And on the forums there is more activity which is never bad!

When will the high guild rank and mascot features be available? Harvest Moon is eligible for both due to its pantheon standings, yet both are listed as unavailable.

Looks like they are available now, Bellatrixie. And woot, no mention of the dreaded top 20 pantheon requirements.

The top 20 pantheon requirements (and the prophet requirement) are still there for me.

Here is the thing it is not easy, but a lot of the honored achievements in this game are not easy. Getting the total amount to retire is not easy. None of these things are impossible but if it was meant to be easy it would be and everyone to do it. But I personally think that a guild achievement like this should not be easy.

Adding to what NaturalBlondChick said – the fact that so many of the main/big guilds managed to pull it off makes me a heck of a lot less comfortable saying it can’t be done/it’s not fair. We just gotta work for it, that’s all.

Good luck to all elected leaders out there. Congrats and enjoy your new fun!

Updating my previous post, it looks like anyone but the guild leadeer still sees “A guild can select a Godville monster as its totem once it reaches Top-20 in the pantheon of Duelery” whereas the guild leader gets “Here a guild leader can designate a Godville monster to be the guild’s totem. A totem monster can be picked from the regular Godville monsters (not strong monsters or bosses) and it can’t be changed until the next elections”.

I wonder if all guild leaders see the same thing but it has no effect unless they’re in the top 20, or if leaders of guilds not in the top 20 see something else?

God of Monsters as a leader of a non-elegible guild, I can confirm that if the guild is not elegible, the leader sees the same as non-leaders normally do.

My point was not that it’s too difficult for a large guild to elect a leader. My point was that the current system does not enable competition or rival campaigns in large guilds. Rather it ensures that such a guild can only succeed if members sportingly agree to vote for one specific candidate, regardless of whom they would actually like to support. Based on the dev’s description above, this is not how the new feature was intended to work.

The new system makes the GC much more fun!

Thanks for that, Brinjal. I’m hoping OMG will drop in and out of the top 20 Popularity over the next few days so I can see what effect a change in Top 20 ranking has on the High-level Rank setting.

To take pressure off this Blog thread I have created a Guild Leader page on the GodWiki that can be updated with the latest info as we explore the new features. (I hope that link works – the Blog is sometimes a bit funny about links, and we can’t edit our comments once posted – but if not just search the wiki for “Guild Leader” and the page should pop up.)

I am really impressed by all the creativity that is bursting forth! I know this hasn’t been an easy change for everybody but the results have been astounding. I just hope the devs can work out the kinks so that everyone can enjoy it!

The Dinner for One guild has decided not to elect a leader for two reasons:

1. Not enough active members to meet the threshold.

2. Our guild has been doing fine without one.

Thank you

I can confirm that five prophets are indeed required to set a High-level Title, even though the game made the option available to Order of the Monster Gods (presumably because we were top 20 in Popularity). It was not until I clicked “Set” that the game told me we needed 5 prophets. OK, I sort of expected that but it’s poor design.

The game should not offer this option if for any reason a guild does not currently qualify to set High-level Title. The message “A guild can set its own high-level guild rank if it has at least five prophets and it reaches Top-20 in the Popularity pantheon” should be displayed instead.

Our guild held a vote on our Totem Monster but the monster chosen by popular vote was rejected by the game. There was no way for us to check in advance that the nominated monsters were acceptable.

The error message for setting for totem monster is actively user-hostile. In trying to set a monster, whether there is a typographical error or the monster is a “strong” monster or another guild has already chosen it, the same message is displayed. Good luck guessing what the actual problem is!

The fact that the error message is only displayed once you confirm that you want to use this monster is an additional issue.

Since the field is free text and “fat fingers” and “auto-carrot” are common problems, adding some context to the error would help, for example “Monster not found (check spelling)”, “Monster is not a regular monster”, or “Another guild has already chosen this monster”.

I love it how the guild totem monster rewards the hero when s/he meets it.

Also, the more I think about it, the more I agree with Brinjal’s idea of making it so 35% of eligible members need to vote in total (I.e. The votes could be split in any way and they needn’t vote for one specific candidate) before a winner can be chosen. Maybe it could even be a little higher, like 40%. But changing the requirement this way would not have the advantage of not limiting competition and rival campaigns in large guilds the way the present system does, while ensuring that a winner could only be chosen if a lot of interest is shown in actually having one, and members can be persuaded to make the effort.

the good/ best thing about these new ‘guild enhancements, is that overall, whoever is ’in power’, will truly have little power at all. Like the Queen Mum, just a figurehead adored by everyone but welding little true power. (As it stands now) The worst thing about these new ‘guild enhancements’ is that it has broken the peace of GV, as a whole, and has also brought out the worst in a lot of us. For some guilds, it is applicable and beneficial. For some guilds, it is detrimental. A monumental move by the developers. Over time, it will evolve and ‘guild enhancements’ will continue to be added

I echo Syrocko and Brinjal on having that be the minimum votes cast, but then the majority of those wins. A group of us are doing a huge “Get Out the Vote” campaign in Blue Feather, but we also have a couple viable candidates in the running. Even if we get 200 people to vote, and they’re split between even just the top two candidates - we won’t hit our 111 votes needed. I know that’s how this first election is happening, and I know it can be done, and I’m hoping we can do it too. This is just for future elections.

I would much prefer allowing individual votes to matter, rather than some subgroup getting to decide “This is who you will back.” Even with the idea of having everyone shift their votes on the last day to the top candidate - that’s a lot more communication (“Thanks for voting, now go do it again”) that needs to be done with players who may or may not be that invested in the process.

Thank you, devs, for adding a countdown clock so leaders know when to change the guild council topic! I love it!

We are a new guild with 28 members but nobody ranked is higher than Follower. I don’t think we should be seeing this:

Registration is open This week is a nomination week. Any guild member with a rank of hierarch or higher can nominate themselves to be a guild leader. Healthy debates in the Guild Council are welcomed.

This is a bug. Since we have no Hierarchs, nobody can nominate. Since we have no Cardinals (let alone 5 Cardinals), nobody can vote. Why confuse us with stuff that we can’t do anything about?