Elaboration on the 'Guild' System..

[genbor]

 If more people want this system than I'll just state it: The Guild Master shouldn't be kicked out of the Guild because he lost. He gets punished enough by being Demoted. And being in the Guild for a certain amount of days is not enough for someone to challenge the Guild Master. Like I said, he should contribute the same amount or more to the Guild as the Guild Master so far has. That could mean coins, organizing Guild events etc., depending on how the Guild System will be like.

 Why do I say this? Because a person must be active in the Guild to be able to even dream about challenging the current Guild Master. How so? Imagine a guy who just joins the Guild, gets all of it's benefits, but doesn't contribute at all to it and just exists within the Guild. That inactive member wouldn't be chosen anyway since nobody would want him, but he still shouldn't have the right to challenge the Guild Master's authority. This is not a barbarian tribe where the strongest becomes chief, even if he is as dumb as they come.

 So if people would like the Challenge Guild Master option, I have to say:

- First, contribute the same or more amount to the Guild as the current Guild Master (nothing new there)
- Be chosen as a candidate by the Guild Members. (each guild member can vote once)
- And there should be a specific time of Guild Elections: a time where, if the current Guild Master
wishes to keep his post, should be able to prove his worth and not just the new candidate(s)

 I still oppose this idea, but like I said, if more people want it, than it should be a little bit more organized. It would prevent a nameless new Recruit from being elected as a Guild Master (just for the fun of it), and would prevent people who weren't entirely serious about the role itself, but just wanted the name and the status it brought with it.
                                                                              Cheers, Genbor

[Wire]

I guess the PU team will decide this in the end.

[Jerry]

I would prefer it be something like official/unofficial ranking within the guild, so that only designated members can move forward to decide of the ownership of the guild, and decide whether or not to open votes and such in case the guild founder needs to be temporarily/permanently switched and things like that.

Pokemon battles are many a times based on luck and one match does not always mean that the winner is the best player. There's the element of luck which should also be considered.

But then, the easiest thing to do remains to quit the guild and form another.

[Wire]

Best 2 out of 3?

[Frenchfry]

Guilds = Monarchy. If you don't like your guild or leader, leave.

/thread

[LeoReborn]

not really the only point of this thread.
Theres more than just that

[Wyrdism]

If that's the case, I would say one of these:
1) the guild disbands after the Leader is absent after 6 Months
or
2) The Highest Contributor not including the Leader takes the role of Leader after 6 months..

The option of a coleader may also give that person the same abilities and authority as the actual leader. The leader must be inactive for 30, 60, 90 or however many days before the co-leader can take over as leader.

About the cities idea. This can be an automated system instance that's paid for ingame. After a period of time, if not used, it's deleted.

If challenging the leader for ownership really is necessary, then have the tournament style-takeover automated with an NPC. The 4 or 8 people that would play the tourney must be decided by other members of the guild. After a maximum of 8 people signed up for the takeover-tournament and another wants to join, the first 8 to sign up at NPC will get the chance.

This means if lesser players sign up then they're easily dominated and booted from the tournament. Whoever wins the tournament and if they beat the current leader, there may be a limited time vote at the guild NPC for the members of the tournament to vote if they approve the new leader.

If not that, then only people that have contributed a certain amount close to what the guild leader has may enter the takeover-tournament to challenge him.

[LeoReborn]

I like the Idea of a second in command.

[genbor]

Co-Guild Leaders exist elsewhere too so I guess that's plausible.

[deadae]

Im sorry i havent read all the post but as elemental elite`s creator i did not chose chad to lead the guild because of his prowess in battles.i dont think the guild leader in apokemon game should be determind by strength since a horrible trainer could become leader because he has all the right counter against someone few others could beat. I dont think leaders should just fight for their position there should be a test of something important and bfore that the guild should vote weather or not a person is worthy to tkae on the leader

[Noah_Road]

Im sorry i havent read all the post but as elemental elite`s creator i did not chose chad to lead the guild because of his prowess in battles.i dont think the guild leader in apokemon game should be determind by strength since a horrible trainer could become leader because he has all the right counter against someone few others could beat. I dont think leaders should just fight for their position there should be a test of something important and bfore that the guild should vote weather or not a person is worthy to tkae on the leader

Deadae, I think you missed the point of this post lol. It also sounds like you're trying to say that you created EE...

[Monzta]

She didn't? Didn't she start the 17 trainers thingy?

[Bing]

Im sorry i havent read all the post but as elemental elite`s creator i did not chose chad to lead the guild because of his prowess in battles.i dont think the guild leader in apokemon game should be determind by strength since a horrible trainer could become leader because he has all the right counter against someone few others could beat. I dont think leaders should just fight for their position there should be a test of something important and bfore that the guild should vote weather or not a person is worthy to tkae on the leader

Deadae, I think you missed the point of this post lol. It also sounds like you're trying to say that you created EE...

Wasn't the EE started by chad... and that's why he's the leader.  If I'm wrong correct me.

[Jerry]

No, deadae resigned his post when she thought it wasn't going to work. And now is trying to justify her leave... really people nowadays...

[deadae]

uh ur all wrong i never thought they wouldnt work i had to go to prison and i gave chad leadership that is all

shoot i even know the member order
deadae
chad29
roloc
stikman- but he is in prison now
these were the only four members of EE back when we hadnt voted on the name yet
the last thing i did was name the guild and hand it over to chad29 in case the game started i vanished because of prison blah but who cares im just saying aleader shouldnt fight for his position in a glorified rock paper scizzors game(no disrespect meant toward the pokemon games)