One aspect of the game is seems a little bit schizophrenic is the nature of legacy and faction.
- Faction says "they are the enemy scum... they should be crushed under foot. Every opponent that lives, a bunny dies"
- Legacy say "go play both sides, we'll reward you and give you a free bunny to hug him, and pet him and call him george".
And all this in a universe where Luke could hold a conversation with the emperor, but not with chewie".
Which when applied to the game, means you can /say to the other faction. But can't /yell or /cower.
A lot was made of the adversary system from the pre-launch registration and perhaps how to carry that forward into the game. Less was stressed about the allies system that mirrored the adversary list.
So while I was contemplating this... something occurred to me, specifically the guy at the end of what became the "The Rest" video from the guild summit... who pointed out encouraging rerolling on the other faction has many benefits - except it goes a long way to destroying the current guilds.
Reference... Both factions could split up our guilds
Plus I was sat on Fleet crafting stuff. Waiting for someone to log in so I could speak to them about something. Otherwise I would have relogged and levelled my consular a bit.
So I was wondering rather than "sister guild" or "ally" or whatever... couldn't we just have the same guild on both factions ? Same guild chat. Same guild roster. Different everything else.
So I'm playing on my consular and someone needs a bounty hunter for Directive 7... they just ask in guild chat.
It could be that getting those initial /ginvite's cross faction would be problematic. But the guild chat is only a chat channel - no different than the /say channel (from my very limited viewpoint). We already have cross faction mailing. The guild would be on the same server. The class names are all unique - so no confusing a republic warlock with an empire warlock. Character and legacy names already have to be unique on the server not the faction.
Surely implementing this would be easier than implementing a true ally / adversary system? (again I'm making huge presumptions here).
The likely issue I can think that would come to people's minds would be that of world PvP on PvP servers...
[Guild] [Skullcrusher]: Right... we're almost ready to raid the Republic outpost on Belsavis. Accepting final invites.
/1 BIG Empire raid against Belsavis shortly. Get the word out.
Two things occurred to me.
- Being a PvP server... players WANT to PvP. So having a larger defence force waiting for this fictitious Belsavis razing would be more fun ? (I'm reaching here.. I don't PvP and so my thoughts are highly speculative).
- Players on PvP server are embracing the conflict between factions, so perhaps are less likely to swap factions quite as often - since doing so would feel like going over to the enemy.
Okay point 1 presumes a reasonable faction balance as well as the aim being the fight rather than an easy victory.
Could you simply say that PvE servers get the cross faction guild choice because we're all carebears who want to hug our fellow adversaries and therefore would tolerate a mixed faction guild? Whereas PvP servers don't, due to their bloodlust for stomping out their opposite numbers and would never cooperate, except to gain intelligence and advantage?
The technical limitations seem less to me than the social ones - where someone decided that horde and alliance... erm, I mean republic and empire should never communicate.
Clearly, lots of development is already scheduled - and unless the idea has already been considered internally, the likelihood of it making it's way onto anyone's to-do list any time soon is limited. But is it an option... "sometime"?
In a world where legacy is deemed important, can't my Jedi Knight adopted child be in the same guild as his Sith Inquisitor father?
Come on guys... what have I missed ? What unchangeable facet of human nature would bring such a system crashing to it's knees?