Server Merge Discussion Thread

[NuSeC]

So Jedi Covenant, who put up more conquest points during Iokath week, between two guilds, than the combined leaderboard of Harbinger is dead? Yeah. Right.

 

Why are you using a metric based on peoples ability to craft a lot of mats as a marker to its population.

 

Conquest and population mean nothing. I have a single account and can put up 20 mil + conquest by myself.

[orangenee]

Upcoming balance changes to utilities:

 

We are removing utilities. This is to bring classes in line with our target DPS to the game itself.

 

Love & Kisses, Eric Musco.

Edited September 26, 2017 by orangenee

[Savej]

No, that is not their only hope.

 

If BW can resolve all the issues surrounding guild and personal transfers, then those players that are "stuck" on "dead" servers due to concerns about losing their guild ship, guild name or personal assets would be able to transfer along with their guild to a higher population server without losing that guild ship, guild name or any personal assets.

 

That would allow those players who wish to play on higher population servers the CHOICE to do so, while still allowing those players who are happy on their current servers the CHOICE to do so, as well.

 

And character names?

[Ratajack]

No, they are trapped if they want to keep all their guilds and guild assets in tact. And that is becoming harder and harder to do on dead servers. Honestly man, why do you post this same nonsense over and over only for someone like me to come around and repeat myself and point out your logical errors?

 

You are right though... I am "choosing" not to forfeit the couple billion credits invested in guild assets

 

Then you admit that you are CHOOSING to remain on your current server and that BW is not taking away your option to transfer?

 

Having said that, I do understand your reasons for choosing to remain where you are and hope that BW can resolve all the issues surrounding guild and personal transfers, so that you can transfer without having to worry about losing that "couple billion credits invested in guild assets".

 

Server merges will not magically allow you to keep that "couple billion credits invested in guild assets", though. If they were to merge servers now, you would still lose all those guild assets.

 

Once all those issues surrounding guild and personal assets are resolved (so that server merges or transfers would not cause anyone to lose any guild or personal assets), then voluntary transfers would also allow players that wish to play on higher population servers to do so, without forcibly moving those players that are happy on their current server and wish to remain there.

[Ratajack]

No, that is not their only hope.

 

If BW can resolve all the issues surrounding guild and personal transfers, then those players that are "stuck" on "dead" servers due to concerns about losing their guild ship, guild name or personal assets would be able to transfer along with their guild to a higher population server without losing that guild ship, guild name or any personal assets.

 

That would allow those players who wish to play on higher population servers the CHOICE to do so, while still allowing those players who are happy on their current servers the CHOICE to do so, as well.

 

And character names?

 

While I did not mention character names specifically, character names would be one of the many issues included in "all the issues surrounding guild and personal transfers", as well as one of the "personal assets" included in "concerns about losing their guild ship, guild name or personal assets".

 

Server merges would still result in naming conflicts, meaning the potential for those players "stuck" on dead servers to lose their names. Claiming that Johnny could lose his character's name in a transfer as an "excuse" for not transferring while demanding server merges so Johnny can keep his character's name is highly illogical, at best.

[Foambreaker]

It has become painfully obvious that the changes needed to do Merge correctly would take their team a year to do. Meanwhile there would be no content and everyone would quit.

 

It is checkmate for this game.

[Totemdancer]

Exactly how I'm feeling now. It doesn't save anyone any longer...too late to make any difference and the negatives of 2017 FAR outweigh anything good that has happened...and the nerfs are just starting...next, in 5.6, they attack utilities!!!

 

Thank god I won't be here for them. I think I'm going to let my sub run out and not renew it. I don't even want to give them the curtesy of unsubbing correctly and giving them feed back on why I'm leaving. If they don't already know why people are leaving, then me telling them won't make a difference.

I've tried to defend Keith lately by saying he's not solely responsible for the last 6 months. But after the posts about class balancing, I'm going to retract that and say he is just as responsible for this mess as those above him. The whole lot of them should just be fired and told never to try working in the gaming or customer delivery industry again because they don't know how to relate to their customers and players.

I'm completely disgusted at the way this great game has been treated this year, it just sickens me,

 

I'm no programmer or dev. I'm certainly not a number cruncher or creative genius. But I am a business manager and I know how to get the best out of my business and people, Ive never wanted to be one of those armchair Devs that tell them how to run the game. But it looks like I couldn't do any worse than they are. At least as a player I'm in touch with what the community is saying. There is enough raw talent floating around this game and a forum full of people who are passionate about this game. If Bioware were to just hire some of us to run the business side of things and manage the people (coders and tech teams and CS). I think we'd actually do a better job. We certainly couldn't do any worse and if we did, it wouldn't matter at this point anyway,

 

I say they should sack everyone who isn't a nose to the wheel coder, tech person or creative artist. Then hire a bunch of random swtor players who can read, use a calculator and have some semblance of a brain to sort out and fix the game and make it fun again.

To be fair, I think we should just put names in a hat and draw them out randomly because I've got more confidence in our wonderful little forum community (the good and the bad 😉 ) to run this game, than I do with the current Bioware management team.

Edited September 26, 2017 by Totemdancer

[Totemdancer]

Upcoming balance changes to utilities:

 

We are removing utilities. This is to bring classes in line with our target DPS to the game itself.

 

Love & Kisses, Eric Musco.

 

Dude, I'd edit that if I was you. Last time I used that colour and made a joke like that, I had to take an involuntary vacation for impersonating a Bioware employee. Unless you don't care, in which case, post more 😉

But let's be fair, I'm pretty sure most of Bioware is impersonating what Bioware employee should be. Maybe that's why they don't post much because they keep getting banned for impersonating people who should care about the game,

[orangenee]

Good call. I don't get much out of my sub as it is.

[Totemdancer]

It has become painfully obvious that the changes needed to do Merge correctly would take their team a year to do. Meanwhile there would be no content and everyone would quit.

 

It is checkmate for this game.

 

Hhmmm, maybe if they'd started last year when this problem started, we'd already be merged. Just another day in the shiney universe that is swtor disappointment.

Edited September 26, 2017 by Totemdancer

[Totemdancer]

Good call. I don't get much out of my sub as it is.

 

Nice red 😊

[HuaRya]

Yeah, well I can tell you that without units of measure, that list is useless. Both of them. I play normally on Mantle of the Force and for reasons not relevant to the discussion, I have a couple of characters on Darth Nihilus.

 

The population on Fleet (and elsewhere) on MotF is usually around ten times that on DN, roughly speaking, and yet DN is ranked higher on Torstatus? Does not compute.

 

Again, my point is that there is no longer enough of an active population worth merging. That time has passed. Tor status was NOT set up to measure below .99 and that's why they are all stuck on that number. It was meant to measure above 1.0 which only TWO servers have that number now, Harbinger just barely.

 

We all have our opinions as to what dead is. For me it was seeing less than 30 people on fleet on JC on a Friday night with zero chat. Combining them with the 40 people on Shadowland's Fleet isn't going to really make a difference at this point.

 

I know this upsets the Dualistic Merge vs No Merge argument but it's painfully obvious that:

1. Bioware has neither the time or the resources to fix the issue

2. The population is far too diminished at this point for it to matter

 

Let the people on JC/Shadowlands hang out with their tight knit tiny guild in their once a week op run. Let Harbinger folks wait a little longer each month for a pop. And let the EH folks play dress up to their hearts content.

[Totemdancer]

Again, my point is that there is no longer enough of an active population worth merging. That time has passed. Tor status was NOT set up to measure below .99 and that's why they are all stuck on that number. It was meant to measure above 1.0 which only TWO servers have that number now, Harbinger just barely.

 

We all have our opinions as to what dead is. For me it was seeing less than 30 people on fleet on JC on a Friday night with zero chat. Combining them with the 40 people on Shadowland's Fleet isn't going to really make a difference at this point.

 

I know this upsets the Dualistic Merge vs No Merge argument but it's painfully obvious that:

1. Bioware has neither the time or the resources to fix the issue

2. The population is far too diminished at this point for it to matter

 

Let the people on JC/Shadowlands hang out with their tight knit tiny guild in their once a week op run. Let Harbinger folks wait a little longer each month for a pop. And let the EH folks play dress up to their hearts content.

 

If swtor was a horse, I would take it out to a field and put it out of its misery, It deserves better than this and should be allowed to go out with some dignity.

As much as it saddens me, I think it's time they consider closing the game,

[SolarSaenz]

Hhmmm, maybe if they'd started last year when this problem started, we'd already be merged. Just another day in the shiney universe that is swtor disappointment.

 

You know, server mergers wouldn't even be a topic of discussion IF the game was regularly adding new, fun, quality content (COMPLETE Ops, not 1 boss every 6 months, FPs, WZs or stuff for PVP, dailies, new areas to explore, etc) in a timely manner.

but I guess that is too much to ask these days

Apparently however, introducing an "exciting" RNG system and "thrill of the hunt" was not only not too much to ask, it was exactly what the doctor ordered!!!!!!

 

I'll even go so far as to say server mergers wouldn't be AS BIG a topic of conversation if GC/CXP/RNG had never been implemented.

 

But, again, I'm preaching to the choir and I digress.

Edited September 26, 2017 by SolarSaenz

[NuSeC]

Then you admit that you are CHOOSING to remain on your current server and that BW is not taking away your option to transfer?

 

Yes, "choosing" not to lose all of our guilds assets by not transferring when it is known it would be a total loss.

 

Having said that, I do understand your reasons for choosing to remain where you are and hope that BW can resolve all the issues surrounding guild and personal transfers, so that you can transfer without having to worry about losing that "couple billion credits invested in guild assets".

 

Our guild has the highest rated public flagship on the server... by about 100,000 points. So yes, a couple billion credits in decos, unlocks etc. I know as most of that came from me.

 

 

And that is the entire point, they have went silent for a long time and left it go until now the server has dwindled to spastic play-times and a huge downturn in active players. Forcing the people with much invested unable to transfer unless we are willing to lose litterly billions of credits and many many play-hours achieving things that can no longer be achieved. So your comments about "choice" is ridicules. You have a choice to do a great deal of things that are counter productive. You repeating it is not moving the conversation along. You have the choice to go take suckers from little babies... no matter how counter productive it is. Pointing it out is pointless in itself.

 

Server merges will not magically allow you to keep that "couple billion credits invested in guild assets", though. If they were to merge servers now, you would still lose all those guild assets.

Of course... and that is the point... they have left it go for so long that people are now just walking away from the game instead of moving as they know they would rather leave the game than lose everything in a transfer.

 

They said they are looking at all those aspects with a merger. I am saying a merger is needed and they also need to ensure when/if it happens, thy need to ensure people like me do not lose everything in the process.

 

Once all those issues surrounding guild and personal assets are resolved (so that server merges or transfers would not cause anyone to lose any guild or personal assets), then voluntary transfers would also allow players that wish to play on higher population servers to do so, without forcibly moving those players that are happy on their current server and wish to remain there.

 

OK... but you running around telling people they have a choice - when really it is an option with 0 good current outcomes (especially for people like me) is annoying. I know more than most of what the risk and options are and that is why I am on the forum talking about it.

[Ratajack]

Yes, "choosing" not to lose all of our guilds assets by not transferring when it is known it would be a total loss.

 

As I said, I understand why you are making the choice that you are making, but claiming that you have "no choice" is not exactly honest, is it?

 

Our guild has the highest rated public flagship on the server... by about 100,000 points. So yes, a couple billion credits in decos, unlocks etc. I know as most of that came from me.

 

 

And that is the entire point, they have went silent for a long time and left it go until now the server has dwindled to spastic play-times and a huge downturn in active players. Forcing the people with much invested unable to transfer unless we are willing to lose litterly billions of credits and many many play-hours achieving things that can no longer be achieved. So your comments about "choice" is ridicules. You have a choice to do a great deal of things that are counter productive. You repeating it is not moving the conversation along. You have the choice to go take suckers from little babies... no matter how counter productive it is. Pointing it out is pointless in itself.

 

Again, until/unless all those issues surrounding guild and personal transfers are resolved, server merges would still cause players to lose all those assets. As previously noted, using the loss of those assets in a transfer as an excuse for not transferring, but demanding server merges which would also cause the loss of all those assets is highly illogical, at best.

 

Of course... and that is the point... they have left it go for so long that people are now just walking away from the game instead of moving as they know they would rather leave the game than lose everything in a transfer.

 

They said they are looking at all those aspects with a merger. I am saying a merger is needed and they also need to ensure when/if it happens, thy need to ensure people like me do not lose everything in the process.

 

Keith stated that they were looking at all those aspects. I do not recall him saying they would be merging servers. If anything, his statement would seem to indicate the opposite, as he specifically stated that they do not want to forcibly move anyone who is happy on their current server and wishes to remain there.

 

I agree that all those aspects and issues need to be resolved. That is the first thing that should be done, IMO. Once those aspects and issues have been resolved, then BW can decide if they wish to merge servers or leave the choice of server and server population up to the individual players and/or guilds.

 

 

OK... but you running around telling people they have a choice - when really it is an option with 0 good current outcomes (especially for people like me) is annoying. I know more than most of what the risk and options are and that is why I am on the forum talking about it.

 

There are possible good outcomes from transferring.

 

The question boils down to which is more important to the player. Is the player more concerned about their assets or playing on a server with a population and community more to their liking? If the former, then it behooves the player to remain on their current server, as some have chosen to do. If the latter, then it behooves the player to transfer, even at the cost of those assets, as many in all these server population threads have indicated they have already done.

[Savej]

While I did not mention character names specifically, character names would be one of the many issues included in "all the issues surrounding guild and personal transfers", as well as one of the "personal assets" included in "concerns about losing their guild ship, guild name or personal assets".

 

Server merges would still result in naming conflicts, meaning the potential for those players "stuck" on dead servers to lose their names. Claiming that Johnny could lose his character's name in a transfer as an "excuse" for not transferring while demanding server merges so Johnny can keep his character's name is highly illogical, at best.

 

Server merges in the past here made name conflicts a sortof contest - whoever had the highest level/played-time/whatever got priority on keeping a name (in theory - there was an algorithm BW didn't detail but they said there definitely was one for both of the forced merges) - I would take my chances on such contests. Merges are the only chance I have of using character names I currently have on dead servers here (names I've used in almost all online games I've played for the last 25 years including Wow and ESO). It's frustrating for me. For others names are a game breaker. The people saying they'd quit if merges cost them a rename have plenty of counterparts on dead servers that never had a chance to keep their names.

Edited September 26, 2017 by Savej

[Ratajack]

Server merges in the past here made name conflicts a sortof contest - whoever had the highest level/played-time/whatever got priority on keeping a name (in theory - there was an algorithm BW didn't detail but they said there definitely was one for both of the forced merges) - I would take my chances on such contests. Merges are the only chance I have of using character names I currently have on dead servers here (names I've used in almost all online games I've played for the last 25 years including Wow and ESO). It's frustrating for me. For others names are a game breaker. The people saying they'd quit if merges cost them a rename have plenty og counterparts on dead servers that never had a chance to keep their names.

 

If I remember correctly from the first two merges, they used a different set of criteria for resolving naming conflicts with each of the server merges.

 

In the first server merge, there were "origin servers" and 'destination servers" as some servers were merged into existing servers. In the case of naming conflicts during the first round of server merges, the player on the destination server got to keep the name, regardless of level or date of character creation.

 

In the second round of server merges, all of the servers were "origin servers", as all the existing servers were merged into new, higher capacity servers. Although the new higher capacity servers carried the same names as some of the old servers, they were not the same server. This meant that there was no way to resolve naming conflicts using a "first on server" criteria.

 

BW used a set of varied criteria to determine who got to keep the name. These criteria included, but were not limited to:

 

• 
   
  Did either character already have to be renamed in the first round of merges?
   
  Which character is higher level?
   
  Which character was created first?
   
  Etc.
   
  

 

So, in neither round of merges was the answer as simple as "Which character was created first?"

 

As for you being "willing to take your chances in a 'which character was created first' scenario", how would you feel if they merged servers and you lost one or more character's names because other players had gotten them 10 minutes before you did, especially if those other players that got to keep the names were not subscribers, possibly no longer even an active players?

Edited September 26, 2017 by Ratajack

[Savej]

If I remember correctly from the first two merges, they used a different set of criteria for resolving naming conflicts with each of the server merges.

 

In the first server merge, there were "origin servers" and 'destination servers" as some servers were merged into existing servers. In the case of naming conflicts during the first round of server merges, the player on the destination server got to keep the name, regardless of level or date of character creation.

 

In the second round of server merges, all of the servers were "origin servers", as all the existing servers were merged into new, higher capacity servers. Although the new higher capacity servers carried the same names as some of the old servers, they were not the same server. This meant that there was no way to resolve naming conflicts using a "first on server" criteria.

 

BW used a set of varied criteria to determine who got to keep the name. These criteria included, but were not limited to:

 

• 
   
  Did either character already have to be renamed in the first round of merges?
   
  Which character is higher level?
   
  Which character was created first?
   
  Etc.
   
  

 

So, in neither round of merges was the answer as simple as "Which character was created first?"

 

As for you being "willing to take your chances in a 'which character was created first' scenario", how would you feel if they merged servers and you lost one or more character's names because other players had gotten them 10 minutes before you did, especially if those other players that got to keep the names were not subscribers, possibly no longer even an active players?

 

 

You're making assumptions. If merges happened and I got to keep one name from my 7 or 8 70s on JM or POT5 I would be happy. And when I said I would be happy to take my chances in a contest, a "played time" contest would would make me happiest as several of them have more than a month each (/played) even tho I haven't done much on those servers in years.

[Ratajack]

You're making assumptions. If merges happened and I got to keep one name from my 7 or 8 70s on JM or POT5 I would be happy. And when I said I would be happy to take my chances in a contest, a "played time" contest would would make me happiest as several of them have more than a month each (/played) even tho I haven't done much on those servers in years.

 

That may be fine for you, but neither you nor I are the only people playing this game.

 

What may "work" for you or for me may not work for someone else.

 

We will just have to wait and see whether or not they can resolve all those issues surrounding individual or guild transfers, including naming conflicts, and what they ultimately decide to do with regards to server population concerns.

[sllion]

East coast players shouldn't have to sync with the timezone of the West coast players just to get a more populated experience in a game they are paying for (in most cases).

Please merge the East Coast Servers into one.

I'm not here asking for global merges, but active players (specially those that are paying subs) shouldn't have to sacrifice their character names and alter their real life schedule to continue playing a game with others (Lookup "mmorpg").

*Drops the mic*

[kodrac]

You know, server mergers wouldn't even be a topic of discussion IF the game was regularly adding new, fun, quality content (COMPLETE Ops, not 1 boss every 6 months, FPs, WZs or stuff for PVP, dailies, new areas to explore, etc) in a timely manner.

but I guess that is too much to ask these days

Apparently however, introducing an "exciting" RNG system and "thrill of the hunt" was not only not too much to ask, it was exactly what the doctor ordered!!!!!!

 

I'll even go so far as to say server mergers wouldn't be AS BIG a topic of conversation if GC/CXP/RNG had never been implemented.

 

But, again, I'm preaching to the choir and I digress.

 

I argued that point back in December when 5.0 was in testing and also when server merge fights were new, but here we are nearly a year later still in the same boat. Nothing has gotten through to the studio.

[CircaCitadel]

Then transfer.

 

That's what a lot of Begeren Colony has done... as some players only want a large busy server. Others have stayed and continue to play on Begeren Colony. Each player makes their own decision in this regard. Oh.. but no.. you want the studio to have addressed this while you were gone and impacted every player on Begeren Colony so you come back to a full server (which would not be Begeren Colony if they did do mergers while you were gone.

 

You leave a game for a year and come back and expect everything to be the same in terms of population and player activity? The studio has not resolved the issue with moving guilds yet.. and so instead they simply made server transfers perpetually 90cc now and that has allowed most players that want to move to actually move. Like it or not.. it's the best current approach until the studio gets off their backsides and addresses the ability to move entire guilds intact.. something they should have addressed years ago when they merged all the old launch servers into the current set of newer servers with larger capacities.

I wouldn't need to transfer if they merged servers. Then it'd be like I transferred for free anyway. Tell people to transfer is just avoiding the problem. They will end up with empty servers if everybody transfers anyway, so why not just merge them?

 

But meh. It's fine. I'll just play solo in all the new content, and hopefully they merge soon.

[Eriamea]

I second this. Plus the server lag I get on Harb is really bad.

[Totemdancer]

I argued that point back in December when 5.0 was in testing and also when server merge fights were new, but here we are nearly a year later still in the same boat. Nothing has gotten through to the studio.

 

I hope they've kept up the game's funeral insurance. I think if something isn't in the road map to fix this, then they will need that insurance for funeral costs.