is it time for one US Megaserver ?

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

On 12/25/2022 at 11:19 PM, illgot said:

I'm excited because a server merge will help everyone on Satele Shan while also benefiting everyone on Star Forge. You may not like the idea that our server will get a bit busier having more items on the GTN along with more players buying and selling, but I am. I'm also not worried about over crowding. We have the new 7.0 tagging system, the developers are lowering the timers on a lot of objectives and mobs and have been constantly updating them since 7.0. The only thing I am concerned with is losing character names. I haven't kept a single good name over the years so I'm not expecting to keep any after the upcoming merger.

I'm sorry, I must have missed the announcement of the server merger. Could you please link me to where Bioware has announced there is going to be a server merger? (Sarcasm)

No, a merger would not benefit Star Forge. We don't have any issues that we need help with. It would only be negatives for Star Forge.

Most Star Forgers, as this string [and others like it] clearly shows  don't want a merger with SS and that isn't because of all that 'benefiting everyone on Star Forge' that would occur.

One server that is comprised of 8 old servers would not be a good thing, it would be a bad thing, if it could even handle that amount at all.

Here's an idea, transfer to Star Forge, and gain all those benefits that you say going to Star Forge will give you and DON'T screw other players over for it in the process.

*Name changes.

*Increased lag.

*Possible log-in quece times.

*Congestion/crowding.

*Character slots/Not being able to make new characters without first deleting a bunch of present characters for those who have alot of alts.

*Increased toxicity (more people, more Ass-O's)

*Increased competition for objectives [where applicable]/increasing amount of respawn waits.]

*Server rivalries/Us vs. Them.

*Cyber-bullying [People being reunited with people who you use to give them problems and whom they switched servers to get away from.]

Star Forge doesn't need any help.

[eabevella]

Satele Shan is fine as it is.

I have no problem forming an operation group whenever I want to (people do tend to form ops group within guild first, unlike on SF, so you'll have to take initiative in the SS endgame channel)

I have no problem finishing GS3 objectives that require a group.

I have no problem finding a guild that's active in pacific asian time zone (if I have no problem doing all of above and below during pacific asian evening time zone, I don't think there will be problem doing them during US peak time).

I don't PvP but I know my guildies do PvP all the time.

I don't run HM/NiM raids but I've seen my guildies and strangers running around with the R4 HM wing mount so endgame raiding is apparently not a problem there.

Stuffs on the SS GTN are actually cheaper? At least from my experience in the past couple of months.

I bought quite a few stuffs that are >1B on SF on the SS GTN for 1B.

Anyway, Satele Shan doesn't need help either. If you don't like the style there, just move to SF.

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

3 hours ago, eabevella said:

Satele Shan is fine as it is.

I have no problem forming an operation group whenever I want to (people do tend to form ops group within guild first, unlike on SF, so you'll have to take initiative in the SS endgame channel)

I have no problem finishing GS3 objectives that require a group.

I have no problem finding a guild that's active in pacific asian time zone (if I have no problem doing all of above and below during pacific asian evening time zone, I don't think there will be problem doing them during US peak time).

I don't PvP but I know my guildies do PvP all the time.

I don't run HM/NiM raids but I've seen my guildies and strangers running around with the R4 HM wing mount so endgame raiding is apparently not a problem there.

Stuffs on the SS GTN are actually cheaper? At least from my experience in the past couple of months.

I bought quite a few stuffs that are >1B on SF on the SS GTN for 1B.

Anyway, Satele Shan doesn't need help either. If you don't like the style there, just move to SF.

Thanks for shedding some light on this from SS's side that differs from what some others have said.

I don't imagine one would want to lose the solidarity they feel for their own server just to be subsumed into another server without good reason.

[illgot]

Does anyone remember when Empire Fleet would have 5-7 instances up on a weekend? Planets would have 2-3 instances each at a minimum... and that was Satele Shan. Now that server is lucky to have 1 full instance of Empire Fleet prime time on the weekend. Give it by the end of next year and the server could end up looking like Levaithan.

What do you think Star Forge will look like a year from now? Do you think we will still have 2-3 instances of Empire Fleet at any given time? Have you not noticed, even on Star Forge the population drop we have had over the last year?

Do you want to wait until Star Forge is having issues filling up a single instance of Empire Fleet before welcoming in players from Satele Shan or are you willing to let the Satele Shan population get so dire that their merger would be absolutely meaningless in bolstering the population of Star Forge.

The most hilarious thing about this thread is it precisely mirrors the arguments I see against immigration in the real world.

"it is fine if it is controlled via paid server transfers, but going to destroy our server if we openly merge"

"We will lose our identity if we merge"

"People from Satele Shan will ruin our community by bring in people not like us"

9 hours ago, WayOfTheWarriorx said:

*Increased toxicity (more people, more Ass-O's)

I have stated it before, a server merge is going to help bolster the NA for a larger population loss in the future. If you want to wait until Star Forges population is as low as Satele Shan before a merge, it's already too late.

The good thing is, a merge isn't up to the players. The developers have real numbers on the games population and trends. What we say does not matter.

I'm just here because I'm bored and trying to get some of you to understand that merging servers would be better for the over all health of the game. That allowing a large population of players to get bored and quit because they can't get group content to pop on Satele Shan does not benefit the players on Star Forge.

Edited December 28, 2022 by illgot

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

1 hour ago, illgot said:

Does anyone remember when Empire Fleet would have 5-7 instances up on a weekend? Planets would have 2-3 instances each at a minimum... and that was Satele Shan. Now that server is lucky to have 1 full instance of Empire Fleet prime time on the weekend. Give it by the end of next year and the server could end up looking like Levaithan.

What do you think Star Forge will look like a year from now? Do you think we will still have 2-3 instances of Empire Fleet at any given time? Have you not noticed, even on Star Forge the population drop we have had over the last year?

Do you want to wait until Star Forge is having issues filling up a single instance of Empire Fleet before welcoming in players from Satele Shan or are you willing to let the Satele Shan population get so dire that their merger would be absolutely meaningless in bolstering the population of Star Forge.

The most hilarious thing about this thread is it precisely mirrors the arguments I see against immigration in the real world.

"it is fine if it is controlled via paid server transfers, but going to destroy our server if we openly merge"

"We will lose our identity if we merge"

"People from Satele Shan will ruin our community by bring in people not like us"

I have stated it before, a server merge is going to help bolster the NA for a larger population loss in the future. If you want to wait until Star Forges population is as low as Satele Shan before a merge, it's already too late.

The good thing is, a merge isn't up to the players. The developers have real numbers on the games population and trends. What we say does not matter.

I'm just here because I'm bored and trying to get some of you to understand that merging servers would be better for the over all health of the game. That allowing a large population of players to get bored and quit because they can't get group content to pop on Satele Shan does not benefit the players on Star Forge.

That's interesting because Star Forge which always had a notably bigger population than SS never had 5-7 instances of fleet.

As far as what will be on Star Forge in the future, lacking a crystal ball I'm not going to venture a guess on that but I'm certainly not going to assume I know what will happen in the future. But as of now, I see no reason to assume its going to get much worse.

The thing about fixing things that aren't broken yet....that's a great way to break things.

Quote

"That allowing a large population of players to get bored and quit because they can't get group content to pop on Satele Shan does not benefit the players on Star Forge."

If you have a large population of players, why are you complaining about having a small population of players? =p [Joke]

Assuming that's even true, it also doesn't hurt Star Forge. I say assuming because there are some people in this string who play on SS and say that isn't problem.

The devs don't need our approval to do anything and they also didn't ask us about this. I agree with you here, they have the numbers, and they haven't said a word about there being problems on SS or made mention of any possible mergers.

Quote

"People from Satele Shan will ruin our community by bring in people not like us"

I don't recall anyone saying anything of the sort. People are people, doesn't matter what server they're from.

Quote

If you want to wait until Star Forges population is as low as Satele Shan before a merge, it's already too late.

That's an assumption that that will happen, not fact. I don't see any noticeable declines in population on Star Forge that seem noteworthy or alarming or anyone voicing such concerns on Star Forge.

If the populations decline enough, the devs who have the numbers will than make that decision. If they decline that much, it really won't matter how many servers there are, nothing will save the game. I am personally of the opinion, and that's all it is,  just an opinion, that you give people lightsabers and Jedi and Sith to kill, people will come.

The devs don't need nor care what any of us think or our opinions on the matter. This is just us talken and sharing our thoughts.

[OlBuzzard]

@WayOfTheWarriorx For the most part of what you have said ..  you're probably correct (at least to some degree).  As for the devs not caring about what we think on the matter... well: yes and no!  IMO it depends on the nature of the discussion (personalities vs functionality) discernment over whimsical (just doing stuff for the sake of doing stuff).

**  I do think it's important that we discuss the matter.  There are some concerns that are worth looking into.  And there's some issues that will exist regardless of how many servers are out there.  Matters of personalities/conflicts will continue regardless ... and yet there are concerns that should be looked at carefully (such as RP groups).
** I'm not so sure how practical one big server would be for the rest of the real world.  There are other places to consider outside of the US that really do enjoy this game just as much as anyone else: Europe and Australia come to mind immediately.  Once again, the technology of the "cloud" and exactly how that works is NOT something I know that much about.  BUT I really am genuinely concerned about accessibility to those who have it now.  Who knows ... accessibility might improve for those overseas??? I just don't know.

Discussion can be good!  We can all learn from it if we want to (including the development team).

[Aghasett]

5 hours ago, OlBuzzard said:

Discussion can be good!  We can all learn from it if we want to (including the development team).

Other than personal experience we're in a total vacuum. I've been on the west coast server forever and SS feels dead as dirt to me, like never before, but we have no idea what BW's metrics are. We don't know what situation would necessitate a server merge, it's all entirely speculative. Whatever's discussed here has zero impact on that potentiality, that's a fact. I do hope it happens though, and naming conflicts and other complications be damned. SS is a graveyard, it's sad and lame and not sustainable at its current trajectory.

[OlBuzzard]

2 minutes ago, Aghasett said:

Other than personal experience we're in a total vacuum. I've been on the west coast server forever and SS feels dead as dirt to me, like never before, but we have no idea what BW's metrics are. We don't know what situation would necessitate a server merge, it's all entirely speculative. Whatever's discussed here has zero impact on that potentiality, that's a fact. I do hope it happens though, and naming conflicts and other complications be damned. SS is a graveyard, it's sad and lame and not sustainable at its current trajectory.

** Not everyone agrees with your assessment.
** Individuals can transfer characters now!

Problem solved without the merger!

Additionally:  The mega server has also been discussed in the context of what have some have defined as "in the cloud".  I have a pretty good idea what that is ... just not sure it's the right idea!

 

[MagesKickass]

Populated MMO's are more fun than dead MMO's. Anything that can be done to get more players in an area together, chatting together, queueing for PvP and group activities and GSF faster, more populated GTN, etc.

 

I see no reason, assuming the infrastructure is there for the game to have everyone on one Mega-Server, that there shouldn't be a mega-server. No more heartbreak over finding out someone else who also plays is on a different server. I love seeing other players in the world while I play, it's the whole reason to play MMO's. The more that happens, the better.

 

MMO's that have active playerbases also tend to attract more people to play as well. Nobody wants to play a dead MMO. Would probably do well for new player growth.

[Exly]

Well, according to Keith's letter from 12/20/2022 the servers are moving to the cloud soon along with the switch to 64-bit.  I don't know how that affects the need for multiple servers, but it could mean that if server mergers are going to happen, they will happen soon.

[Toraak]

Just a thought. If all characters are going to be in a cloud, couldn't that open up the possibility of Cross Server Queu's? While this is speculation on my part, I have no idea personally. 

 

If this is the case however, then there would be no reason to have a server merge. Group content would be across all servers, and those that want to be on a smaller population server still could.

[DWho]

9 minutes ago, Toraak said:

Just a thought. If all characters are going to be in a cloud, couldn't that open up the possibility of Cross Server Queu's? While this is speculation on my part, I have no idea personally. 

 

If this is the case however, then there would be no reason to have a server merge. Group content would be across all servers, and those that want to be on a smaller population server still could.

Putting the game in the cloud has one main advantage, reduced maintenance costs for Bioware (effectively virtual servers instead of physical ones). They would no longer need to "own" any servers and would not need to pay for maintenance (just whatever the rental fee is). Unfortunately, it is likely the first step towards a true maintenance mode. Updating the code would also be able to be done without taking the servers down, meaning more "up time" for sales of CM items.

A server merge would be a confirmation, that the game is going into maintenance mode so I hope we are not looking at that any time soon. For those cheering a server merge, keep that in mind.

[OlBuzzard]

14 minutes ago, DWho said:

Putting the game in the cloud has one main advantage, reduced maintenance costs for Bioware (effectively virtual servers instead of physical ones). They would no longer need to "own" any servers and would not need to pay for maintenance (just whatever the rental fee is). Unfortunately, it is likely the first step towards a true maintenance mode. Updating the code would also be able to be done without taking the servers down, meaning more "up time" for sales of CM items.

A server merge would be a confirmation, that the game is going into maintenance mode so I hope we are not looking at that any time soon. For those cheering a server merge, keep that in mind.

This is what is in the back of my mind.  I don't pretend to understand all of the technobabble ... but I do get where you are going with this.  I'm not convinced that this is 100% the case...  But this has to be something that will come up shortly.

Well.  Maybe someone will clue us in on the whole story before speculation gets too far out of hand.

To be perfectly candid about it...  I have a hard time believing that maintenance mode is that close at hand.  7.2 was so well done.  There is still so much potential of SWTOR yet to be tapped.  

BTW...  @DWho ... thanks for any tech stuff you post.  It does help.  

[DWho]

16 minutes ago, OlBuzzard said:

This is what is in the back of my mind.  I don't pretend to understand all of the technobabble ... but I do get where you are going with this.  I'm not convinced that this is 100% the case...  But this has to be something that will come up shortly.

Well.  Maybe someone will clue us in on the whole story before speculation gets too far out of hand.

To be perfectly candid about it...  I have a hard time believing that maintenance mode is that close at hand.  7.2 was so well done.  There is still so much potential of SWTOR yet to be tapped.  

BTW...  @DWho ... thanks for any tech stuff you post.  It does help.  

I think 7.2 was a response to them getting savaged over the state of 7.0 when it launched (if they hadn't "pulled a rabbit out of the hat", it might have been all over - 7.0 has been widely panned as the worst expansion so far, 7.2 shores it up a bit). I hope we're not looking at maintenance mode yet, but it is disconcerting to suddenly see an emphasis on 64-bit and "in the cloud" when there was really no "warning" it was coming. Both 64-bit and "in the cloud" will make it easier to maintain the servers (or more properly outsource them to someone else), whether those savings go into more content is the real question. Let's hope it means filling out the linear story-lines since Revan into something more like an open world format, where missions can be taken on when the player takes an interest in them and not as a gatekeeper to future content.

Edit:

My biggest concern is how "cloud servers" work. They are a decentralized type of configuration which means the data for the game could be spread out across multiple physical servers and dependent on some sort of "central processing" to keep it all running smoothly. Also, with the servers out of Bioware's hands, server issues may take longer to fix, since they won't be a priority to the "cloud server" manager. Priority will be assigned based on value to whoever is running the servers.

Edited December 29, 2022 by DWho

[casirabit]

1 hour ago, DWho said:

Putting the game in the cloud has one main advantage, reduced maintenance costs for Bioware (effectively virtual servers instead of physical ones). They would no longer need to "own" any servers and would not need to pay for maintenance (just whatever the rental fee is). Unfortunately, it is likely the first step towards a true maintenance mode. Updating the code would also be able to be done without taking the servers down, meaning more "up time" for sales of CM items.

A server merge would be a confirmation, that the game is going into maintenance mode so I hope we are not looking at that any time soon. For those cheering a server merge, keep that in mind.

That's what I am thinking, based on my experience from SWG; when they combined the servers, it was not long before they announced the game closing.  

 

Even though there isn't any talk about private servers (like there was in SWG), it doesn't mean it will not happen as the SWTOR game is a bit different than SWG was, so I am not sure they can even do private servers like SWG Legends for this game.

Edited December 29, 2022 by casirabit

[Nee-Elder]

34 minutes ago, casirabit said:

That's what I am thinking, based on my experience from SWG; when they combined the servers, it was not long before they announced the game closing.  

Not quite.

Our SWG servers merged in 2009  ( 6 years after release ) .

Then, that game shutdown 2 years later in 2011 , but that was primarily due to  SWTOR.  ( if SWTOR hadn't been announced, who knows what SOE/Daybreak & LucasArts  would've done ) .

And since , so far, no one knows  what if anything will be the next SW centered  MMO ,  i doubt  SWTOR is gonna shutdown anytime soon. ( 2 years from now in 2025 ? )

40 minutes ago, casirabit said:

Even though there isn't any talk about private servers  it doesn't mean it will not happen as the SWTOR game is a bit different

Who would even want/need a  private server of SWTOR though?

We already have psuedo-privacy  now, with  instanced  Strongholds & phases & such.   Plus the game is theme-park, not sandbox  ( like SWG was) ,  so there's nowhere template-wise to even BUILD anything.   Therefore, i don't really see the purpose or desire for a private server at all tbqh.

Unless maybe someone  could somehow  re-code retrofit  the game back to like 3.0 era with 'skill trees' ... i dunno.

[DarthCasus]

36 minutes ago, Nee-Elder said:

Who would even want/need a  private server of SWTOR though?

We already have psuedo-privacy  now, with  instanced  Strongholds & phases & such.   Plus the game is theme-park, not sandbox  ( like SWG was) ,  so there's nowhere template-wise to even BUILD anything.   Therefore, i don't really see the purpose or desire for a private server at all tbqh.

Unless maybe someone  could somehow  re-code retrofit  the game back to like 3.0 era with 'skill trees' ... i dunno.

Weren't private servers on another certain themepark game capable of allowing owners (or leasers) to tweak specific things about the experience, like speeding/slowing leveling, tweaking drop rates, and such? I think that's what Casira may have been alluding to with private servers, however unlikely the idea may be.

[OlBuzzard]

1 hour ago, DWho said:

I think 7.2 was a response to them getting savaged over the state of 7.0 when it launched (if they hadn't "pulled a rabbit out of the hat", it might have been all over - 7.0 has been widely panned as the worst expansion so far, 7.2 shores it up a bit). I hope we're not looking at maintenance mode yet, but it is disconcerting to suddenly see an emphasis on 64-bit and "in the cloud" when there was really no "warning" it was coming. Both 64-bit and "in the cloud" will make it easier to maintain the servers (or more properly outsource them to someone else), whether those savings go into more content is the real question. Let's hope it means filling out the linear story-lines since Revan into something more like an open world format, where missions can be taken on when the player takes an interest in them and not as a gatekeeper to future content.

Edit:

My biggest concern is how "cloud servers" work. They are a decentralized type of configuration which means the data for the game could be spread out across multiple physical servers and dependent on some sort of "central processing" to keep it all running smoothly. Also, with the servers out of Bioware's hands, server issues may take longer to fix, since they won't be a priority to the "cloud server" manager. Priority will be assigned based on value to whoever is running the servers.

I follow most of what you are saying.  Thanks for the continued replies.  There is one question I do have.  And this will probably expose my total ignorance on the subject.  BUT ... it's the only way I'm going to learn any of this...

"In the cloud"  ...  does this change accessibility for people other than US customers?  How might this affect Steam (if at all)?  Why even utilize the cloud accessibility?  I'm wondering if this is to make it easier (or cheaper) for the overall future of SWTOR.

Also:  Maintenance mode:  IMO I don't think we're there right now... BUT it could easily be that pieces are being put in place to make it as easy as just simply "throwing the switch" (so to speak).

(UGH !!! ...  I hope this is one time the old man is just totally wrong)

[TalLura]

44 minutes ago, OlBuzzard said:

I follow most of what you are saying.  Thanks for the continued replies.  There is one question I do have.  And this will probably expose my total ignorance on the subject.  BUT ... it's the only way I'm going to learn any of this...

"In the cloud"  ...  does this change accessibility for people other than US customers?  How might this affect Steam (if at all)?  Why even utilize the cloud accessibility?  I'm wondering if this is to make it easier (or cheaper) for the overall future of SWTOR.

Also:  Maintenance mode:  IMO I don't think we're there right now... BUT it could easily be that pieces are being put in place to make it as easy as just simply "throwing the switch" (so to speak).

(UGH !!! ...  I hope this is one time the old man is just totally wrong)

 

someone correct me if I'm wrong but i think the only real advantage of cloud would reduce server lag times for those farther away from server meaning no detriment to playing on Malgus form USA , or playing on SF or SS from Kenya or Italy for that matter. 

 

I play on both Malugs and SS and am in Europe, Malgus tends to be faster for me, but most my friends are on SS so i play there more 

 

 

, things aside, I am against server merges for not reason. SS has enough playerbase that its fine.  

 

[SteveTheCynic]

11 hours ago, DWho said:

They would no longer need to "own" any servers and would not need to pay for maintenance (just whatever the rental fee is). Unfortunately, it is likely the first step towards a true maintenance mode.

Please justify the use of "likely" here.  Arenanet moved GW2 to AWS (Amazon's cloud) back when they released Path of Fire (er, yes, they released a major expansion *and* moved to the cloud at the same time), and the game has released a bunch of Living World stuff *and* another major expansion since then, so "move to cloud" is not directly an indication of any sort of maintenance mode intent.

11 hours ago, DWho said:

Updating the code would also be able to be done without taking the servers down, meaning more "up time" for sales of CM items.

Indeed.  Well.  Not exactly.  GW2 has had "live" patching since before Path of Fire, that is, before they went cloudy.  Essentially, if you're in game when they push a patch, you get a warning notification ahead of time, and when the patch is pushed, you get a notification followed by a couple of hours to log out and pull the client-side patch.  If you refuse to log out yourself, after that couple of hours, the (old-style) server instance closes and you pull the patch anyway.

Please also bear in mind that it isn't a universally good thing.  It might make it more likely that server-crash bugs reach production, as in the initial release of GW2's Living World Season 4 Episode 3, where there was a server-crash bug in PvP somewhere.  It was fixed within a couple of hours, but it was annoying.

11 hours ago, DWho said:

A server merge would be a confirmation, that the game is going into maintenance mode

Not exactly.  It would, rather, be a confirmation that the active population per-server is substantially below what they want it to be.

11 hours ago, DWho said:

so I hope we are not looking at that any time soon. For those cheering a server merge, keep that in mind.

Wise words all the same.

[DWho]

9 hours ago, OlBuzzard said:

I follow most of what you are saying.  Thanks for the continued replies.  There is one question I do have.  And this will probably expose my total ignorance on the subject.  BUT ... it's the only way I'm going to learn any of this...

"In the cloud"  ...  does this change accessibility for people other than US customers?  How might this affect Steam (if at all)?  Why even utilize the cloud accessibility?  I'm wondering if this is to make it easier (or cheaper) for the overall future of SWTOR.

Also:  Maintenance mode:  IMO I don't think we're there right now... BUT it could easily be that pieces are being put in place to make it as easy as just simply "throwing the switch" (so to speak).

(UGH !!! ...  I hope this is one time the old man is just totally wrong)

My understanding is that you would still need an access portal and the distance/quality of the connection between you and that portal would determine your basic access speed. Beyond that, where the data is physically maintained would add additional access time. For example, you could have access portals basically anywhere the cloud service provider has a physical presence. The data is still stored on a physical server somewhere (not necessarily in the same place all the time) and there is some processing overhead required to maintain the "cloud" so there are additional potential delays. All of the data has to be transferred through the internet and there are no dedicated connections between the server farms in general, so internet speed in the region will determine performance.

On the other hand, it is possible to set up "virtual servers" anywhere there is a physical server farm owned by the service provider and you could maintain multiple copies of the software (pretty much like it is now with the physical server farms - US & Europe) without having to own the physical hardware. That could potentially improve performance for non-US users but does have an increased cost for the company using the "cloud"

[SteveTheCynic]

8 hours ago, TalLura said:

someone correct me if I'm wrong but i think the only real advantage of cloud would reduce server lag times for those farther away from server meaning no detriment to playing on Malgus form USA , or playing on SF or SS from Kenya or Italy for that matter. 

Not as such, no, it wouldn't do that.  If the specific cloud server where you are playing is the other side of the ocean, you still pay cross-ocean latency.

In fact, at quiet times in Europe, it might make latency *worse* for players physically in Europe by having all the cloud server instances in North America, and vice versa for NA quiet times.

[TalLura]

4 hours ago, SteveTheCynic said:

Not as such, no, it wouldn't do that.  If the specific cloud server where you are playing is the other side of the ocean, you still pay cross-ocean latency.

In fact, at quiet times in Europe, it might make latency *worse* for players physically in Europe by having all the cloud server instances in North America, and vice versa for NA quiet times.

thank you for clearing that up 

[OlBuzzard]

Hmmm

I think I'm kind of getting a better handle on this whole thing.
** Numbers have dropped with 7.0.  That might improve.  If there is a continued demonstration of what we received in 7.2 my guess would be that things will continue on an upward trend.  However, that does not mean that some areas (OPS / PvP) will still be hurting for a while yet.  IMO server transfer (as opposed to mergers) is still the best option.
** The cloud: This carries with it the POTENTIAL of providing better connections and perhaps less lag issues.  Possibly! I'm still a little fuzzy on some of this but this is my take on the matter.
** Individual servers ...  sounds like this could be farmed out.  There again:  possibly.
** IMO the team is simply still trying to do the best that they can within budget.  How much of this is a budget move and how much of this is a move by someone else (meaning EA) that is hard to say.

To quote the Jedi:  I say patience. 

From my own personal standpoint of view:  take this one step at a time and see what happens.  I have appreciated the discussion thus far.  It has been interesting to say the least.

[xordevoreaux]

As I've stated previously in this thread, I'm not for it, but if it happens, it happens, will probably bellyache about standing in a line 12 players deep to click to something instead of merely 6 deep, but I'll still be here.