Hmmm...Gritt, I don't really know you in game (I have seen you around) so I don't know how you play the game, but (if your comment was directed at me) I think that it is somewhat disingenuous to ask for reasonableness when you advocate on behalf of those who hold such extreme, myopic views. And by advocate I mean that you request feature changes that others state they want in order to facilitate their domination of the server.
I accept that this may not be your own personal view or aim (server domination) but it is very much that of certain others (one of whom has given a 'thumbs up' to your post).
I would like to add a third category to why you state people chose the guilds they do, playstyles.
On one end of a play spectrum we have players such as myself who just like to play against the server, try to forget life and chill. I don't go out of my way to upset, demoralise or otherwise 'piss off' other players and if they beat me to a boss I simply say 'good luck' and go. It will be there for me another day. I do not PK, if someone were to attack me I would like to fight back - however the game doesn't really afford the time to do so. It really is all over in the blink of an eye (if you get caught out). Also, I think there is something repugnant in causing another human being to drop an item that may have cost them many 100's of £'s or hours and hours of repetitive grinding, but that is just me.
At the other end we have those who want to dominate the game, dominate other players, dominate its resources and areas and have no time for 'care bear' sensibilities such as fair play. They will RT around caves looking for players and even if that player goes somewhere else they will continue to RT around to again find them, either to try to make them drop or bully them out of an area.
The two views are diametrically opposed, the latter being the antithesis of how I play a game and would have overwhelming bearing on the type of guild I would chose. I accept that I probably sit in a guild that is somewhat towards the middle, I would argue that most of Doom are very firmly to one side.
You may hint (and please correct me if I am wrong) that those who fall into the latter category of playstyle have quit and will quit if they are prevented from achieving their aims.
I would state that if certain players (who are barely reined in as it is) are given carte blanche to do whatever they like then this will not be a server I would like to play any more. Also, I would suggest we have lost players due to their type of play style; I came very close myself when a certain player caused me lose an item I had put gg into. The thought does go through ones mind 'how is this fair' and 'what is the point?'
Wars are merely a way of condensing play into a smaller area, with a defined aim and timescale. The above 'playing styles' have to fit within these confines.
GM did try to address some of the issues by introducing more bound kit but this doesn't seem popular with people (I personally have no problem with it other than with those who moan about bound kit then wear bound kit!)
Maybe the solution is for the guild that feels disadvantaged to ally? Also, Doom show a full roster of 40 players. If they are all alts or not playing, then time for some recruitment? I shudder when I type this but if Doom consisted of 40 active players of a type like 'Vic' or 'North' there would be no need to change anything. I feel that guild would do very well indeed in wars. Even with allying.
In short, I don't think GM will (or should) prevent guilds allying, it is not an 'unnatural thing' there are many precedents in games and real life where people will temporarily combine to achieve a common aim.
I accept that this may not be your own personal view or aim (server domination) but it is very much that of certain others (one of whom has given a 'thumbs up' to your post).
I would like to add a third category to why you state people chose the guilds they do, playstyles.
On one end of a play spectrum we have players such as myself who just like to play against the server, try to forget life and chill. I don't go out of my way to upset, demoralise or otherwise 'piss off' other players and if they beat me to a boss I simply say 'good luck' and go. It will be there for me another day. I do not PK, if someone were to attack me I would like to fight back - however the game doesn't really afford the time to do so. It really is all over in the blink of an eye (if you get caught out). Also, I think there is something repugnant in causing another human being to drop an item that may have cost them many 100's of £'s or hours and hours of repetitive grinding, but that is just me.
At the other end we have those who want to dominate the game, dominate other players, dominate its resources and areas and have no time for 'care bear' sensibilities such as fair play. They will RT around caves looking for players and even if that player goes somewhere else they will continue to RT around to again find them, either to try to make them drop or bully them out of an area.
The two views are diametrically opposed, the latter being the antithesis of how I play a game and would have overwhelming bearing on the type of guild I would chose. I accept that I probably sit in a guild that is somewhat towards the middle, I would argue that most of Doom are very firmly to one side.
You may hint (and please correct me if I am wrong) that those who fall into the latter category of playstyle have quit and will quit if they are prevented from achieving their aims.
I would state that if certain players (who are barely reined in as it is) are given carte blanche to do whatever they like then this will not be a server I would like to play any more. Also, I would suggest we have lost players due to their type of play style; I came very close myself when a certain player caused me lose an item I had put gg into. The thought does go through ones mind 'how is this fair' and 'what is the point?'
Wars are merely a way of condensing play into a smaller area, with a defined aim and timescale. The above 'playing styles' have to fit within these confines.
GM did try to address some of the issues by introducing more bound kit but this doesn't seem popular with people (I personally have no problem with it other than with those who moan about bound kit then wear bound kit!)
Maybe the solution is for the guild that feels disadvantaged to ally? Also, Doom show a full roster of 40 players. If they are all alts or not playing, then time for some recruitment? I shudder when I type this but if Doom consisted of 40 active players of a type like 'Vic' or 'North' there would be no need to change anything. I feel that guild would do very well indeed in wars. Even with allying.
In short, I don't think GM will (or should) prevent guilds allying, it is not an 'unnatural thing' there are many precedents in games and real life where people will temporarily combine to achieve a common aim.