Super Catanian
Well-Known Member
After a proposal came up asking to issue temporary Guild rights, my response got me thinking a bit. What are some ways to run a Guild? Forge of Empires is a game about, well, forging your empire. Real life "empires" have different forms of government, each with their own advantages and flaws.
A Guild is a place where many people come together to try to achieve a common goal (usually), meaning that there must be some sort of authority, or government, needed to keep it stable (most of the time, anyways). Since there are many forms of government, Guild Founders will have to choose wisely on how to run their Guild, in order to keep it's members happy and cooperating well.
Below will be a list of different forms of government, and how they can influence on a Guild. Obviously, this list is not complete, and I will need your help to add more to it and expand it. Furthermore, some governments might not be able to be reflected fully due to the "limitations" of a Guild. It's also worth considering that many of these are very similar to each other, and a Guild might not be able to reflect these differences fully.
Monarchy
This is a Guild in which one single player has the role of Founder. Everyone else has no rights. This Founder is responsible for every single major action that takes place in the Guild, such as unlocking new Difficulties for GE, placing Siege Armies, managing the Guild Forum, and more. This is a huge responsibility, and monarchs can have a pretty hard time dealing with it. The other members might not be happy with this placement of power, seeing as how they have no say in these things.
There's also a constitutional monarchy, meaning that there are written rules that even the Founder has to abide to. These laws have to be enforced, meaning that the Founder does not have truly absolute authority, but shares a small portion with someone else.
Oligarchy
This is similar to a monarchy, but involves multiple Founders that, together, have absolute power over the Guild. This can be a bit risky, as you must select your co-Founders wisely. Doing so lightens the load on yourself a bit, since now you have fellow Guild members to help you carry the Guild's activities. This can be similar to the Aristocracy that I will mention below, but there is a difference.
A variation of this oligarchy would be a triumvirate, with three individuals holding absolute power.
Aristocracy
In this Guild, power is distributed among the wealthiest of players, meaning players with larger, more advanced cities. These could even be determined by whoever contributes the most to the Guild's wealth (e.g., donating Goods to the Guild Treasury often). Wealthier ones will be Founders, less wealthy ones might have Leader rights, and the lowest players will be "peasants", with little to no rights. In my opinion, this is a pretty good way of running a Guild, since wealthy players have probably been around longer and know a lot about playing the game in the best way possible.
Meritocracy
In my opinion, this is one of the best ways to run a Guild. It divides power among those players that are worthy, meaning that they have proved themselves to the Founder. I'm talking about those who participate in the Guild Expedition often, or get involved often in the Guild matters. This shows that they are ready to take on more responsibilities. Those that are worthy of obtaining those rights will receive them by the Founder, according to their ability. It doesn't necessarily have to do with their wealth or with their relationship with the Founder.
Anarchy
Probably one of the worst ways to run a Guild. I, personally, have never seen it happen in real life so far. Basically, all members have Founder rights. Since they all have the same rights, there is no sense of authority, since anyone can do anything, and it ends up being chaos most of the time.
Stratocracy
This is a type of government that is "ruled" by military chiefs. This is not a dictatorship or any other form of government. It involved military positions being so wired into the government that they are treated as the same, legally speaking. This could be seen as a sort of meritocracy, since these governments typically have military generals (GvG fighters) as people with authority, and everything is determined by means of military power rather than wealth. This could be common in some GvG Guilds, as their military power allows them to hold sectors. Even some players in these Guilds have titles that correspond to their positions and responsibilities in the GvG Continent Map, and perhaps their rights are also involved as well.
Obviously, this list is still a work in process, and it will take a while for me to complete it. I am looking forward to your comments on things that I will add. Thanks!
A Guild is a place where many people come together to try to achieve a common goal (usually), meaning that there must be some sort of authority, or government, needed to keep it stable (most of the time, anyways). Since there are many forms of government, Guild Founders will have to choose wisely on how to run their Guild, in order to keep it's members happy and cooperating well.
Below will be a list of different forms of government, and how they can influence on a Guild. Obviously, this list is not complete, and I will need your help to add more to it and expand it. Furthermore, some governments might not be able to be reflected fully due to the "limitations" of a Guild. It's also worth considering that many of these are very similar to each other, and a Guild might not be able to reflect these differences fully.
Monarchy
This is a Guild in which one single player has the role of Founder. Everyone else has no rights. This Founder is responsible for every single major action that takes place in the Guild, such as unlocking new Difficulties for GE, placing Siege Armies, managing the Guild Forum, and more. This is a huge responsibility, and monarchs can have a pretty hard time dealing with it. The other members might not be happy with this placement of power, seeing as how they have no say in these things.
There's also a constitutional monarchy, meaning that there are written rules that even the Founder has to abide to. These laws have to be enforced, meaning that the Founder does not have truly absolute authority, but shares a small portion with someone else.
Oligarchy
This is similar to a monarchy, but involves multiple Founders that, together, have absolute power over the Guild. This can be a bit risky, as you must select your co-Founders wisely. Doing so lightens the load on yourself a bit, since now you have fellow Guild members to help you carry the Guild's activities. This can be similar to the Aristocracy that I will mention below, but there is a difference.
It is possible that a Founder might invite a friend of theirs to start playing FoE. As soon as that player unlocks Guilds and finally joins it, the Founder is thinking to themselves, "This person is a low level player. But, they are my friends IRL. Might as well give them Founders rights; I know that they're good people". And then they do so. This position of authority has nothing to with a player's wealth.
Aristocracy
In this Guild, power is distributed among the wealthiest of players, meaning players with larger, more advanced cities. These could even be determined by whoever contributes the most to the Guild's wealth (e.g., donating Goods to the Guild Treasury often). Wealthier ones will be Founders, less wealthy ones might have Leader rights, and the lowest players will be "peasants", with little to no rights. In my opinion, this is a pretty good way of running a Guild, since wealthy players have probably been around longer and know a lot about playing the game in the best way possible.
Meritocracy
In my opinion, this is one of the best ways to run a Guild. It divides power among those players that are worthy, meaning that they have proved themselves to the Founder. I'm talking about those who participate in the Guild Expedition often, or get involved often in the Guild matters. This shows that they are ready to take on more responsibilities. Those that are worthy of obtaining those rights will receive them by the Founder, according to their ability. It doesn't necessarily have to do with their wealth or with their relationship with the Founder.
Anarchy
Probably one of the worst ways to run a Guild. I, personally, have never seen it happen in real life so far. Basically, all members have Founder rights. Since they all have the same rights, there is no sense of authority, since anyone can do anything, and it ends up being chaos most of the time.
Stratocracy
This is a type of government that is "ruled" by military chiefs. This is not a dictatorship or any other form of government. It involved military positions being so wired into the government that they are treated as the same, legally speaking. This could be seen as a sort of meritocracy, since these governments typically have military generals (GvG fighters) as people with authority, and everything is determined by means of military power rather than wealth. This could be common in some GvG Guilds, as their military power allows them to hold sectors. Even some players in these Guilds have titles that correspond to their positions and responsibilities in the GvG Continent Map, and perhaps their rights are also involved as well.
Obviously, this list is still a work in process, and it will take a while for me to complete it. I am looking forward to your comments on things that I will add. Thanks!
Last edited:
