When will there be a SERVER MERGE?

[-Dench]

a fix two months away is not a fix. There will be irreparable damage done to the community far before then. It needs to be two weeks away... not early summer... more like by end of may.

 

it needs to be done ASAP. Something is holding this up, and its not the technology needed.

 

my server is entering crisis mode. Hutta had 4 people on it last night at 8:30pm EST, my self and other guild mate where half that number. And guess what the server was running at? You guessed it! Standard! YEAH!!! woooo

 

 

4 people on a starter world, 2 of them level 50's practicing PVP sure does mean Standard to me! haha.

 

Every week it gets worse.

Edited May 9, 2012 by -Dench

[Kaonis]

Just cancelled my subscription because (among other reasons too) BW fails to see the dead servers as an issue,. The fact that Daniel Ericson said it's not a priority made me instant unsubscribe. It's no fun playing an online game by yourself, and even less fun to get told by the devs it's not a big deal. -_-

[Futteralet]

I absolutely love this game! But last night I cancelled my sub.

 

I've been playing on Trayus Academy since pre-launch, and have seen this server's decline. On the IMP fleet peak numbers have gone from 150+ to 20-30 on a good evening.

 

I recently rolled a Trooper, which I enjoyed playing a lot. Logged in two days ago and was ALONE on REP fleet around 11 in the evening.

 

Logged in mid-day around and was ALONE. "Peak"-numbers are 10-15. Not much MMO'ing going on.

 

The Galactic Trade Marked on the republic side is litterally EMPTY, and items are scarce at best on the imperial side.

 

I've never written a forum post before, but I would like to voice my opinon on this. BW should do what Trion did - offer free transfers like in Rift. Which is were I will be going back, incidentally.

 

Sadly, all of my guild mateys have quit or are quitting for the same reason.

[Holden_Dissent]

L2R. transfers are coming soon.

 

I don't understand why people are still talking about this.

 

The more you know...

Edited May 9, 2012 by Holden_Dissent

[EduardoJN]

L2R. transfers are coming soon.

 

I don't understand why people are still talking about this.

 

The more you know...

 

1- Because they are paying to play on a dead server, not like some ppl who are ROTFL cuz they are playing on the Fatman.

2- Because this kind of feature should be in the game since launch.

3- Because the two reasons above can piss anyone off.

[Futteralet]

L2R. transfers are coming soon.

 

I don't understand why people are still talking about this.

 

The more you know...

 

The more you know? I will believe it when I see it!

 

I should add that I also wrote a ticket about mergers. I got an autoreply which clearly stated it is not going to happen.

 

Anyways: I will return when/if mergers are done. Playing now is, sadly, pointless.

[Wrakk]

Transfer is one thing and MERGE is another....We need a merge, not a transfer

[Earitory]

I would LOVE to see a server merge...

[Sekketh]

on my server we can barely pull 30reps on fleet during peak time most of time its less than 20

 

i would really love a merge

[Jederix]

We need both merges and transfers.

 

Merges because some servers are already ghost towns.

Transfers because some servers need to stay regardless of their population i.e. RP servers.

 

I'd say I hate sounding like a broken record, but you will not get mergers. They will follow the Rift model, give everyone the opportunity to move to a designated server, then close the other server.

 

So keep crying for mergers. They are not coming.

[Jederix]

Transfer is one thing and MERGE is another....We need a merge, not a transfer

 

You aren't getting them. Next.

[Wrakk]

Fair enough. We don't get merges - we talk with our wallets Edited May 9, 2012 by Wrakk

[Pyrocan]

BW dont obsess with server merge. I am sure there are many "dead server" because you pushed too many servers at release. Merge them /relax

[Wrakk]

Tbh this should be a top priority for Bioware. It's the only way to save their game.

[Patched]

You aren't getting them. Next.

 

I believe the last statement was that they are "in the cards". But you obviously know more.

Edited May 9, 2012 by Patched

[Guavarama]

Well transfers are looking likely and shouldn't happen as they are a cop out to the situation and will only result in them shutting down servers and forcing people to transfer anyway!

 

Mergers are the way forward however they pose a few problems-

 

Character Names

Legacy Names

Guild Names

 

Out of the above Guilds names are not that bad. Infact if they introduced alliances as they said they were it might have been even easier to move a guild to another server......

 

Legacy names or surnames (how I saw them after a chose mine) Could be the thing which people would have to change and could become the unique factor to distinguish between people.

E.g. You get you choose you legacy name at the start and this will be your surname. it won't turn into an active legacy name until you reach the point where it used to come into action.

 

what this would mean-

Character names could be the same, this would avoid people getting pissed off cause all 5 toons names have been taken on the server merge already etc

 

I suggested this earlier in another post and some guy said it would be crap cause everyone would have to change their legacy names. I see it as everyone wouldn't have to change their main name which they have played with.

 

let me know what you think? or suggest other problems which they would face with mergers.

[contacts]

personally, i could give a **** about my characters names if i could actually play the game. i'd be happy with farthead1 if i could play a pvp warzone sometime other than the weekend

[Wrakk]

My 5 cents: I would rather have to change my character name then continue to beat on a dead horse ( playing on a dead server )

[Kourage]

I'm going to explain to you why they are doing transfers, not merges. Merges would involve transferring characters of player who quit and aren't coming back. They aren't here to put in a new name or legacy name. Merging them onto another server is just moving people who don't play onto another server, which serves no purpose. Once all the active and dedicated players choose to transfer and do, that server left behind likely will be subject for a merger or closure at a later date.

[ISTrick]

I'm going to explain to you why they are doing transfers, not merges. Merges would involve transferring characters of player who quit and aren't coming back. They aren't here to put in a new name or legacy name. Merging them onto another server is just moving people who don't play onto another server, which serves no purpose. Once all the active and dedicated players choose to transfer and do, that server left behind likely will be subject for a merger or closure at a later date.

 

More people need to hear this... POTD! *

 

* Post of the Day.

[discbox]

I'm going to explain to you why they are doing transfers, not merges. Merges would involve transferring characters of player who quit and aren't coming back. They aren't here to put in a new name or legacy name. Merging them onto another server is just moving people who don't play onto another server, which serves no purpose. Once all the active and dedicated players choose to transfer and do, that server left behind likely will be subject for a merger or closure at a later date.

 

Bioware said they never delete accounts or character. So, do you really think they continue to run the old empty server just to archive them? Because they have to, because they never delete accounts or character, just in case a player comes back anytime.

[Irilith]

I'm going to explain to you why they are doing transfers, not merges. Merges would involve transferring characters of player who quit and aren't coming back. They aren't here to put in a new name or legacy name. Merging them onto another server is just moving people who don't play onto another server, which serves no purpose. Once all the active and dedicated players choose to transfer and do, that server left behind likely will be subject for a merger or closure at a later date.

 

Sounds like a pretty solid way to never win people back once they're gone.

[JeramieCrowe]

I believe the last statement was that they are "in the cards". But you obviously know more.

 

Let's clarify here: allowing people to transfer off of a low-pop server to a higher one, then shutting down the server is NOT a merge.

 

A merge is the buggy, convoluted process of "merging" the software, economies, loot tables, entire server environments of two server clusters into one server cluster. It's a buggy, overly complex way of just allowing people to move off the dead server and shutting it down.

 

This is what Rift did last year with great success. Weren't around when the server was shut down? Next time you log in, you get a window allowing you to pick a server, pick a server, click login, and voila, everything's moved and you're ingame. Simple as that. Name conflict? You get another window to enter your new name, and that's that. It's literally as fast as logging in normally to transfer to another server.

 

Why ask for something more complicated that will only take more time and likely result in unplayability? No, we don't need merges, that's an out-dated system.

Edited May 9, 2012 by JeramieCrowe

[Patched]

Let's clarify here: allowing people to transfer off of a low-pop server to a higher one, then shutting down the server is NOT a merge.

 

A merge is the buggy, convoluted process of "merging" the software, economies, loot tables, entire server environments of two server clusters into one server cluster. It's a buggy, overly complex way of just allowing people to move off the dead server and shutting it down.

 

This is what Rift did last year with great success. Weren't around when the server was shut down? Next time you log in, you get a window allowing you to pick a server, pick a server, click login, and voila, everything's moved and you're ingame. Simple as that. Name conflict? You get another window to enter your new name, and that's that. It's literally as fast as logging in normally to transfer to another server.

 

Why ask for something more complicated that will only take more time and likely result in unplayability? No, we don't need merges, that's an out-dated system.

 

Ok, now I see you DON'T know what server merges are... Merging servers would have nothing to do with software, economies, and loot tables. It would simply be merging the player data.

Server merges would simply be player transfers without the ability to pick the server you want to go to. It also would not have to be simply combining 2 servers.

I can understand wanting the ability to choose the server you go to. It will just make it harder to get the servers more balanced.

With mergers they can group the servers so that most of the merged servers are starting with approximately the same number of players. With players choosing servers, either they constantly change what servers are available (and people get pissed because their friends moved to a server they can't) or you risk too many people going to the same server and other servers still having population issues.

It would also allow them to do things like keep guilds intact.

[Mallorik]

they need to rip off GW2, one faction per server, Server vs Server wz's and open worl pvp areas. let people transfer to what ever server they want to whenever they want to.