Back to Topic Index
A Fair Trade?
By Chimpy on 16/05/2009
So I've been pondering about it and suggesting this for awhile, but now that we will most likely be going to 100+, I'd like to market this more.
I think that a new system where we have 100+ TG, and 105+ to be full member will be the most beneficial and equal trade off. This way the noobs can still be in the clan, and we can still have a high combat average and higher req to join that is appealing to the higher levels and experienced warrers.
Of course in doing this we would have to extend the trial period by what...2 weeks maybe? Not a big deal.And I guess we'd have to scrap trial Guardian altogether but I think it would be for the best. There would also be an activity requirement to fulfill for the TG's.
There are also otehr things we'd need, like FA managers, a seperate FA list, etc etc, but it is all easily worked out. (well, sorta 
)
So that's about it, please give this some serious thought, I think this would be WAY better than 100+ reqs.
Discuss!
I think that a new system where we have 100+ TG, and 105+ to be full member will be the most beneficial and equal trade off. This way the noobs can still be in the clan, and we can still have a high combat average and higher req to join that is appealing to the higher levels and experienced warrers.
Of course in doing this we would have to extend the trial period by what...2 weeks maybe? Not a big deal.
)So that's about it, please give this some serious thought, I think this would be WAY better than 100+ reqs.
Discuss!
By Kyle on 16/05/2009
I prefer the trial guardian system :c
By Quikdrawjoe on 16/05/2009
NH
By Chimpy on 16/05/2009
| QUOTE (Darth Magul @ May 16, 2009 12:12 pm) |
| I prefer the trial guardian system :c |
OH well idc if we still do TG but as long as it is 100+ for TG and 105+ full member I'm a happy chimp
By George on 16/05/2009
I agree with Kyle, the trial guardian system atm is really good and I don't think it needs this.
Plus 5 cmb levels even at lvl 100 is quite a lot for a trial period....
Plus 5 cmb levels even at lvl 100 is quite a lot for a trial period....
By Chimpy on 16/05/2009
| QUOTE (Gorgemaster @ May 16, 2009 12:15 pm) |
| I agree with Kyle, the trial guardian system atm is really good and I don't think it needs this. Plus 5 cmb levels even at lvl 100 is quite a lot for a trial period.... |
If they really want in, they can do it (I mean if we know tey're trying hard we can obviously be a little lenient with them, cause hell we're lenient with some trials that aren't even trying)
edit: and read my reply to kyle about the TG thing.
By DZ on 16/05/2009
WG has always gone against the Future Applicant system as there are pro's and con's to both. I could be mistaken but I believe it was because back when RAW was active and meant something, we would be able to add 'Trial Guardians' to our memberlist and have them participate as technically they were full members of the clan (even though they were going through a trial period)
I wouldn't mind a FA system but I doubt we will ever get one.
I wouldn't mind a FA system but I doubt we will ever get one.
By George on 16/05/2009
Also if we do the FA thing, that just makes us like any other clan.
We're unique in the trial guardian thing.
We're unique in the trial guardian thing.
By Chimpy on 16/05/2009
| QUOTE (Darkzero101 @ May 16, 2009 12:19 pm) |
| WG has always gone against the Future Applicant system as there are pro's and con's to both. I could be mistaken but I believe it was because back when RAW was active and meant something, we would be able to add 'Trial Guardians' to our memberlist and have them participate as technically they were full members of the clan (even though they were going through a trial period) I wouldn't mind a FA system but I doubt we will ever get one. |
I changed it to where we keep the trial system but it's still 100+ for TG and 105+ for full member.
edit: sorry DZ ffs
By Angus0000 on 16/05/2009
I think it'd be a bad idea to implement something like this. It seems to me the major selling point of WG is that it has a great community, and it would be backwards to send lower levelled newcomers the message that they are lesser members because of their combat level.
By Chimpy on 16/05/2009
| QUOTE (Angus0000 @ May 16, 2009 03:18 pm) |
| I think it'd be a bad idea to implement something like this. It seems to me the major selling point of WG is that it has a great community, and it would be backwards to send lower levelled newcomers the message that they are lesser members because of their combat level. |
They're not lesser members...we would still have the Trial system, just wi ht105+ for full member, not much change.
By Angus0000 on 16/05/2009
| QUOTE (Chimp Guy0 @ May 16, 2009 04:23 pm) | ||
They're not lesser members...we would still have the Trial system, just wi ht105+ for full member, not much change. |
That's what we have now...
By Chimpy on 16/05/2009
| QUOTE (Angus0000 @ May 16, 2009 04:12 pm) | ||||
That's what we have now... |
No I meant with 100+ to be Trial Guardian silly
By Nick on 16/05/2009
I know for sure that I wouldn't be able to make 5 combat levels in a month, but that is me. 
Lower to stakes to 2 or 3, and/or increase the trial guardian requirement and then I would agree a bit more with what you are proposing.
Creating a FA system would not make us unique. If levels were to change, then yeah, I think it would be better. But remember we had the system in the past where 102 was required for graduation and you only had to be 100 to apply.
Lower to stakes to 2 or 3, and/or increase the trial guardian requirement and then I would agree a bit more with what you are proposing.
Creating a FA system would not make us unique. If levels were to change, then yeah, I think it would be better. But remember we had the system in the past where 102 was required for graduation and you only had to be 100 to apply.
By Chimpy on 17/05/2009
| QUOTE (Lefty2802 @ May 16, 2009 06:53 pm) |
| I know for sure that I wouldn't be able to make 5 combat levels in a month, but that is me. Lower to stakes to 2 or 3, and/or increase the trial guardian requirement and then I would agree a bit more with what you are proposing. Creating a FA system would not make us unique. If levels were to change, then yeah, I think it would be better. But remember we had the system in the past where 102 was required for graduation and you only had to be 100 to apply. |
If you read my post I suggested an extended trial period by 2-4 weeks
. By Indivi2you on 17/05/2009
It would make it like an FA system, which is NOT what we want.
By Chimpy on 17/05/2009
| QUOTE (Indivi2you @ May 16, 2009 07:07 pm) |
| It would make it like an FA system, which is NOT what we want. |
We had it before with a shorter trial period and lower reqs, what's the difference besides what I stated?
By ArSeNaLfAn32 on 17/05/2009
It wouldn't be hard to do this. Maybe like 100 to intro, 102 to App, 105 to graduate, though?
By Nick on 17/05/2009
| QUOTE (Arsenalfan32 @ May 17, 2009 02:20 pm) |
| It wouldn't be hard to do this. Maybe like 100 to intro, 102 to App, 105 to graduate, though? |
So in 3 days people are expected to get 2 combat levels if they intro at 100?
There shouldn't be a requirement to intro.
By Chimpy on 18/05/2009
| QUOTE (Lefty2802 @ May 17, 2009 02:21 pm) | ||
So in 3 days people are expected to get 2 combat levels if they intro at 100? There shouldn't be a requirement to intro. |
Yeah Glenn, Gotta agree with Lefty there
. Just extend the trial period tbh. Back to Topic Index