Server Merge Discussion Thread

[casirabit]

That s not viable for the long term health and success of the game.

 

Yes it could if they offer a better transfer service which includes guild assets and personal assets being transferred with them. Most of the reason most will not transfer is because of that issue, especially if they are on a low population server. Not all servers are low population no matter what some people claim.

[Ylliarus]

Just wanna pop in and say, keep the feedback coming! The team has been actively discussing the thread and we appreciate everyone's viewpoints. For the most part the thread has been constructive and devoid of personal attacks, keep that coming!

 

Thanks everyone.

 

-eric

 

Megaservers, please, they will really be the key to the future of the game. 1 European Megaserver, 2 for the US (one West Coast and one East).

[AscendingSky]

Megaservers, please, they will really be the key to the future of the game. 1 European Megaserver, 2 for the US (one West Coast and one East).

 

Not without 100% guaranteed no exceptions intact transfer of character and guild assets. If you force most of the players to give up everything they've built and acquired over 5+ years, a lot of them are going to quit, and the mergers will make the population situation worse, not better. I'd go into more detail, but myself and many others already have done so in this thread already and I hate repeating myself.

[Ylliarus]

Not without 100% guaranteed no exceptions intact transfer of character and guild assets. If you force most of the players to give up everything they've built and acquired over 5+ years, a lot of them are going to quit, and the mergers will make the population situation worse, not better. I'd go into more detail, but myself and many others already have done so in this thread already and I hate repeating myself.

 

But of course that goes without saying, assurances need to be made the players won't lose anything either they or their guilds obtained throughout the years. If it takes Bioware some time to craft a solution for that so be it, but I really think that megaservers would be a priceless boon to the game. Yet I agree, if such is to be implemented it must happen with the utmost care players won't lose their achievements and such and guilds of course the assets they built up over the years.

[Lunafox]

My response in blue

 

Hyperbole much? There is truth in hyperbole. If it wasn't true even in the slightest, I couldn't say it. Harbinger goes down more than any other server. That's the truth. And it would happen if you jam the populace of several server together.

 

 

 

PVP players can play on RP servers now though if they so choose? Sure there are instances on each server, though that doesn't necessarily mean you'll find anyone in a pvp instance. On Shadowlands PVP instances are ghost towns. People focus on other things, pvp is an afterthought for many who play on PVE servers or RP servers.

 

 

 

Pointless? How so? The fact we are all bringing up the very issue you say that makes it pointless so that BWA are well and truly aware of "don't merge until this is sorted" is one in a variety of reasons that give this thread a "point".

 

Also if it were pointless why are you replying?

Pointless in the fact that if Bioware can't move everyone's personal and guild assets INTACT, then it's moot. Why should people lose billions in credits and hundreds of real-life dollars, so someone can have a faster queue pop? People who can fix their own issues with a 90cc transfer won't even do that to help themselves and yet expect others to give up all their stuff. When they can figure that out, then they can deal with who merges with what and if it's necessary. If they could do cross server than it wouldn't be an issue at all, because then the pvpers/groupers could have their pops and no one else would have to suffer over it. Edited June 7, 2017 by Lunafox

[Darkside]

Yes it could if they offer a better transfer service which includes guild assets and personal assets being transferred with them. Most of the reason most will not transfer is because of that issue, especially if they are on a low population server. Not all servers are low population no matter what some people claim.

 

No amount of cheap/free transfer service is going to counter act the damage done by the perception that the game is dead. As I've said earlier in thread the thread, the amount of new and returning players is more financially important to the health of the game than the few remaining hold outs on the dead servers. The onus is also not on the new players to have to discover which server is the populated one, and which is not. They will have the perception that any server they choose (and rightfully so) should be active and full of players even if it's not the most populated one.

 

The damage of leaving ghost town servers is too great. Think of it this way.......say you have 150 regular hold outs who love playing on the dead server, but over the course of a month they cause 1000 new people to not sub, or cancel after subbing, because they think they've wasted their time with a dead game, especially one that has such a sordid history. Now add that to all the dead servers over the course of year, and during promotions, that does more harm financially than the few loyal subs are worth.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Darkside

[RobertFKennedyUS]

So I just did a quick comparison between JC and Harb during JC's peak server time, which I would assume to be 8PM EST.

 

On the republic side there were 75 people and one person trying to form a group finder ops. After over 5 minutes, I messaged him and asked him how many people he had and he said 2.

 

On Harbinger it was 103 on instance 1 and a second instance that was depopulating (also bear in mind that's 5PM for Harb).

 

I checked the hypercrates on the GTN. Jedi Cov prices were vastly higher, with the lowest crate being 5 million creds higher than the lowest crate on Harb. There were only 2 crates at 40 million on JC, the rest were 60 million. Harb has 10 crates for 35 million.

 

This tends to confirm what I said earlier about the dysfunctionality of JC's multiplayer options and market. This is why I advocate a Jedi Cov- Shadowlands server merge and labeling low population servers as such.

Edited June 8, 2017 by RobertFKennedyUS

[Ratajack]

No amount of cheap/free transfer service is going to counter act the damage done by the perception that the game is dead. As I've said earlier in thread the thread, the amount of new and returning players is more financially important to the health of the game than the few remaining hold outs on the dead servers. The onus is also not on the new players to have to discover which server is the populated one, and which is not. They will have the perception that any server they choose (and rightfully so) should be active and full of players even if it's not the most populated one.

 

The damage of leaving ghost town servers is too great. Think of it this way.......say you have 150 regular hold outs who love playing on the dead server, but over the course of a month they cause 1000 new people to not sub, or cancel after subbing, because they think they've wasted their time with a dead game, especially one that has such a sordid history.

 

IMO, it is illogical to negatively impact multitudes of players who are CURRENTLY PLATING this game on the off chance that some Tom, Dick or Harry MIGHT POSSIBLY decide to try (or return to) this game at some undetermined point in the future.

 

That said, the old PVP servers are an issue, but mergers should not even be considered for the remaining servers, IMO.

 

I think the first step is to label the old PVP servers as "very light population" or "very low population" so that new players will have that information when choosing a server. In addition, BW could also implement a confirmation dialog box so anyone choosing to create a character on one of those old PVP servers confirms that they understand the population issue on the server they chose.

 

IF BW can resolve ALL the issues surrounding server merges and can ensure that guilds will transfer intact, with all guild assets intact, that no one will lose anything or be negatively impacted in any way, then, and ONLY THEN, those old PVP servers could be considered for being merged into one of the other servers in their respective timezone.

[DWho]

People who create characters on to Harbinger, Jedi Covenant, Shadowlands, and Ebon Hawk (I don't know anything about the population of the west coast second PVE server since I have never played there) are not going to think the game is dead (60 to 80 players on the planet is hardly an indication of a dead game). The only real issue would be with the old PVP servers and the note that is displayed when you create a character on those servers should be able to be easily modified to convey the server population as a short term fix. The longer term fix would be to merge them with one of the other servers after the issues of character and guild transfers have been worked out. Since these are smaller servers, that should be easier to do than with the larger servers to make a so called megaserver.

[Ratajack]

So I just did a quick comparison between JC and Harb during JC's peak server time, which I would assume to be 8PM EST.

 

On the republic side there were 75 people and one person trying to form a group finder ops. After over 5 minutes, I messaged him and asked him how many people he had and he said 2.

 

On Harbinger it was 103 on instance 1 and a second instance that was depopulating (also bear in mind that's 5PM for Harb).

 

I checked the hypercrates on the GTN. Jedi Cov prices were vastly higher, with the lowest crate being 5 million creds higher than the lowest crate on Harb. There were only 2 crates at 40 million on JC, the rest were 60 million. Harb has 10 crates for 35 million.

 

This tends to confirm what I said earlier about the dysfunctionality of JC's multiplayer options and market. This is why I advocate a Jedi Cov- Shadowlands server merge and labeling low population servers as such.

 

Maybe you missed (or chose to ignore) the numerous posts that indicate that Jedi Covenant seems to run at about 80% of Harbinger's population, a number not far off your "observations".

 

Those numbers do NOT by any means indicate that Jedi Covenant is anywhere near "dead", except in the closed minds of some posters.

 

Now, if Johnny is playing on Jedi Covenant and wants to play on a higher populated server, then he CAN do so, without negatively impacting multitudes of players.

 

If Johnny REFUSES to avail himself of any of the options available to him(for whatever reason), that is a JOHNNY problem and NOT a BW problem.

 

 

Remember also, that while Harbinger is on the West Coast, there are likely many players who are on the East Coast but transferred to Harbinger for whatever reason.

 

I would guess that many of those playing on Harbinger at 8 PM Eastern (5 PM Pacific) are actually on the East Coast, in THEIR prime time, and will not likely be playing much beyond 8 PM Pacific (11 PM Eastern). That is only a guess, but it is an educated guess.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Ratajack

[MeNaCe-NZ]

There is truth in hyperbole. If it wasn't true even in the slightest, I couldn't say it. Harbinger goes down more than any other server. That's the truth. And it would happen if you jam the populace of several server together.

 

You again make another assumption Harbinger goes down due to it's population instead of other issues (hardware, data center issues for example). It's equally valid to say it would go down just as much with a really low population.

 

Let's not forget servers used to be FAR more populated than they currently are and had no more stability issues than what they currently do. People just notice it more on Harbinger/we hear about it more simply because it is the most populated server.

 

Funnily enough if you go back over the recent dev thread on downtime it's not down on even close to a greater amount of time compared to some other servers.

 

Sure there are instances on each server, though that doesn't necessarily mean you'll find anyone in a pvp instance. On Shadowlands PVP instances are ghost towns. People focus on other things, pvp is an afterthought for many who play on PVE servers or RP servers.

 

What does any of that have to do with your point (that I quoted) around when you "loose PVP players on an RP server"?

 

Pointless in the fact that if Bioware can't move everyone's personal and guild assets INTACT, then it's moot.

 

So? How do you know what they can and cannot do? The fact the issue is being raised in this thread makes it not moot. They may not be able to do it now but they could still be able to do it.

 

Why should people lose billions in credits and hundreds of real-life dollars, so someone can have a faster queue pop? People who can fix their own issues with a 90cc transfer won't even do that to help themselves and yet expect others to give up all their stuff.

 

What strawman, over sensationalized nonsense is this? Where did I say anything about anyone losing anything? That response has nothing to do with you calling this thread pointless.

[Darkside]

IMO, it is illogical to negatively impact multitudes of players who are CURRENTLY PLATING this game on the off chance that some Tom, Dick or Harry MIGHT POSSIBLY decide to try (or return to) this game at some undetermined point in the future.

 

That said, the old PVP servers are an issue, but mergers should not even be considered for the remaining servers, IMO.

 

I think the first step is to label the old PVP servers as "very light population" or "very low population" so that new players will have that information when choosing a server. In addition, BW could also implement a confirmation dialog box so anyone choosing to create a character on one of those old PVP servers confirms that they understand the population issue on the server they chose.

 

IF BW can resolve ALL the issues surrounding server merges and can ensure that guilds will transfer intact, with all guild assets intact, that no one will lose anything or be negatively impacted in any way, then, and ONLY THEN, those old PVP servers could be considered for being merged into one of the other servers in their respective timezone.

 

The problem is there isn't multitudes of players, which why those servers are currently dead. They no longer have the populations to support them, and unfortunately those few remaining players will (should) have to cope for the greater good. Plus the cost of maintaining those servers vs reallocating those resources elsewhere is another issue that a low populations can't financially sustain.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Darkside

[DWho]

At 8:30 Eastern there were 90 in JC fleet which dropped suddenly by 8, presumably when one of those non-existent ops groups left to run an OPs and 1 person looking for 1 dps and 1 tank for a group finder weekly Explosive Conflict. I did post numbers for JC on three different occasions and found the minimum population comparison to be about 80% so seeing 75% would not be unreasonable for a snapshot. I have the screenshots for the last time I checked and can post them if someone is interested in seeing them.

[Ratajack]

The problem is there isn't multitudes of players, which why those servers are currently dead. They no longer have the populations to support them, and unfortunately those few remaining players will (should) have to cope for the greater good. Plus the cost of maintaining those servers vs reallocating those resources elsewhere is another issue that a low populations can't financially sustain.

 

Allow me to quote you:

 

No amount of cheap/free transfer service is going to counter act the damage done by the perception that the game is dead. As I've said earlier in thread the thread, the amount of new and returning players is more financially important to the health of the game than the few remaining hold outs on the dead servers. The onus is also not on the new players to have to discover which server is the populated one, and which is not. They will have the perception that any server they choose (and rightfully so) should be active and full of players even if it's not the most populated one.

 

The damage of leaving ghost town servers is too great. Think of it this way.......say you have 150 regular hold outs who love playing on the dead server, but over the course of a month they cause 1000 new people to not sub, or cancel after subbing, because they think they've wasted their time with a dead game, especially one that has such a sordid history. Now add that to all the dead servers over the course of year, and during promotions, that does more harm financially than the few loyal subs are worth.

 

If you can provide concrete, rock solid, irrefutable evidence that those 150 people (your number, not mine) have caused 1000 people (your number, not mine) to leave the game over the course of a single month, then your point might have merit, but I'm going to go out on a limb and bet that you cannot provide that concrete, rock solid, irrefutable evidence.

 

As I stated, IMO, a far better way to prevent those "dead" old PVP servers from driving away new players is to make it known to those new players exactly what the population issues are on those "dead" old PVP servers. Doing this would not negatively impact those actual players that CHOOSE to play on those lower population servers in any way, while at the same time providing a much better "experience" for those hypothetical new players.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Ratajack

[Darkside]

Allow me to quote you:

 

 

 

If you can provide concrete, rock solid, irrefutable evidence that those 150 people (your number, not mine) have caused 1000 people (your number, not mine) to leave the game over the course of a single month, then you point MIGHT have merit, but I'm going to go out on a limb and bet that you cannot provide that concrete, rock solid, irrefutable evidence.

 

As I stated, IMO, a far better way to prevent those "dead" old PVP servers from driving away new players is to make it known to those new players exactly what the population issues are on those "dead" old PVP servers. Doing this would not negatively impact those actual players that CHOOSE to play on those lower population servers in any way, while at the same time providing a much better "experience" for those hypothetical new players.

 

That would be okay IF they funneled all new accounts to only populated servers for their first few characters, and have labeled all the dead servers as very low population servers. Even then I would reduce all low pop servers to a single server to reduce cost overhead.

 

Now, let me ask you this. Combine every single active user on the dead servers. Let's say for arguments sake that there are 2000 combined active players across all dead servers. Do you honestly believe that there are less new/returning people who try the game for the first time than the amount of low population subscribers within a given year? If your answer is "No", then you realize that those subscribers become a detriment to the larger potential income and growth of the game.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Darkside

[Andryah]

The issue here is simply NOT as binary as some players wish to make it. We need to separate the wheat from the chaff in this discussion before it begins to melt down yet again, which will in turn narrow the focus and discourage some of the sweeping hyperbolic declarations by a small number of posters here...... So....

 

1) The studio should just lock the old PvP servers (which I think just about everyone agrees need some form of action), issue a notice to vacate within 30 days (with a one time free transfer for every character on said server), and then move whoever is left at the end of the 30 days wherever the studio wishes, and be done with it. The rest of the servers do not yet clearly warrant merges (regardless what the guildless PvPers and raiders try to claim).

 

2) Then.. revisit server status again in the fall after they release the next expac. The non-PvP server to watch in this regard is Begeren Colony, which is the smallest non-former-PvP server and yet is still active enough to not need to be merged. So revisit the topic in the fall.

 

3) And.. shame on all pro-merge-all-servers-now crowd for insisting that only one server in each region is worth continuing to keep open and that the studio simply must merge everything into one server in EU and one in NA. That is absurd nonsense at this point in time.

 

4) And.. shame on the studio for doing NOTHING (nothing visible to players) to address player concerns about needing the ability to move guilds and guild assets without the need to disband, forfeit assest, and rebuild new on a destination server. Begin a real effort to fix this now please Keith... as it is needed... even for people choosing to self-transfer. Lack of an actionable plan and process by the studio on this is just encouraging player on player hostilities in the forum. Keith.. if you cannot or will not address the issue with guild destruction in server moves... then at least be honest about it and state that in a gold post.. so we can all move on rather then continue this constant bickering in the forum over the "merge all servers now" nonsense.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Andryah

[Ratajack]

That would be okay IF they funneled all new accounts to only populated servers for their first few characters, and have labeled all the dead servers as very low population servers. Even then I would reduce all low pop servers to a single server to reduce cost overhead.

 

I don't believe that they should "funnel" all new accounts to certain servers. I believe that they should provide the information a new player would need to avoid those "dead" old PVP servers if they prefer a more populated server.

 

There is a difference between allowing a new player to make an informed decision and removing that choice from a new player.

 

 

As I said, IMO, those "dead" old PVP servers are, IMO, the only servers that should be considered for mergers and even mergers for those "dead" old PVP server should be considered ONLY if BW can resolve all the issues surrounding those mergers.

 

IF BW can ensure that no player on those "dead" old PVP servers will lose anything, that all guilds and guild assets, as well as all personal assets, and that no player will be negatively impacted in any way, then I would agree that those "dead" old PVP servers should be considered for being merged into another server in their respective areas.

[Andryah]

 

As I said, IMO, those "dead" old PVP servers are, IMO, the only servers that should be considered for mergers and even mergers for those "dead" old PVP server should be considered ONLY if BW can resolve all the issues surrounding those mergers.

 

IF BW can ensure that no player on those "dead" old PVP servers will lose anything, that all guilds and guild assets, as well as all personal assets, and that no player will be negatively impacted in any way, then I would agree that those "dead" old PVP servers should be considered for being merged into another server in their respective areas.

 

Honestly... at this point.. those old pvp servers are so dead and empty as to not be worth waiting until they have a process to move guilds intact. Those servers are already largely abandoned through self-transfers, and have been for at least a year now.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Andryah

[Darkside]

The issue here is simply NOT as binary as some players wish to make it. We need to separate the wheat from the chaff in this discussion before it begins to melt down yet again, which will in turn narrow the focus and discourage some of the sweeping hyperbolic declarations by a small number of posters here...... So....

 

1) The studio should just lock the old PvP servers (which I think just about everyone agrees need some form of action), issue a notice to vacate within 30 days (with a one time free transfer for every character on said server), and then move whoever is left at the end of the 30 days wherever the studio wishes, and be done with it. The rest of the servers do not yet clearly warrant merges (regardless what the guildless PvPers and raiders try to claim).

 

2) Then.. revisit server status again in the fall after they release the next expac. The non-PvP server to watch in this regard is Begeren Colony, which is the smallest non-former-PvP server and yet is still active enough to not need to be merged. So revisit the topic in the fall.

 

3) And.. shame on all pro-merge-all-servers-now crowd for insisting that only one server in each region is worth continuing to keep open and that the studio simply must merge everything into one server in EU and one in NA. That is absurd nonsense at this point in time.

 

4) And.. shame on the studio for doing NOTHING (nothing visible to players) to address player concerns about needing the ability to move guilds and guild assets without the need to disband, forfeit assest, and rebuild new on a destination server. Begin a real effort to fix this now please Keith... as it is needed... even for people choosing to self-transfer. Lack of an actionable plan and process by the studio on this is just encouraging player on player hostilities in the forum. Keith.. if you cannot or will not address the issue with guild destruction in server moves... then at least be honest about it and state that in a gold post.. so we can all move on rather then continue this constant bickering in the forum over the "merge all servers now" nonsense.

 

I know that I'm one of the players you mention in your above post, but my response is a bit of a curiosity about why on earth the devs don't have the ability to clone guilds/decorated-unlocked strongholds/outfits etc across all servers. You would think that they would be able to clone these assets, especially considering how quick they can already transfer characters and items. I do like the idea of closing some servers and revisiting the remaining ones in the near future. HOWEVER, I would like for them to include a more accurate number count / activity meter on the remaining servers, so that new/returning players can make the best informed choice.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Darkside

[Ratajack]

Honestly... at this point.. those old pvp servers are so dead and empty as to not be worth waiting until they have a process to move guilds intact. Those servers are already largely abandoned through self-transfers, and have been for at least a year now.

 

I don't disagree that those servers are largely abandoned, but I think waiting for a process to move guilds intact is still prudent, even for those servers, for multiple reasons.

 

Those reason include, but are not limited to:

 

1) I think even those few players remaining on those "dead" old PVP servers deserve the respect of being moved intact if they are going to have their choice of server "forcibly" removed.

 

2) Knowing the state of the mice in this game, if BW were to move those players on the "dead" old PVP servers without a process to move players and guild fully intact, I have no doubt that within hours we would see the first of many "BW, you already merged 'X, Y and Z servers' without having a process in place to move guilds and players intact. We demand that you merge the remaining servers into 'megasever A' or 'megaserver A and megaserver B'. You OWE us that." threads.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Ratajack

[Ratajack]

I know that I'm one of the players you mention in your above post, but my response is a bit of a curiosity about why on earth the devs don't have the ability to clone guilds/decorated-unlocked strongholds/outfits etc across all servers. You would think that they would be able to clone these assets, especially considering how quick they can already transfer characters and items. I do like the idea of closing some servers and revisiting the remaining ones in the near future. HOWEVER, I would like for them to include a more accurate number count / activity meter on the remaining servers, so that new/returning players can make the best informed choice.

 

I cannot say for certain, but I'm guessing that it is not as simple as "copy this file from server 'X' and install on new server 'Y'"

 

Even a character transfer will not transfer that character fully intact.

 

Anything in the mail is lost. Anything listed on the GTN is lost. BW warns you to empty he mailbox and remove all items listed on the GTN.

 

Items in legacy storage do not transfer.

 

Outfits stamped in designer slots are lost.

 

Strongholds have to repurchased ot re-opened and re-decorated, etc.

[Andryah]

1) I think even those few players remaining on those "dead" old PVP servers deserve the respect of being moved intact if they are going to have their choice of server "forcibly" removed.

 

I disagree, only because they represent such a small number of active players as to be not worth the attention and special handling at this point. Note: I have no objection of they actually do so with an intact guild process... but with multiple years of stone walling by the studio.... I don't see any magic happening here.

 

2) Knowing the state of the mice in this game, if BW were to move those players on the "dead" old PVP servers without a process to move players and guild fully intact, I have no doubt that within hours we would see the first of many "BW, you already merged 'X, Y and Z servers' without having a process in place to move guilds and players intact. We demand that you merge the remaining servers into 'megasever A' or 'megaserver A and megaserver B'. You OWE us that." threads.

 

I really could care less about what the "chicken little" "entitlement crowd" choose to smear all over the forum floor and walls. They are going to grouse no matter what... because that is what they do.. grouse.. and they pay to grouse.. which I find hilarious.

 

At the end of the day..... the empty old PvP servers serve little purpose other then to cloud all discussions about server merges. We need to pare down some of the nonsense, and this would be a good first step by the studio.

Edited June 8, 2017 by Andryah

[Darkside]

I cannot say for certain, but I'm guessing that it is not as simple as "copy this file from server 'X' and install on new server 'Y'"

 

Even a character transfer will not transfer that character fully intact.

 

Anything in the mail is lost. Anything listed on the GTN is lost. BW warns you to empty he mailbox and remove all items listed on the GTN.

 

Items in legacy storage do not transfer.

 

Outfits stamped in designer slots are lost.

 

Strongholds have to repurchased ot re-opened and re-decorated, etc.

 

But do you remember way way back didn't those things use to transfer, but people were complaining how long transfers took, which why they revamped it and made it super quick, but at the cost of stripping down the service?

[Thunderisaclone]

We need to separate the wheat from the chaff in this discussion, which will in turn narrow the focus and discourage some of the sweeping hyperbolic declarations by a small number of posters here...... So....

 

1) The studio should just lock the old PvP servers (which I think just about everyone agrees need some form of action), issue a notice to vacate within 30 days (with a one time free transfer for every character on said server), and then move whoever is left at the end of the 30 days wherever the studio wishes, and be done with it. The rest of the servers do not yet clearly warrant merges (regardless what the guildless PvPers and raiders try to claim).

 

Everyone??? nope.

 

2) Then.. revisit server status again in the fall after they release the next expac. The non-PvP server to watch in this regard is Begeren Colony, which is the smallest non-former-PvP server and yet is still active enough to not need to be merged. So revisit the topic in the fall.

 

Ok, so you think you get to decide witch servers get to close and where other have to move to? How is this any different to any of the other hyperbolic declarations you mention?

 

3) And.. shame on all pro-merge-all-servers-now crowd for insisting that only one server in each region is worth continuing to keep open and that the studio simply must merge everything into one server in EU and one in NA. That is absurd nonsense at this point in time.

 

Agreed on this. However I don't believe players should have a say on other players accounts. Servers closing down because BW cannot afford to keep them all going is one thing. In witch case all servers should go. New ones start up just less of them. That way all customers are treated equal. No player gets to keep anything extra to other players. Why should one player on a server that is closed down lose everything or even just a few things. When the ones on a different server gets to keep everything?

 

4) And.. shame on the studio for doing NOTHING visible to players to address player concerns about needing the ability to move guilds and guild assets without the need to disband, forfeit assest, and rebuild new on a destination server. Begin a real effort to fix this now please Keith... as it is needed... even for people choosing to self-transfer. Lack of an actionable plan and process by the studio on this is just encouraging player on player hostilities in the forum.

 

So 50-70 players concerns out way every other player? witch very few even agree on how the merge should happen.

You assume every guild member wants to move to the same server? That would only work if BW gave no say on which server you end up on. That will also mean threads complaining about the merge because they did not end up on the server they thought they would. Lets say that a guild has 500 members. 430 want to move to harbinger. The guild master wants to move to JC. The guild master is the one with the assets you mention. Think about it. So forced move would be the only option for a guild to stay together . How likely is it every guild member in large guilds are going to be happy with that? .

 

Dread

Edited June 8, 2017 by Thunderisaclone

[Andryah]

But do you remember way way back didn't those things use to transfer, but people were complaining how long transfers took, which why they revamped it and made it super quick, but at the cost of stripping down the service?

 

I have never seen any of the items he listed be part of character transfer. And the last server merges over 4 years ago did not have to consider any of this as it did not exist at that time.