilds should really take the time to play the game and think about what they can afford as a unit; rushing is just going to get you thrown into default.
Which isn't so bad really; extra cr sink and all, s'what we need. Foolish players just get to pour even more into the sink w/ the debt markup :D
If you don't like paying dues, then find a guild that doesn't charge them. I'm not saying force everyone to pay, im saying just give the GM the option as it could help a lot of guilds out.
No. I don't like it. I am a guild master, founder even. My main is dancinjen I'm the guildmaster of In the Jelly. They've been working their tails off to get funds for the guild. I don't agree with having a taxing option, period.
What i would like to see is maybe an option on each run where you, yourself, can chose to have a certain percent from the run donated into the funds. I've made a thread about that. I think it would be more convenient for the younger kids you might have a hard time with budgeting and handling money. They can set it to be a certain amount from the run and it goes straight into the funds. They can control their own amount.
You introduce taxing into the game and it will be hard to find a guild that doesn't tax. I also think it's lazy to do that. I think guilds will end up getting less money from it because people will be unwilling to donate anymore than what is already being taken away from them. Right now it's pure voluntary and I rather keep it that way.
Also, punishing people for not being able to pay the tax... what if they haven't been on in a while? You want to continue to tax a guildmate that has had outside life issues. No. That's just too much. I like it like this.
I'm with Toki on this; tax isn't the answer, especially when it affects players who may not have as high activity rates
It's a simple matter of noting who is highly active in the game and who spends a lot of time using the GH features. If you find out that they're doing nothing to donate, have words with them. It really shouldn't be that hard to get enough donations to pay upkeep as it takes very little time when you have even a handful of your actives do a run or two; it's not like a full-time commitment is required. If people are deliberately avoiding donating towards a GH that they use; are they really the kind of person you want around? Talk to them.
But auto-taxing everyone won't solve this problem of guilds who overspend or people who want to avoid donating, and depending on how the tax is implemented, it could wind up just punishing your most active players.
Then you get players like me, who spend most of their time in LD and have nothing to get taxed anyway.
Large guilds get more upgrades. This will turn down the number of small guilds, because most people won't want to worry about being a GM because they need all this upkeep to stay with the big guilds.
Wow seriously? Are you guys even thinking about this? Giving the option of having an automated system of guild dues would make life easier on everyone. If you don't like the tax, fine. But why should you keep other people from having the option?
In all seriousness though, a tax system really does just make more sense. In real life, we all hate the idea of taxes. But in reality, all of societies most basic functions are based on tax revenues and we're better off paying them. Because of taxes we can afford things like public school and roads that we wouldn't pay for by ourselves.
The same goes for the functioning of a guild. You really think donation levels are going to remain where they are right now? Once the glamor of the new update wears off people are going to donate less. Guilds are going to realize that they bought a lot of things they can't afford to keep. A basic taxation system that puts even 100 to 200 crowns per member towards upkeep will go a long way towards ameliorating that cost once donation revenues start to decline. As a player, I would happily pay it. Just like taxes in real life, it makes us all better off even if we hate the idea.
Don't like the idea of punishing players that are away? Fine, don't assign a punishment to it. Maybe the money could be automatically withdrawn each week. If you don't have the money to pay, then you don't pay. If you haven't played that week, then maybe you could be exempt. Let guild masters determine punishments, amounts taken, or even implementing an optional tax. There just needs to be a better, more official, system for facilitating guild donations. Give guilds options, that's all I'm advocating.
Asking Guild masters to keep track of everyones donations and pull aside those that donate is a bad system on so many levels. Who wants to keep track of the donations from 100+ players? Do you really want to go around giving people lectures and rattling your tin cup asking for donations? If a GM pulled me aside to chat about my donations I would leave that guild on the spot. And as a GM, I don't ever want to hound people about it. Making an official system for donations solves all these problems and your guild mates don't have to hate the people tin cup rattling GM's.
Also, I never implied that it would solve the problem of spending too much. It will, however, enable guilds to afford more things, which is very good for the spiral economy as a whole. If I were OOO's I would jump on this idea because it would make guild halls a much more efficient crown sink without members feeling the sting of it so much.
I'm not keeping track of everything everyone donates. I will skim over the logs, and if i have anyone the complains about something I will look through it and talk to them about if they are going to share so many negative opinions then maybe they should put in some donations and offer up a more positive solution.
You know, I think the only guilds that are going to have a huge problem with this are guilds that are trying to bite off more than they can chew. Guilds that instead of thinking about their funds that are available at that moment and what they need to upkeep it... they rushed it and now they'll be discouraged and constantly struggling. Punishing the guild by taxing them for upkeep that they can't afford because they made the mistake. But unwilling to downgrade because well... they want the best stuff. I refuse to do that to my guild. I will NOT let that happen. We're only going to take on what we can handle at a time. Taxing all the members for stuff because that's what the guild master wants for the guild... is a bit selfish. There are many people that don't care anything about the guild hall. They just want to play lockdown and have their lockdown gear. Or people who just want to have their pretty costumes. Why should anyone put that on them? Taxing people isn't the end all be all. This is supposed to be a casual game.
Taxing the guild is putting a responsibility on people that is unneeded. I don't want the option. This is a casual game, taxing would be silly. It's just lazy of guilds to charge each member because they want the best stuff. If you can't afford it don't get it, but don't take everyone with you and force them to sacrifice their own wages and fun times for your personal wants. Taxing a guild for something you don't need, is selfish. period. It is ultimately a guild masters decision.
Taking money from everyone to make up for something you can't/won't do on your own is NOT the way.
"Asking Guild masters to keep track of everyones donations and pull aside those that donate is a bad system on so many levels. Who wants to keep track of the donations from 100+ players? Do you really want to go around giving people lectures and rattling your tin cup asking for donations? If a GM pulled me aside to chat about my donations I would leave that guild on the spot. And as a GM, I don't ever want to hound people about it. Making an official system for donations solves all these problems and your guild mates don't have to hate the people tin cup rattling GM's."
That is sooo contradictory. So you want to call GM's that are making sure everyone puts in money tin cup rattling GM's... but it's okay to tax and get money from the whole guild?
Sounds like to me you don't like being called out for stuff, or you would be offended of a GM keeping track of stuff and asking for your share.
I personally wouldn't do that. I'll only call people out on it if they are going to complain about the guild hall. I said it earlier and I'll say it again, if anyone complains they need to offer up a positive solution.
Which still leaves me with my same decision... taxing, even offering it as an option in the game, is bad.
You're looking at it the wrong way, It's not a punishment and you don't have to force anyone to do anything. Guild masters are free to adjust the system as they see fit, and guild members are free to find a guild the suits their taste. It's a tool for GM's to have at their disposal to make donations easier to track and collect. It's that simple. If you're punishing your players with it rather than making their life and your life easier, then you're using it wrong. There is nothing intrinsically good or bad about the tool itself, its all about how GM's use it. If you think that some form of taxation can't possibly have any good effect, then I'm sorry but you just don't have the slightest clue about finances or econ. The tool isn't good or bad, but having options is a good thing.
And no, an automatically withdrawn guild due is not contradictory to cup rattling. The crime in cup rattling isn't getting money from the guild, its in guild members forcing their leaders to ask. No, I wouldn't like a GM calling me out on something like donations. Like you said, its a casual game. I'd much rather have an automated system that I wouldn't have to worry about it than spend spend hounding my guild members or being annoyed by GM's. An automated system could put all of that in the background, and the actual game center stage.
And again, its not about trying to let people buy more than they can afford. It's about enabling people to play and run the game how they wish. If I want a guild with a big fancy guild hall and don't mind being taxes 1000 crowns a week for it, why do you care? Many players wouldn't mind paying a modest fee to help support a guild hall. All we're doing is formalizing the system. It's a nudge to players to donate, something they wouldn't mind doing, but probably won't unless there is a formal system.
Also, saying that a guild master issuing a tax is selfish is like saying that a business owner charging for his product is selfish. No one is forcing anyone to be a member of a guild, just like you are never forced to buy from a certain business. If the people who run the guild decide they want to generate more revenue so they can have a better guild hall and you don't want to pay, then too bad. It's their guild and they have every right to do so. Go find another guild that suits your taste. If you don't want to tax anyone and would rather have a modest hall, than great, do whatever you want. There is no reason why other GM's should be forced to run their guild according to what you think is good or bad though. Give GM's the option to run the guild and raise funds however they want. That's all it comes down to.
It's not that i'm for taxation and you're not, its that I'm for giving people options and you're not.
I see where you are coming from, and there is a certain undeniable logic to your argument. It wouldn't be a better system, just a different one. A worse one? Thats arguable. Some (i think most) will say so. Some (such as yourself, and i believe a minority with you) will say no, its not worse, its better.
But i'll point out a few reasons why i don't feel its the way moving forward.
#1. Nearly every knight in the game who is part of a guild was part of that guild before these upgrades and upkeep were ever introduced. Their is an intrinsic contract, unwritten and unspoken, in joining and being part of a guild--if its a good guild, the kind that fosters trust and loyalty. This contract was set forth by both parties with the implicit understanding that there is not tax, duties, or tariff on being part of that guild. To turn around and lay a tax on every member now would be a breach of that contract, and erode those bonds of fidelity. Plain and simple, it would be wrong.
#2. You point to the governmental model, and the good thats done by taxes. The analogy is apt, but misplaced. I'd say that the taxes are in the game, as monthly upkeep, and the societal good it does is seen in the overall lowering of CE prices to the economy. IMO. that would be the proper context of the tax and public goods performed as it relates to spiral knights. The reasoning you give for taxes player is:
"Guilds are going to realize that they bought a lot of things they can't afford to keep. A basic taxation system that puts even 100 to 200 crowns per member towards upkeep will go a long way towards ameliorating that cost once donation revenues start to decline."
To me, this is trying to fix one overreach with another overreach. There is a reason good guilds have Guild Masters and Officers. These are the folks who are entrusted with having a vision and plan for the guild. It is up to them to chart the direction and forge the future of their guild. Its a matter of leadership. If i a guild is to make progress and strive, it needs capable leaders. Its up to the leaders of the guild [as dancinjen and her officers have done] to set down and intelligently decide what they CAN AND CANNOT afford. There needs to be fiscal responsibility by the guild leaders. Its up to those people to not overextend. The idea that they can overextend and then pass the burden on to the rank and file who have not say so in the matter is not a good precedent to set.
A guild, as a collection of like-minded individuals working towards a common goal, should set down and determine what that goal is, if they can attain it, and how it is best done, and in what time-frame. From there, the leaders of that guild should be responsible to seeing that its handled correctly.
to bridge the gap between a non-taxed system, and a system where people "pay their parts," I submit to you my suggestion to octavio's other thread:
http://forums.spiralknights.com/en/node/68653
post #8
By being able to set access limitations on various levels of the guildhall, as well as limiting access through door restrictions, you could combine the best of both worlds. A non-taxed guild, but also have sections of the guildhall set up as (for lack of a better word) VIP sections with graduated donation level access. Want to use the guildhall Auction House, Crafting Machines, and Lockdown sign up? Be a level 1 contributor X,XXX per week. Want access to the snipe garden, war room, and master suites on level 5? Be a level 5 contributor XX,XXX per week.
Perhaps let members have 1 day passes for say 1.5k per day (if its 5k per week. In this way, they are encouraged to be a full-time member, but can also see what its like even if they can't afford full-time membership. They still get to feel like a part of the team, and gives them something to look forward to).
I think there are more creative and friendly ways to pay for upkeep, such as innovative, novel ideas that encourage donations, rather than an non-negotiable tax.
P.S.
Octavio.....you right out well-reasoned, albeit flawed, posts. I appreciate that you take the time to punctuate, use good grammar, fully thought out ideas, but your condescending "I'm right and if you can't see it then you are obtuse" mentality is very off-putting. Especially given some of the fairly contradictory statements you are making.
A tax is not a donation. (octavio said its a simpler way to keep track of donations-to paraphrase)
You say that "It's not that i'm for taxation and you're not, its that I'm for giving people options and you're not." This is a scarecrow argument. Its entirely that you are for taxation and we are not. Giving people options you say? When you give one person (or a couple GMs) the option to levy a tax, you are taking away the option of every member in that guild to not pay a tax. Yes, they can leave the guild that they've been a part of for who knows how long, where all their friends are, where they've made all their memories, etc... and find a new one...but really?!? You are shutting down infinitely more options than you are opening up with this mechanic. So, what it all boils down to is this: YOU ARE FOR GUILD TAXATION. WE ARE AGAINST GUILD TAXATION.
Your first point is a good one. The dividing of guilds is a side effect of the guild hall update that I think is unavoidable to a small degree and a formal system of dues could exacerbate it. My personal opinion though is that the number of guilds it tears apart would be in the minority, and that would also just lead to new guilds with different philosophies on the subject. Maybe it's just because I was a guild hopper for a long time, but I don't think most people are too attached to their guild. Those that are tend to be higher ranking, and any decent GM would talk these things over with longstanding members rather than unilaterally implementing it. If they don't then maybe the GM deserves to have his members leave haha. It's also worth noting though that a formal taxation could have a very positive effect on guilds that are looking to be more serious about the game. New governments use taxation as a way to establish legitimacy and gain loyalty from people. Likewise, I've been part of serious guilds/clans in other games that tried to implement dues, and it never worked because there was no formal system. Even if the majority of members wanted to take part in it, it never worked. Basically, I strongly agree with your last point and see this as a possible tool to help guilds achieve whatever vision they have.
So yes, good point, but there is my logic to it.
#2 is also a good point, to which I would say that taxation at the guild level amplifies the benefits of weekly upkeep. When financial burdens are dispersed rather than concentrated, the aggregate spending tends to go up. That means more crowns and CE flowing through the economy, which is good for everyone. As it stands right now, I would argue that the lowering of CE prices is largely temporary, but that's another debate I'd rather not get into.
I think that's a great idea unique. I'll get behind that.
P.S.
Octavio.....you write well-reasoned, albeit flawed, posts. I appreciate that you take the time to punctuate, use good grammar, fully thought out ideas, but your condescending "I'm right and if you can't see it then you are obtuse" mentality is very off-putting. Especially given some of the fairly contradictory statements you are making.
A tax is not a donation. (octavio said its a simpler way to keep track of donations-to paraphrase)
You say that "It's not that i'm for taxation and you're not, its that I'm for giving people options and you're not." This is a scarecrow argument. Its entirely that you are for taxation and we are not. Giving people options you say? When you give one person (or a couple GMs) the option to levy a tax, you are taking away the option of every member in that guild to not pay a tax. Yes, they can leave the guild that they've been a part of for who knows how long, where all their friends are, where they've made all their memories, etc... and find a new one...but really?!? You are shutting down infinitely more options than you are opening up with this mechanic. So, what it all boils down to is this: YOU ARE FOR GUILD TAXATION. WE ARE AGAINST GUILD TAXATION.
With that, i'll drop the subject, as no one ever sways another to their way of thinking on the internet.
Agreed to disagree. And yes, you are absolutely right. The CE prices will return to previous levels and then continue upon their same inflationary patterns. At least this reset the equilibrium lower for the time being, and gives us a brief period of respite from the 9k prices. But yes, they'll be back, and sooner than many think.
As for guild loyalties. I was a guild hopper too, until i finally found a good one, and made a home in it. My main is quite the well-known knight from quite the well-known guild. The guild morphed and changed and went through a few different names, but its always been the same guild, on the same ideals, by the same stalwarts. I rose from recruit all the way to GM, and then back down to veteran as i rarely play, and feel it should be steered by knights more active than myself.
But when you find such a fitting home in game, that guild and those core members become as much a draw to the game as does the game itself. If you haven't found that kind of experience on the game, i hope you will. It makes it much more fun, imo. Again, i spent the first 4 months or so in about 10 different guilds, wondering all the while why anyone really cared about being in a guild at all!? But once you find a good one, one that clicks, it makes all the sense in the world.
However, to that end, if my guild implemented a tax i'd say my goodbyes and exit stage left. --were i still active, playing nearly each day, and loved the guild hall, then i'd pay the tax and keep on moving, most likely. Though i'd still not be in favor of it, and might leave out of principle. But when you've been in a guild for a long time, one that you really like, there is an emotional connection to that guild, for the previously stated reasons. You've made friends, made memories, shared in common experiences, and generally taken the guid as part of your SK personal identity. Thus, even if you hated the tax and were absolutely against it, you'd still face a very difficult decision.
This post isn't to discuss the right or wrong of taxes, just the extenuating circumstances they would place on guild members who were torn between allegiances and principles (or pocket books). Its to point out that some of us do place a very high value on the guilds we reside in :D
--its also worth noting that i was one of the few who never had any care for guild hall updates. I could take it or leave it, and as a matter of principle, i do all my crafting, AH'ing, etc.. in the haven and bazaar, rather than doing it in my own guildhall. I'm not part of the "Free-Ride" problem.
I like what UV said about the levels so much.
I see what you're saying octavian and to say I'm not for options and you are... is a broad term that shouldn't be used. UV explains this so well... he explained my reasoning for my reaction to what you were saying. Earlier you tried to justify it by basically saying "guilds will tire of donating because they spent more than they should have, so you tax and that problem won't be there" is sort of how I understood it right off the bat... for your reasoning.
I have discussed taxing with people before, or membership fee if you will, and everyone I've talked to is in pretty much the same agreement that we don't think it would be a good thing.
I am for options. I'm also thinking about creative ways to raise funds for the guild. Such as a donation day where we can all go on runs in the clockworks and put all that money into the funds. That is a free to participate run. That is giving my guild an option.
You are right, if people don't like it they could leave. But should we put them in the position to have to leave a guild that they've been in for a year because suddenly they want to have a ravishing guild hall and want to tax the guild? No. It isn't right. They shouldn't be put in that position to make a decision like that.
The donating system encourages game play, it encourages communication. It encourages planning and events. Teamwork. Yeah, you can do that with taxing too... but how many people will actually participate in those events when they are already having money taken out every week for the fund. They won't see the point. Then the guilds won't have those events. Donating is deciding on your own PERSONAL terms what and how much you put in.
Lol i was completely sniped by UV. hahaha... he said what I wanted to say. :D
Especially about the options vs. no options it's taking away the options of the guild as a whole rather than bring one option to the guild master as a matter of convenience. Anyways. he said exactly what I wanted to say.
Yes I am quite aware that I was condescending in my post and misrepresented Tok's argument. Like I said in another thread, I'm an economist by trade. So I'm not pulling this reasoning out of thin air and I get frustrated when someone refuses to grasp the very basics of the system. It's one thing to take a moral stance against it, but to say that there are no possible benefits from it is nonsense. And yes, I sympathize with your story as it is essentially the same as my own. However, being the cold calculating econ. mind that I am, I choose not to take individual circumstances into account (including my own), and rather suggest what I think would be best for the whole.
But speaking of straw man arguments, no I'm not for guild taxation. I don't believe I ever stated what I would do in my own guild. Like I said before, I'm for tools, and giving guild masters the option is a powerful one. It could be a tax, it could be formal donations, or there could be no requirements, I just want it to be whatever the guild master wants. Just make it easy and accessible. A streamlined system is better for everyone.
I'm not against anything you're suggesting Tok. What you suggest and what I suggest are not mutually exclusive. They can coexist and make everyone in SK better off. Heck, even if you wanted to do a donation day I think it's pretty clear how having a formalized system of donations would help facilitate that. In my mind, the current system is messy and does not encourage cooperation as much as a more streamlined system could.
that you find peoples supply vs demand arguments for the CE market as absolutely laughable, inane, and misguided as i do :D
It irritates me to no end when people think they can apply the model for regional, national, or global economics (as it stands in the real world) to the spiral knights "economy." Meanwhile they completely ignore the fact that the supply and demand for CE in spiral knights is affected by myriad internal and external factors that simply don't exist in our world, while simultaneously there are a whole host of internal and external factors in the real world that don't exist in spiral knights. The fact that the majority of forum goers can't grasp this is unfathomable. And then they say, ITS ALL ECONOMICS. And prance around like they are god's gift to economics, 100% unaware of the irony.
I liken it to trying to build a spaceships with the blueprints to a skyscraper. They are both blueprints, but one does not fit the other.
/rant
I do understand what you're saying about taxes. It gives a regular stream of income in that doesn't normally have to be thought about or remembered.
See, I was a public relation/broadcasting major before I started going into the medical field. I understand the importance of convenience and I even have a good grasp of economics. Many times I would agree with streamlining stuff, in this particular case in this particular game, I do not agree with streamlining it. The game is not set up for that kind of format(I think that's the word I'm searching for here).
I don't know where you stand personally. Honestly I don't care at this point because you are saying one thing and then you are going back and saying that isn't what you think because you personally wouldn't do it but you are for options. So, please forgive me for being a bit confused in that area. It's almost like you're continuing this just to try and prove a point that you aren't going to prove with me. I'm THAT strongly against having tax in the game.
In this game and how casually people play this game I think taxing will be more of a hindrance than a help. I will go as far as saying I think the majority of this game are very casual players. The log on to do a few games of lockdown, use up their mist, craft, and log off. That's the majority. The minority are the ones that spend their time planning things such as guild halls and worrying about actual game content.
Anyways, my post isn't finished but I'm cut short with time right now at work.
I don't want to be rude and interrupt your conversation, but I do want to add in a little suggestion.
I think the guildhall log system could simply be changed so that a members total donation, time in the guild, and average donation per week could all be listed in the same page, instead of being just randomly chucked onto 831 pages in a random order.
Say, set it out like the Auction House, with being able to sort/search guildmembers by Total donations, average donated per week, time spent in the guild etc.
I'm doing this for other guilds that are probably sad that they are being set to default
A guild can make it's upkeep how ever high or low they want, or just remove the upkeep.
Please do not post on graveyarded threads unless you have sufficient new information to add.
Use the search bar please, or at least look at the rest of the FIRST page before making a new thread. Thankyou.