Megaservers

[Laurreth]

By the term "Megaservers" I presume you think we are collapsing multiple servers together into "megaservers." Especially with many of the quality of life features you highlighted. These changes were only designed to allow friends to play together, regardless of their personal playstyle. Now someone who wants to play on a PvP server can play on the same server as their friends who don't want to.

 

So basically still no attempt to "fix" anything for people stuck on effectively dead servers and who can't afford to transfer (it's pretty much impossible for small guilds to "transfer" with any kind of dignity, so no, just recreating guilds on another server is not an option).

 

There goes that last sliver of hope.

[Jamtas]

So basically the servers become the same. So using example of Harb and Bastion: both are west coast servers. Harb has much larger population. Teh thing Bastion had to differentiate was it being a PvP server while Harb was PvE. So now that they aer the same, why should anyone remain on Bastion? If new players are joining what is the allure to choose Bastion over Harb if both now have the same play environment? This will just make the population skews even worse.

 

This feels like instead of megaservers, we'll just make the players pay to switch to the higher population servers rather than fix the issue

[Savej]

My impression is that they are lining things up for merges in the not too distant future. But they aren't ready to talk about them yet and so are just clarifying that 4.3 does not include them.

[sentientomega]

Presumably RP servers will still be noted as such? The three servers I'm on are clearly RP ones, and I hope that in the server list it will continue to note that they are RP ones, so that the RP-minded know where they can be relatively safe from revilement.

 

My impression is that they are lining things up for merges in the not too distant future. But they aren't ready to talk about them yet and so are just clarifying that 4.3 does not include them.

 

Provided they leave the RP servers alone and don't merge them with other servers, everyone's playstyles should be safe.

Edited February 26, 2016 by sentientomega

[Devlyne]

So basically the servers become the same. So using example of Harb and Bastion: both are west coast servers. Harb has much larger population. Teh thing Bastion had to differentiate was it being a PvP server while Harb was PvE. So now that they aer the same, why should anyone remain on Bastion? If new players are joining what is the allure to choose Bastion over Harb if both now have the same play environment? This will just make the population skews even worse.

 

This feels like instead of megaservers, we'll just make the players pay to switch to the higher population servers rather than fix the issue

 

To devil's advocate for you here, a question would be 'what's to stop them now from choosing Bastion over Harb'? Because if their reason for going to Harb was that it was PVE and Bastion was PVP, well now there would be no difference (in a way). Why not roll on Bastion and stay in a PVE instance? I would think with all of the people complaining about Harb's lag and crashing problems, that that would make Bastion more appealing, not less.

 

It might not, I can't say, but just a thought I had while reading your post.

[Thoronmir]

To devil's advocate for you here, a question would be 'what's to stop them now from choosing Bastion over Harb'? Because if their reason for going to Harb was that it was PVE and Bastion was PVP, well now there would be no difference (in a way). Why not roll on Bastion and stay in a PVE instance? I would think with all of the people complaining about Harb's lag and crashing problems, that that would make Bastion more appealing, not less.

 

It might not, I can't say, but just a thought I had while reading your post.

It may depend on whether the new player bothers to research the servers. Of course, said research may simply reveal the alleged "lagfest" on the better-populated servers versus the so-called "dead" populations on other servers. Which server a new player selects would then depend on the player's population preferences. Given the emphasis on SWTOR as a solo game, some players might prefer the funereal quiet of a sparsely populated server.

[sentientomega]

To devil's advocate for you here, a question would be 'what's to stop them now from choosing Bastion over Harb'? Because if their reason for going to Harb was that it was PVE and Bastion was PVP, well now there would be no difference (in a way). Why not roll on Bastion and stay in a PVE instance? I would think with all of the people complaining about Harb's lag and crashing problems, that that would make Bastion more appealing, not less.

 

It might not, I can't say, but just a thought I had while reading your post.

 

This is true, the Harbinger doesn't have the best performance reputation, so it may indeed provide transfer options.

 

It wouldn't bother me, so long as they don't swallow the RP servers up into the new regular servers, thus killing RP opportunities for all wishing to avail themselves of them.

Edited February 26, 2016 by sentientomega

[Devlyne]

It may depend on whether the new player bothers to research the servers. Of course, said research may simply reveal the alleged "lagfest" on the better-populated servers versus the so-called "dead" populations on other servers. Which server a new player selects would then depend on the player's population preferences. Given the emphasis on SWTOR as a solo game, some players might prefer the funereal quiet of a sparsely populated server.

 

This is true, the Harbinger doesn't have the best performance reputation, so it may indeed provide transfer options.

 

It wouldn't bother me, so long as they don't swallow the RP servers up into the new regular servers, thus killing RP opportunities for all wishing to avail themselves of them.

 

Yes. I'll be honest, I only know of Harbinger from the people coming to the forums, so no idea if it truly is an issue or not. I don't see much lag but as I've said before, I'm on Shadowlands. (Which I read somewhere, in a forum post, is supposedly the least populated of the PVE servers or something). But to that end, if someone does their research and sees that Harb is allegedly laggy as all sin, they might roll on Bastion to get away from it. It really is population preference.

 

Or if Bob wants Jim to come play, but Jim hates PVP servers with a passion, Bob can now tell Jim 'hey, you don't have to PVP on my PVP server, you can stay in the PVE instance and I'll join you sometimes."

 

I did the 'empty PVP server' on Ravenholdt for a number of years in WoW. It wasn't fun. :-( And then I transferred to Mannoroth (which was a higher population server) only to watch it go through an imbalance (3 to 1 in favor of Alliance and I was Horde) and then...it got connected with two other realms and ended up still imbalanced and laggy as hell. So for me, this feels like a better solution, but I won't know that until I see it in place, working in the game. And I have other thoughts about where we're headed.

[Zasszz]

This sounds like WoW server merging. They took two realms that werent good populated or below average population and kinda fused them. Both populations didnt notice any change for anything except the population in general grew with people from another realm. The realm name changed from A and B to AB.

 

It only creates the illusion of more people but in reality in creates only more competition for resources, rares, quest objects outside instanced map sections and more spam on the fleet.

 

Finding people for anything isnt a real issue anywhere. So what benefit is there for anyone with this feature?

Edited February 26, 2016 by Zasszz

[tummiswtor]

Sorry, there's a tone of posts. So its like instantion system or something? As The Progenitor player can i use ToFN GTN or what?

[Pietrastor]

Sorry, there's a tone of posts. So its like instantion system or something? As The Progenitor player can i use ToFN GTN or what?

 

Eric explanation was so succesful in clearing up the confussion no one knows exactly anymore.

 

So ye. In any case, lemme just say WE WANT MEGASERVERS!!!

[Devlyne]

Sorry, there's a tone of posts. So its like instantion system or something? As The Progenitor player can i use ToFN GTN or what?

 

No. The servers are not connected in any way, shape or form from this.

 

If you are on Progenitor, you now will have a choice of setting focus to PVP or PVE. If you set focus to PVP, you're in a planetary instance (likely named Planet Name - PVP 1) with other people who set focus to PVP. If you set focus to PVE, the same applies.

 

So before where there was a Hoth 1, Hoth 2, Hoth 3 when the planet was populated, now there will be a Hoth 1, Hoth PVP 1. They're just planetary instances which are focused toward PVE or PVP. You can't flag in the PVE (so reported from the PTS) and you can't unflag in the PVP. If you want to unflag, you have to go to the PVE instance. If you want to flag, you have to go to the PVP instance.

 

Edit: Fixed it as 'now will' since it's only on the PTS, not live.

Edited February 26, 2016 by Devlyne

[CloudCastle]

This thread has exploded faster than I keep up, so sorry if this has been discussed already.

 

I notice that Eric says "no megaservers" but did not deny server mergers as a possibility. Here's what I think is going to happen:

 

PVP servers with low population will be merged into their corresponding east or west coast PVE counter parts. The RP-PVP server may get merged with one of the RP servers instead, or people moving from there may actually get a choice of where to go (PVE or RP.) No other servers will be touched.

 

This would explain the new instancing they've developed and would also explain why they have been silent about the third major server type - why there are no "RP instances." If the RP servers aren't being replaced, then there's no need for a "RP instance" they'd get the same PVE or PVP instance choices as anyone else. (Of course they'd be RP-PVE and RP-PVP, but that goes without saying.)

 

This would also explain the new naming change, and the new guild pop change. Could also have something to do with the increase to 40 characters per server change as well. I just find it impossible to believe that BW would go and develop these changes, changes which would be directly applicable to a server merge, and have that be a coincidence.

 

Also...how was the last server merge handled? A lot like this, as coincidence would have it!

 

- People were given the option to transfer servers voluntarily (then it was for free, now it is for the big 90CC discount)

 

- BW refused to admit to any server merges when asked. Instead people were told, "Moving is entirely voluntary."

 

- A few months later, server merges happened and it was NOT voluntary anymore. All remaining characters on the old servers were force merged.

 

So when Eric says, "no megaservers are planned" in dev speak that actually means one of two things:

 

1) No megaservers are planned [for now]

or

2) No megaservers but there will be server merges.

Edited February 26, 2016 by CloudCastle

[Botho]

It's basically a 100% pointless change.

[Joesixxpack]

Well thought and common sense conclusions that are probably correct.

 

Mmhmm.

[ivanhedgehog]

Yay, can't wait for RP to be trolled even more.

 

absolutely nothing is changing for rp. if someone wants to troll rpers, they can do it perfectly fine now. the same people will be on the same servers when this goes live

[Gearmasterblitz]

This thread has exploded faster than I keep up, so sorry if this has been discussed already.

 

I notice that Eric says "no megaservers" but did not deny server mergers as a possibility.

 

No, he didn't. He specifically made a point to not confirm or deny that megaservers or even server merges are coming.

[casirabit]

It's basically a 100% pointless change.

 

Actually not really. If you cannot pvp on the pve side of the server that is a great change and will keep pvp players from stealthing in mobs people are killing. Before you say it, yes it happens.

[starbuckone]

Well, that puts that to rest...

 

.... unless/until they jump out from behind a rock and actually contradict themselves by their actions.

 

It would only work if character limits are removed. If a player has 24 characters on server a , server b, and 8 on server c for a total of 56 characters and then you mash them all together on a server that player would have 56 characters there and you would be shafting said customer if he has to delete or make any of them inactive.

[Andryah]

Yeah, it's actually pretty nice. No accidental flagging, and no 5 minute outof combat wait to go back to carebear status. Also means no competition from bots, as if they show up in the PVP instance, you can just kill them. I doubt the scripts accounted for death.

 

Does the setting persist through logins?

 

I would prefer it be a persistent switch setting that you can set and forget in your options settings.

[DarthOvertone]

So basically the servers become the same. So using example of Harb and Bastion: both are west coast servers. Harb has much larger population. The thing Bastion had to differentiate was it being a PvP server while Harb was PvE. So now that they aer the same, why should anyone remain on Bastion?

 

Well...if they want to play the game with other people, they won't remain on a dead server.

 

My Pub Legacy is on The Bastion. I will be moving the entire lot of them to Harbinger this weekend. The Guild that Legacy is a member of has an unlocked Guild Ship, but the membership has been awol since before SoR. Oh well...goodbye Ship. Not going to bother grinding that Unlock ever again. So much for Conquest. lol

[DayneDrak]

Does the setting persist through logins?

 

I would prefer it be a persistent switch setting that you can set and forget in your options settings.

 

Seems to so far. Whenever I log out PVE, I log back in PVE. If I log out PVP, I log back in PVP.

[Pietrastor]

Actually not really. If you cannot pvp on the pve side of the server that is a great change and will keep pvp players from stealthing in mobs people are killing. Before you say it, yes it happens.

 

Sure it does. Once or twice a year. In the grand scheme of things, where does accidental PVP flagging rank on list of pressing important issues? Especially compared to queue times?

[Mirandel]

No. The servers are not connected in any way, shape or form from this.

 

If you are on Progenitor, you now will have a choice of setting focus to PVP or PVE. If you set focus to PVP, you're in a planetary instance (likely named Planet Name - PVP 1) with other people who set focus to PVP. If you set focus to PVE, the same applies.

 

So before where there was a Hoth 1, Hoth 2, Hoth 3 when the planet was populated, now there will be a Hoth 1, Hoth PVP 1. They're just planetary instances which are focused toward PVE or PVP. You can't flag in the PVE (so reported from the PTS) and you can't unflag in the PVP. If you want to unflag, you have to go to the PVE instance. If you want to flag, you have to go to the PVP instance.

 

Edit: Fixed it as 'now will' since it's only on the PTS, not live.

 

Looks like you are right. Here is a topic on Reddit

 

Look at the picture - on the mini-map at the lower right corner. You can see a PvE/PvP switch.

[DayneDrak]

Sure it does. Once or twice a year. In the grand scheme of things, where does accidental PVP flagging rank on list of pressing important issues? Especially compared to queue times?

 

Yeah, this change didn't exactly require alot of dev work, dude. It's basically just turning on both rulesets for the server, and then adding some glue to switch between them. It's a nice little QoL feature. However, everyone is down on it because of the rampant speculation, followed by the disappointment that they made a mistake.