Guild Membership cap.

[Gehere 8]

A bird told me that Nostalrius has a character limit of 321 members in their Guilds..

 

Is there any way we can get this increased?

 

If things are looking as good as they are - population-wise - Guilds may need to be able to holster more people and their alts.

 

 

Yes/No?

[Arquestan 0]

I second this emotion.

[criboee 1]

Nostalrius wants to keep everything as genuine as possible so if member cap was 321 on retail they gonna keep it same

[Enulla 0]

I'd actually prefer it to be kept at the cap it currently is. I'd prefer a larger diversity of guilds, rather than a few massive ones swallowing up everyone.

[Overtime 6]

I recall that too big guild can crash the server.

[Gehere 8]

I honestly can't remember the member cap, on Vanilla Retail servers, back in 04-06..     but I think 321 wasn't it.

 

The number 500 comes to mind though..

[Overtime 6]

I have faint memory that Nostalrius had 650 cap but it caused issues.

[Storfan 24]

Quality > Quantity.

 

Also lets not forget. If it aint blizzlike, then it aint for us.

[dvergur 0]

Quality > Quantity.

 

Also lets not forget. If it aint blizzlike, then it aint for us.

Gonna bring out the mandatory "population > 2500" isn't Blizzlike".

 

This being the case, we're going to need to consider whether the change brings a Blizzlike experience rather than being pedantically Blizzlike.

 

I don't really have an opinion on the guild cap but we need to end the "MUH BLIZZLIKE!" meme and focus on the experience.

[Shayss 43]

Gonna bring out the mandatory "population > 2500" isn't Blizzlike".

 

This being the case, we're going to need to consider whether the change brings a Blizzlike experience rather than being pedantically Blizzlike.

 

I don't really have an opinion on the guild cap but we need to end the "MUH BLIZZLIKE!" meme and focus on the experience.

 

Don't even think about starting your campaign in this thread too.

 

If you don't like how it is ------------> Retail.

[Xadaver 0]

I honestly can't remember the member cap, on Vanilla Retail servers, back in 04-06..     but I think 321 wasn't it.

 

The number 500 comes to mind though..

This was my recollection as well.

[cowking 5]

i hope we get blizzlike lagg for those old school feels on eu Laggfeather realm

[Storfan 24]

Gonna bring out the mandatory "population > 2500" isn't Blizzlike".

 

This being the case, we're going to need to consider whether the change brings a Blizzlike experience rather than being pedantically Blizzlike.

 

I don't really have an opinion on the guild cap but we need to end the "MUH BLIZZLIKE!" meme and focus on the experience.

 

I was only refering to guild member-cap, not server population cap which is a whole other situation. Server-caps in vanilla was due to constraints on hardware and software that we dont have anymore. I think guild member-cap was to make guilds more managable. I want a huge population.

[Gehere 8]

I was only refering to guild member-cap, not server population cap which is a whole other situation. Server-caps in vanilla was due to constraints on hardware and software that we dont have anymore. I think guild member-cap was to make guilds more managable. I want a huge population.

 

That's just it.

 

The population on "our" servers EXCEED old Blizzard servers, by a good solid amount of accounts.

 

We have more people playing, but can have less of them in our Guilds.   That's off.

 

Why not just bring it upwards a notch?    Would 500 people in Guilds, ruin your experience?   Considering you're already lower than what Blizz-like is supposed to be.

[SpottedCow 2]

I was only refering to guild member-cap, not server population cap which is a whole other situation. Server-caps in vanilla was due to constraints on hardware and software that we dont have anymore. I think guild member-cap was to make guilds more managable. I want a huge population.

 

Yes, but whether or not we have those hardware and software limitations, the game was balanced around those caps, which is why Nost had to introduce several un-Blizzlike workarounds when they lifted that cap, like dynamic respawns and clustering.  Personally, I found the dynamic respawns and the phasing (especially in Un'Goro and Badlands) to be a huge detriment to gameplay.

You can't say "all the things Blizzlike!!!  Except for this one thing where I like it better when it's not Blizzlike!!!"  The arguments against a raise in the cap seem specious at best.  Of course, I can't see why it's needed; the guild I was running with on the PvE server had 2 raid groups plus associated alts and we managed just fine with what was available.  But still, I can't see what it hurts.

[Gehere 8]

Bump.

 

 

Is it possible to get a comment on this, from an official?

[Badtank 0]

Holy фекал dont run a garbage zerg guild and this won't be a problem. Entitled had three raid teams and still had room. Stop.

Edited December 16, 2016 by Badtank

[Alexensual 12]

321 is definitely the cap number. IIRC they can not increase it due to limitations within the game.

[Crowley 8]

Guild cap should be relative to Population cap.  So if these servers are going over "Blizz-like" server caps, then Guild cap shoud as well.