Server Merge Discussion Thread

[Kernel_Cinders]

Does anyone else think we should stop posting until Eric and/or Keith gets back to us? We've discussed ideas, options, and opinions very thoroughly at this point with lots of information the Dev Team can sift through . . .

 

 

KC

[TyonYlle]

Does anyone else think we should stop posting until Eric and/or Keith gets back to us? We've discussed ideas, options, and opinions very thoroughly at this point with lots of information the Dev Team can sift through . . .

 

 

KC

 

I agree, it is obvious that this argument is going to go in a never-ending loop.

[Odinalmighty]

BW should merge the all english ones together, the germans ones & the french as well. That would get the best of everything on same server for each language

[Otaktey]

BW should merge the all english ones together, the germans ones & the french as well. That would get the best of everything on same server for each language

 

I think they should do whatever it takes to merge the group queue across all US and merge the group queue across all EU servers. Leave the servers alone and implement a cross server group queue. That would solve all issues except how to communicate with friends across servers to form groups. For that, they need to put an Origin overlay in the game and we can use that friends list to reach out to friends on other servers. The Origin friends list also has a voice chat component, and we could see each other online in other Origin games like Mass Effect and Battlefield.

[Ylliarus]

BW should merge the all english ones together, the germans ones & the french as well. That would get the best of everything on same server for each language

 

I am 100% for this idea, it is something that should have been done ages ago. The 9 servers we have on the EU side have really become obsolete, we don't need that many servers. Just 3, 1 English, 1 German and 1 French are more than enough.

[casirabit]

I am 100% for this idea, it is something that should have been done ages ago. The 9 servers we have on the EU side have really become obsolete, we don't need that many servers. Just 3, 1 English, 1 German and 1 French are more than enough.

 

No Thank you. Merging East with West on the US is not practical due to some people's connection and other problems with certain servers toxic behaviors. Furthermore, not every server is low on population. Are some, yea, but not all which is a point some people are ignoring.

Edited June 13, 2017 by casirabit

[fushnchips]

No Thank you. Merging East with West on the US is not practical due to some people's connection and other problems with certain servers toxic behaviors. Furthermore, not every server is low on population. Are some, yea, but not all which is a point some people are ignoring.

 

I don't see what the problem is other games manage just fine with 1 US server and 1 EU server and players in those games are from all over the globe so I think the excuse of east and west is tiring.

[Artanisia]

Server merges create more problems than they solve - and to be honest, I personally have no problems with low-population servers. I like to switch between high-pop and low-pop servers, depending on how social I feel that day.

 

Additionally, as a RP player I am strongly against merges, because I have no desire to get harrassed and griefed - and yes, that will happen. I have seen it in two games I played and quit after the merges.

[DWho]

I don't see what the problem is other games manage just fine with 1 US server and 1 EU server and players in those games are from all over the globe so I think the excuse of east and west is tiring.

 

The two items brought up are of concern. My latency to the west coast is 80 ms and to the east 40 ms from the Midwest. That would seem to indicate an east coast to west coast latency of around 100-120 ms. Doesn't sound like much but I am sure PVPers and Nim Ops players will tell you it can be problematic. A centrally located server might be an answer to that but that would likely mean another server move and the problems associated with that. For whatever reason this game seems to be subject to (or at least more affected by) latency, or latency spikes, than a lot of other games. Toxicity is also an issue with large servers. If there were a hard line taken on chat, I would be less inclined to resist larger servers. People defend Harbinger as "not that bad" as far as toxic chat but it is flat out disgusting for someone who has played on the more civil east coast servers. I have no idea what the reason for that is other than server size.

[HuaRya]

Server merges create more problems than they solve - and to be honest, I personally have no problems with low-population servers. I like to switch between high-pop and low-pop servers, depending on how social I feel that day.

 

Additionally, as a RP player I am strongly against merges, because I have no desire to get harrassed and griefed - and yes, that will happen. I have seen it in two games I played and quit after the merges.

 

These RP'ers and their demands for safe spaces make me think of the John Travolta TV movie Boy in the Bubble. The moral of that story was in the end he very much wanted to get out and socialize with the rest of the world and do the things other teens his age did.

 

RP'ers say they avoid fleet and decry it has no indication of a servers population and yet when you go onto TEH they are all congregating at the bar at the center of fleet.

[Savej]

That is exactly my point.

 

BW would not need to talk about the "why", regardless of what the "why" was.

 

Therefore, we do not know what they "why" is. We can guess, but we do not know, no matter what some would like to claim or have the rest of us believe.

 

You were making assumptions that BW couldn't handle merges with a legacy currency based on the fact that they aren't handling them with transfers now. And that merges would therefore destroy it. Just like merges would destroy guild ships, legacy banks and a bunch of other things based on merge technology that was created before those things existed. Do we agree that such assumptions are just that: baseless, worst case assumptions?

Edited June 13, 2017 by Savej

[DWho]

These RP'ers and their demands for safe spaces make me think of the John Travolta TV movie Boy in the Bubble. The moral of that story was in the end he very much wanted to get out and socialize with the rest of the world and do the things other teens his age did.

 

RP'ers say they avoid fleet and decry it has no indication of a servers population and yet when you go onto TEH they are all congregating at the bar at the center of fleet.

 

You know there is very little difference between your wanting to be on a more populated server and their desire to be on a less populated one and be left alone. Not everyone wants to live in New York City because of (crime, intolerance, filth, etc). They have just as much right to their playstyle as you have to yours. That has been the problem with this thread, no empathy for the other position.

[DWho]

You were making assumptions that BW couldn't handle merges with a legacy currency based on the fact that they aren't handling them with transfers now. And that merges would therefore destroy it. Just like merges would destroy guild ships, legacy banks and a bunch of other things based on merge technology that was created before those things existed. Do we agree that such assumptions are just that: baseless, worst case assumptions?

 

I would say they are legitimate concerns not baseless, worst case assumptions (outside the GC currency). What if I said it is a baseless, best case assumption that server mergers are going to improve group activities. Everyone who I have seen say that has said, just look at what happened last time we merged. Same story different side.

[LordRapheus]

Server merges could offset not only the population frustrations, but also the downtime/maintenance frustrations. I saw above someone suggested ONE server West Coast, ONE server East Coast. Another expressed concerns about new players stumbling into an empty server and getting turned off of the game which will appear dead in that server.

 

My suggestion is, in response, is link an active server with an empty server. Downtime shutdown will still boot you from your main server, and the next time you log in you'll be on the "standby" server, which would be a carbon copy of your main. the servers would be linked, so whenever you are not logged in to your account, your story progression/n game achievements will be synced with the other server, which wouldn't be as large a deal as a server wide patch installation. This would be no more of a lag than as many people accessing their, for instance, facebook accounts at the same time. Each sync would take no more than several seconds.

 

During maintenance, you'd be locked out of your main server, but able to play on the alternate. When maintenance is over, the main server opens again, but only the login server is rerouted, sending you an in game chat window message, but not booting you out of the secondary server.

 

We still get to play, no one can log into an empty server, and Valkorian is still a bad memory.

 

[bncsmom]

you were ok till you got to the end. separating pve and pvp was one of the best things they ever did. Make it so I can turn off the pvp flag with absolutely no chance of turning it on unless I go to preferences. until that happens, I dont need or want to be in a pvp capable instance.

 

You do realize, don't you, that with the old system you had to flag yourself for PvP, unless you were on a PvP server, or you couldn't PvP on any planet? It was an actual toggle button on your minimap. The only exception was if you were a healer and hit someone else who was flagged for PvP with a heal. It would then flag you, but even then, so long as you actually paid attention, there was a very small chance of being flagged.

[DWho]

You do realize, don't you, that with the old system you had to flag yourself for PvP, unless you were on a PvP server, or you couldn't PvP on any planet? It was an actual toggle button on your minimap. The only exception was if you were a healer and hit someone else who was flagged for PvP with a heal. It would then flag you, but even then, so long as you actually paid attention, there was a very small chance of being flagged.

 

In the old system the problem was the AOE bug, which I don't recall if they ever fixed, and the griefers standing on top of objectives so you couldn't get to them without flagging yourself. The PVP griefers were the ones to blame for the change (and it did not take many of them to ruin the game for a lot of people). All you had to do was join a group with someone who was flagged for PVP and you were immediately flagged. Healing a flagged person also flagged you. There were lots of ways to abuse that system. That was why it was changed. I believe even attacking a mob that someone flagged for PVP was attacking also flagged you.

[fushnchips]

The two items brought up are of concern. My latency to the west coast is 80 ms and to the east 40 ms from the Midwest. That would seem to indicate an east coast to west coast latency of around 100-120 ms. Doesn't sound like much but I am sure PVPers and Nim Ops players will tell you it can be problematic. A centrally located server might be an answer to that but that would likely mean another server move and the problems associated with that. For whatever reason this game seems to be subject to (or at least more affected by) latency, or latency spikes, than a lot of other games. Toxicity is also an issue with large servers. If there were a hard line taken on chat, I would be less inclined to resist larger servers. People defend Harbinger as "not that bad" as far as toxic chat but it is flat out disgusting for someone who has played on the more civil east coast servers. I have no idea what the reason for that is other than server size.

 

and mine is 150-180 west and 220 east so that is no issue at all

[casirabit]

These RP'ers and their demands for safe spaces make me think of the John Travolta TV movie Boy in the Bubble. The moral of that story was in the end he very much wanted to get out and socialize with the rest of the world and do the things other teens his age did.

 

RP'ers say they avoid fleet and decry it has no indication of a servers population and yet when you go onto TEH they are all congregating at the bar at the center of fleet.

 

Incorrect. Not all RP are in the center of the fleet. Myself I rarely am on the fleet. I am either out doing heroics, flashpoints or last night I was doing an operation, so that comment is incorrect, considering you said all roleplayers.

[ivanhedgehog]

Incorrect. Not all RP are in the center of the fleet. Myself I rarely am on the fleet. I am either out doing heroics, flashpoints or last night I was doing an operation, so that comment is incorrect, considering you said all roleplayers.

 

You mean different rpers want to do different things? Say it isnt so, I always thought yall were a hive mind. I dont rp but I want you to have fun in the game. Someone was kind enough to explain to me why you need to keep a rp server as opposed to just an rp instance, so I agree the rp server need to labeled as such and CS needs to keep a shorter leash on griefing there.

[Andryah]

You mean different rpers want to do different things? Say it isnt so, I always thought yall were a hive mind. I dont rp but I want you to have fun in the game. Someone was kind enough to explain to me why you need to keep a rp server as opposed to just an rp instance, so I agree the rp server need to labeled as such and CS needs to keep a shorter leash on griefing there.

 

I'm not an RPer myself, but I generally do locate on RP servers in MMOs, as I do enjoy observing the RPers doing their thing.

 

The RP on EH is generally rather good and fairly prolific, and generally not griefed by non-RPers. As non-RPers.. I consider us "guests" in the context of their playstyle if we choose to locate on an RP server.

[casirabit]

You mean different rpers want to do different things? Say it isnt so, I always thought yall were a hive mind. I dont rp but I want you to have fun in the game. Someone was kind enough to explain to me why you need to keep a rp server as opposed to just an rp instance, so I agree the rp server need to labeled as such and CS needs to keep a shorter leash on griefing there.

Lol, someone that understand that not all people are the same, even roleplayers.

[Talon_strikes]

separating pve and pvp was one of the best things they ever did..

But making PvP/PvE instances was NOT. Doing so made PvP servers irrelevant, thus hurting the PvP community and forcing us to go to PvE servers for faster queue pops.

[DanNV]

But making PvP/PvE instances was NOT. Doing so made PvP servers irrelevant, thus hurting the PvP community and forcing us to go to PvE servers for faster queue pops.

 

I disagree. It was probably one of the better things they'e done in the last 3 or 4 years. PVP servers were already irrelevant because most of the population had moved to servers where they could get PVP queue pops. Most of them went to Harbinger. Making instances solved the issues of PVP griefers and gave the PVP community the chance to have OW PVP on the servers they moved to. It's not BWs fault no one wants to go to the PVP instances, it's the fault of the PVP community and how they have behaved over time.

[Ratajack]

You were making assumptions that BW couldn't handle merges with a legacy currency based on the fact that they aren't handling them with transfers now.

 

 

No, I was not. Go back and actually read what I wrote. In fact, I'll quote your post and my response:

 

Command tokens are not transferring with some characters because if they were that would be very exploitable with the current transfer system, not because BW can't do it.

 

Do you have a quote from an actual BW source to confirm that?

 

It is a possible explanation, but without a quote from a BW source, that is all it is---a POSSIBLE explanation, that may or may not be the actual reason.

 

 

Notice that nowhere did I make any assumptions. I pointed out that YOU were making a statement as fact, when in truth, you have nothing with which to back up YOUR assumption.

 

And that merges would therefore destroy it. Just like merges would destroy guild ships, legacy banks and a bunch of other things based on merge technology that was created before those things existed. Do we agree that such assumptions are just that: baseless, worst case assumptions?

 

No. we cannot agree that the concerns of those against merging servers are just "baseless, worst case assumptions".

 

You might wish they were, but they are not.

 

All of the evidence we have points to those being at least possible outcomes of server merges, if not definite outcomes.

 

As has been pointed out numerous times, the previous two merges blew up guilds, and destroyed guild banks. Yes, guilds could be reformed, and some guilds got their bank tabs reinstated (but not the contents of their banks), although it took months for some guilds to have their bank tabs reinstated.

 

There is currently still no way to transfer guilds, let alone with all guild assets intact.

 

Transfers do not currently transfer all personal assets.

 

Is it possible that BW can put a process in place, in the event they deem mergers necessary (something which they have NOT done at this time), to ensure that no one loses anything and that no one is negatively impacted in any way? Yes, but they have so far given no indication that they are even working on such a process, let alone that they are close to having it in place.

[Ratajack]

and mine is 150-180 west and 220 east so that is no issue at all

 

It may not be an issue for you, but for some a jump of 40-70 MS ping could be a huge impact on the game.