Guilds Remove Rule 18 Or Enforce It +98

Mods, please enforce this rule. If this rule isn't going to be enforced, then it should be removed. Many guilds are using a ridiculous amount of subs right now.

 

Rules that aren’t enforced aren’t rules. They should be removed or edited to prevent confusion and false fear. We’ve noticed a spike in Sub guilds and have come to question whether this rule should even exist or not. Either update this or learn to enforce the rules you created. If you can’t enforce it, then remove it entirely so people know which side the mods are taking.

 

See typically I wouldn't mind sub-guilds they add strats to the game and wars in general (I do have subs tho I don't use all of them at once.)
I just don't get how using 7-8 sub guilds is normal or even allowed at this point how is this any different from when HackForums [Hax] owned the map and used sub-guilds to maintain it.

 

The lack of action concerning this rule leads to guilds with a number of sub-guilds that can match a mega-alliance and keep up with their territories while under seige on all sides, which is both unfair and ignorant.

 

The last time I saw this rule challenged, I was given the excuse from a certain moderator that an "edit of the rule made by JPresent renders the cdurrent rule 18 void." First off, JP isnt here anymore, second, his statement was vague and not properly documented; it was made in a "feeder clarification" post that got archived and closed for becoming an all-out chaos and flame war. The rule 18 as it stands on the "official wynncraft game and forum rules" is being crapped on right now, and it should be the version of the rule that is enforced. Players are expected to abide by and reference those "official rules" when behaving on the server or reporting inappropriate behavior of other users.

It has been over half a year since a simple request to update the Rule18 to whatever its current form even is by the retired JP. it doesnt take half a year to edit a forum post. Do something about this, to make sure that all guilds will adhere to proper policy when defendingtheir lands onthis game, or create a lack thereof as requested in the forum post and remove it, so that guilds will be on equal ground for rights. It would be better to just enforce it because this direct subguild-to-mainguild feed tactic is extremely one-sided benefit in favor of the megaguilds. I have seen some of the offending guilds' own members scorn these tactics.

We are not fishing for ways to compete. Rather, we are trying to hold the staff team accountable for negligence of a rule they created and refuse to enforce, update, or abolish, and any of those 3 options are preferable to negligence.

 

I mean a mod has already answered

 

If it's a rule that isn't being enforced, it's not a proper rule. This might sound like gatekeeping, but it's most likely the truth. Either the staff should remove it entirely, or actually enforce it. I support a removal for now.

 

This a huge problem, and the moderation team has to do something about it. Monopoly was never good for the community, neither in economy, neither in any other fields. It is ruining the whole warring system if one guild can rule the whole map (or a very significant part of it), even if 10 or 20 big guilds are standing in their way. All they have to do is creating subguilds... Please, do something.

 

However, what we’ve noticed is that this mod is bias and is with guilds who support this. I think it would be better if we could get an unbiased mod response, otherwise I claim it as invalid. If they think the same thing the I understand, otherwise, it’s just unfair

 

Maximi's response to me doesn't address why this rule is still listed among the other rules. If the mods refuse to enforce it because of fancy wording and wily reasoning then why is it still a rule?

 

While I do agree that the rule should definitely be updated, I believe that the main issue is the guild system as a whole.
If subs in all forms were banned, any two guilds with 3+ members warring could beat a single one with say 100 in war, this way a guild is at least rewarded for having enough members & coordination to split into multiple, it's not like making a sub magically comes with the players to manage it. The guild update was supposed to change that, but alas we'll have to exercise a bit more patience.

 

It still doesnt change that a mod has already answered this - no matter the guild they are still a mod and to blame them of bias is absurd

 

I feel like the "Definition of a subguild" that Maximi says cannot be drawn, is pretyty clear if it's Made in the middle of the host guild getting raided, and that host guild sending their own warrers into it. Furthermore, what in the case that direct proof exists of a subguild being a subguild? I have multitude of proof showing this. @Ayn4rch @Maximi777

Nonetheless, why not just delete the role18, or update the "official game and forum rules" thread to fit the new definition?

 

Unfortunately, mods are also human (except Toy but he's gone) and we can't expect them to be perfect.

 

In normal laws m, there’s reasons juries are meant to be unbiased. People are people, and those who have power usually use it to help their friends and hurt their enemies. It’s human nature, power create corruption and no one is an exception, not even us.

 

Actually I have an idea. Why not change the guilds as a whole? Why don't let a guild to attack multiple territories at the same time? So it is based on the number of members, but we don't have to create 1 million subguilds with 3 members each to be powerful enough.

 

A quite simple solution would be to increase the wars a guild can do at the same time, which would result into subguilds being useless and give bigger guilds with more active players some strenght back.
Right now it seems like bigger guild are bottlenecked as 5 people can be in a war at the same time they still are bound to respawn timers so if 2 smaller guilds attack at the same time with 1 player each the smaller guild will slowly take over which seems quite unfair tbh.

Active war count could be based on: Guild lvl - Active Players - owned Territory (wouldnt recomment this option tho)

 

Laughable
That's like
The same thing they said over half a year ago
This won't satisfy anyone here and thus this conversation isn't over
It's completely ridiculous that one guild can just hop into 10 subs and defeat literally everyone
Actually wondering rn why you're not just taking over the map right away the same way as Hax did 2 years ago which led to this rule even existing in the first place
Fox is 100% breaking this rule, meaning Kingdom of Foxes is a cheating guild
Even if Maxi is saying it's not enforced, the rule is still there in the rules thread and must be obeyed

 

NO, no no oh ogds allowing guilds to attack multiple palces at the same time would make things even worse, even more unfair and in favor of the megaguilds, and also cuased much more strain on the server resources. There is no "alternative suggestion" to make the situation fairer, rather all the ones I see here would make it even worse and more controversial. Actaul full allied guilds should be relied upon for defense rather than subguild abuse anyways.

Also i just thought of a fantabulous question: If the staff team could never really decide on what the identity of a subguild is, why was there ever a rule (18) made about them in the first place??

 

Is it fair now, that if you're a big guild, you can split your members into 3 ppl groups, and wipe out everyone from the map? I would rather give the opportunity for multiple wars at the same time. And yes, if you're a small guild, you shouldn't attack bigger ones. It's how life works. If you're Luxembourg, you shouldn't attack Russia, because you'll be destroyed.