Since this place as a little bit more members now and will be anticipating even greater numbers in the next few months, will we reestablish the old legions? I say if we're going to do this guys, it better be now, before everything goes to disarray. What do you people think?
Yes or no?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I like the life I lived, because I went from negative to positive.
You know very well who you are, don't let them hold you down, reach for the stars.
If you read the various disbanding threads, they said the legions would infact be reinstated when there were enough numbers in order forthem to work to their full potential.
I am not bringing back 10 Legions and only having 2 oe 3 people in each one like we had before, I rather 2 or 3 with 10 or 12 people in each.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange. In those days, we really believed that to be the world's one, and only, truth.
I gotta say, even as a decently well-ranking member of SICK, I'm all for the few leaders rest followers sorta guilds. They're simple and easier to manage than a whole whack of inactive sub-guilds. Let's not make this any more complicated than it is now.
I vote that we should leave the legions out of it, at least for now. Its kind of jumping too far ahead at the moment. Leave legions for the future when we really get lots of members and have a game to actually play.
Also, the Legions would probably change depending on the design of Diablo III. Certain clan options could be implemented to the game, so if we jump too far ahead at organising ourselves we would likely have to just reorganise again.
At the moment its just fantasising, but we want to have a good guild/clan happening before DIII is released, and organisations aren't as strong if they are spread too far apart.
I gotta say, even as a decently well-ranking member of SICK, I'm all for the few leaders rest followers sorta guilds. They're simple and easier to manage than a whole whack of inactive sub-guilds. Let's not make this any more complicated than it is now.
Thats why I suggest if we do make subguilds in the future we should make them more fluid and interchangeable that way if we lose members we could always get rid of "squad whiskey" and disperse its members amongst the rest, bolstering their numbers.
just out of curiosity, why do we call it a guild and not a clan?
Because of the games played. Medieval Fantasy RPGs are primarily filled with guilds. FPSs are filled with Clans.
Diablo is, for lack of a better description in relation to online groupings, a Medieval Fantasy RPG.
Also you have thing's like a Fighter's Guild,
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange. In those days, we really believed that to be the world's one, and only, truth.
I say that we do not reform the legions because of the lack of numbers, I say we just reform the Guild under our on ruler and decide upon a new game to play. Many of the members do not even play D2 and I would think that we should choose a new game to reform our Guild anew.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Dream as if you'll live forever, and live as if you'll die today. "James Dean"
We tried that multiple times. It seems Diablo III is the only thing that will instill loyalty and a sense of brotherhood. Or possibly a Diablo MMO. Which ever comes first.
Structurely, I see no flaw to the guild. Total numbers, we are, well we stink out loud. We can't keep people around long enough.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
-Humankind cannot gain anything without first giving something in return. To obtain, something of equal value must be lost. That is alchemy's First Law of Equivalent Exchange. In those days, we really believed that to be the world's one, and only, truth.
Yes or no?
To find the truth, you must risk everything.
KISS
keep is simple stupid - michael scott, dunder mifflin
I am not bringing back 10 Legions and only having 2 oe 3 people in each one like we had before, I rather 2 or 3 with 10 or 12 people in each.
Squad Alpha
Squad Beta
Squad Charlie
Squad Delta......
something to that effect.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
Also, the Legions would probably change depending on the design of Diablo III. Certain clan options could be implemented to the game, so if we jump too far ahead at organising ourselves we would likely have to just reorganise again.
At the moment its just fantasising, but we want to have a good guild/clan happening before DIII is released, and organisations aren't as strong if they are spread too far apart.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
Because of the games played. Medieval Fantasy RPGs are primarily filled with guilds. FPSs are filled with Clans.
Diablo is, for lack of a better description in relation to online groupings, a Medieval Fantasy RPG.
Also you have thing's like a Fighter's Guild,
Structurely, I see no flaw to the guild. Total numbers, we are, well we stink out loud. We can't keep people around long enough.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
Fuck you, I'm a dragon.
working my way up to 100+ posts.