Max_Killjoy Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Max, which reviews? Because everything I have seen is glowing, not to mention it is their biggest selling game. I'll see if I can find them again.. someone put links in a post in another forum far away, on a thread that moves very fast. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max_Killjoy Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 JC is about as packed as Harb? ROFLMAO!!!!!! Are you serious or trolling? No I mean really? FYI I have several fully geared toon on JC and it is not even close. Wow man. Just wow. And yes JC is decent at peak times. I wouldn't say it was good, it is decent at best. Off peak times that server is a toilet bowl. It is horrible off peak times. And JC is nowhere even close to how it was last year at this time. JC has dropped significantly from where it was this time last year. If you want to try to hoax someone about JC, you have to do it to someone who doesn't know about that server. Because off peak times it is horrible. And during peak times it is barely getting by. And its getting worse as the weeks go by just like Harbringer is. Given your posting histories, I'll take LSA's statements over yours, 10 out of 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codedrago Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 What is this game called The Division? Is it like Crisis? Thrid-person shooter MMO. From what I understand it's set in New York after a virus has been unleshed and killed off most of the population, so you go around and gather resources to make a main base for survivors? think... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Ooh, pretty colours. Sadly, without any actual figures, that's all it is. It doesn't say anywhere what the maximum server load is, what server load triggers the different levels, doesn't tell us subscriber numbers, doesn't tell us how much is spent on the store. It's just a pretty picture that I am going to put right on the refrigerator door. It doesn't matter what the maximum server load is...the TREND is downward. Deny it all ya like...but it's obvious to everyone but you. The population will come back in summer, plus the new starwars films have essentially saved SWTOR from complete death. Not how it works. In summer people have other stuff going on and MMO populations drop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertthebard Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 It doesn't matter what the maximum server load is...the TREND is downward. Deny it all ya like...but it's obvious to everyone but you. I take it you have some hard numbers to support this, since the numbers matter? As I pointed out previously, if capacity is increased, the same number of people logging in will be lower on torstatus, since it's based entirely on percentage of full logged in. This isn't rocket science. Not how it works. In summer people have other stuff going on and MMO populations drop. Yep, this is absolutely correct. It's hard to sit at my desk and play an MMO when I'm at the lake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanArgent Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 JC is about as packed as Harb? ROFLMAO!!!!!! Are you serious or trolling? No I mean really? FYI I have several fully geared toon on JC and it is not even close. Wow man. Just wow. And yes JC is decent at peak times. I wouldn't say it was good, it is decent at best. Off peak times that server is a toilet bowl. It is horrible off peak times. And JC is nowhere even close to how it was last year at this time. JC has dropped significantly from where it was this time last year. If you want to try to hoax someone about JC, you have to do it to someone who doesn't know about that server. Because off peak times it is horrible. And during peak times it is barely getting by. And its getting worse as the weeks go by just like Harbringer is. I've been able to get into PvP in reasonable times when I've been on; and into FPs when I've bothered. The GF Ops queue I've never seen work, but I gather that is a universal complaint (and I haven't been patient enough anyway). The population is high enough that open-world heroics are pretty much picked clean during peak times, and Fleet is full enough that it's a laggy chatspamfest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCT Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 It doesn't matter what the maximum server load is...the TREND is downward. Deny it all ya like...but it's obvious to everyone but you. If the maximum server load increases, then the same amount of players would show as a smaller percentage. If the trigger values for the different levels changes, then the same amount of players that were triggering it for 'Light' could trigger 'Heavy'. Without any actual figures, you can't tell anything from it. I could draw a graph on MSPaint and it would have as much factual basis as TORStatus. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadCuzBad Posted March 24, 2016 Author Share Posted March 24, 2016 He's on Harb and claiming the pop there is dying. Not sure I want to encourage him to come to JC and bring his negative vibes to my server I'm not claiming I'm telling. Harbringer went from 3-4 republic instances at peak to now only 1. Que pops have dropped off. I never said Harbringer is dead. I never 1 time anywhere said it was dead. What I did say is that it has started its decent. I have been thru 3 mergers and a 4th move from POT5. I know what it looks like when a server begins its decent. If the patter follows on Harbringer as it has on 4 other servers I have experienced, Harbringer will be a ghost town within 6 months of now. It is a slippery slope that when it starts, it goes from bad to worse quickly. Unless Bioware steps in and creates a mega server and somehow is able to integrate server to server que system in this game soon, this is what will happen. The point of this thread was that until this point, SWTOR has been able to dodge the bullet. It has done so by having refuge servers to bail out to and by merging several servers into one. But now we are down to the final 8 and most of the 8 are already abandoned by players seeking active servers. When Harbringer dies off, we have reached the end of the rope. Minus server to server que system or a creation of a mega server there will be no recovering from this one. And Harbringer whether you like it or not has peaked and has started its decent. Have I now become your enemy because I tell you the truth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 I take it you have some hard numbers to support this, since the numbers matter? As I pointed out previously, if capacity is increased, the same number of people logging in will be lower on torstatus, since it's based entirely on percentage of full logged in. This isn't rocket science. Ahh...so you believe Bioware made some back end change that impacted these number huh? LOL! No Bob. You're asking for "proof" that you know isn't public knowledge, and you know it. The trend is 100% clear to anyone without an agenda, which you clearly have. You have to distort the facts to pretend they may reflect something they don't....you're right, it's not rocket science...it's obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 If the maximum server load increases, then the same amount of players would show as a smaller percentage. If the trigger values for the different levels changes, then the same amount of players that were triggering it for 'Light' could trigger 'Heavy'. Without any actual figures, you can't tell anything from it. I could draw a graph on MSPaint and it would have as much factual basis as TORStatus. Sorry CT, you're just as wrong as Bob is. The facts are there and easy for anyone to see the trend. You can pretend with Bob that they may reflect something else, but they don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertthebard Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 I'm not claiming I'm telling. Harbringer went from 3-4 republic instances at peak to now only 1. Que pops have dropped off. I never said Harbringer is dead. I never 1 time anywhere said it was dead. ? Looks at thread title. Looks at who posted thread. Laughs and laughs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max_Killjoy Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 (edited) I'm not claiming I'm telling. Harbringer went from 3-4 republic instances at peak to now only 1. You do realize that the max number of people in an instance went up, reducing the number of instances for the same number of players, right? I never said Harbringer is dead. I never 1 time anywhere said it was dead. Thread title -- "Game has died, Nowhere to go" Thread OP -- MadCuzBad Edited March 24, 2016 by Max_Killjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertthebard Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Sorry CT, you're just as wrong as Bob is. The facts are there and easy for anyone to see the trend. You can pretend with Bob that they may reflect something else, but they don't. So let's see these hard numbers? 20% of 1000 is a higher number than 20% of 500, yet both are 20%. How am I in anyway wrong? It doesn't fit the agenda? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadCuzBad Posted March 24, 2016 Author Share Posted March 24, 2016 You do realize that the max number of people in an instance went up, reducing the number of instances for the same number of players, right? This change was made within the past 2 months? Because 2 months ago we were at 3-4 republic instances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 So let's see these hard numbers? 20% of 1000 is a higher number than 20% of 500, yet both are 20%. How am I in anyway wrong? It doesn't fit the agenda? The graph doesn't lie. Keep trying to bend the truth - nobody is buying it Bob. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanArgent Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 You do realize that the max number of people in an instance went up, reducing the number of instances for the same number of players, right? Did they now? I had observed that the pre-4.0 headcount for instances was ~100 or so, in passing; I hadn't noticed post-4.0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadCuzBad Posted March 24, 2016 Author Share Posted March 24, 2016 Did they now? I had observed that the pre-4.0 headcount for instances was ~100 or so, in passing; I hadn't noticed post-4.0 iknorite. It tells you how many people are on each instance, lol. Amazing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max_Killjoy Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 (edited) Did they now? I had observed that the pre-4.0 headcount for instances was ~100 or so, in passing; I hadn't noticed post-4.0 Yes, along with "upgrading" the servers to increase capacity. It takes more people on the same world to "trigger" a second instance -- this was in the notes somewhere, and the effect has also been observed on high-pop worlds such as Yavin 4. Edited March 24, 2016 by Max_Killjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Yes, along with "upgrading" the servers to increase capacity. It takes more people on the same world to "trigger" a second instance -- this was in the notes somewhere, and the effect has also been observed on high-pop worlds such as Yavin 4. Link please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCT Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Sorry CT, you're just as wrong as Bob is. The facts are there and easy for anyone to see the trend. You can pretend with Bob that they may reflect something else, but they don't. They don't reflect anything other than Bioware's internal measures of server load. And without knowing their politics we can only guess. For all we know, Light could be anything below 60%, and Heavy only above 90%. Without any actual figures it doesn't tell us anything. It's even possible it doesn't reflect the server loads at all, but is like the "Close Doors" button on an elevator, that is just there to make people feel like they are doing something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanArgent Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 iknorite. It tells you how many people are on each instance, lol. Amazing. You know I generally agree with Max, right? All I was saying is that I hadn't noticed the headcount change, with the implication that I didn't look at it recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TUXs Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 They don't reflect anything other than Bioware's internal measures of server load. And without knowing their politics we can only guess. For all we know, Light could be anything below 60%, and Heavy only above 90%. Without any actual figures it doesn't tell us anything. It's even possible it doesn't reflect the server loads at all, but is like the "Close Doors" button on an elevator, that is just there to make people feel like they are doing something. We can read the trend. That's what we can do. The trend is a decline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max_Killjoy Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Link please? I've been looking since I posted it, will post as soon as I find a reference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertthebard Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 The graph doesn't lie. Keep trying to bend the truth - nobody is buying it Bob. Nope, it doesn't lie. What does lie is the interpretation that somehow 20% of a higher number somehow means that the game is dying. The problem here is that you're going to need some actual numbers, not a percentage based graph, of server populations. I realize you would prefer to stick to generalizations, it does make the argument easier to bear out after all, if you don't have to provide anything but screenshots of information you don't understand, but I do understand what those graphs mean. So in order to carry this "but it says it's lower, so it's lower" argument out, I need to know, how many people were logged in when that graph was shot both times. Based on how Torstatus works, it's entirely possible that there were more people on the second time, than the first, since BW increased the total number of people that could be on the server between the two graphs. Wouldn't that be a kick in the head. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrazyCT Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 We can read the trend. That's what we can do. The trend is a decline. We're just going round in circles here - The servers have been changed, the capacity has increased. Did Bioware adjust the trigger levels to accommodate this? We don't know. Without ANY NUMBERS we can't compare any of these things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts