Can we get free transfers off dead servers please?

[TrixxieTriss]

34 minutes ago, Darkestmonty said:

they don't mirror each other. Low pop servers lose players faster than servers with a higher population. SF and SS used to have similar populations a few years ago. The gap was never as big as SF having 2-3 times the population of SS until the last year or two.

Every server has a population decay problem!

[Darkestmonty]

26 minutes ago, TrixxieTriss said:

You are still ignoring the point that mergers ALSO negatively affect some players. Until you recognise that, I can only assume you want mergers for your own selfish reasons. 

The only real loss from a merge is character names and from what I read who gets to retain character names depends on more factors than who created the character first on that server. That will only effect 50% of the people with clashing names.

People wanting to play in empty worlds? The very real time numbers I took disprove the idea that the lower population of SS will always let people play in world instances with lower populations. SS had 1 instance of Coruscant with 59 players. SF had 3 instances up, one with 120 players, and two others instances that split the remaining 59 players. That means if you wanted to encounter less people, SF would have been a better option than SS; a bonus for SF being that with 3 instances open you had more options for avoiding players if you did encounter them.

That people like having a GTN stocked with less items? That doesn't happen. I want to meet the person who says "You know what, I enjoy never finding what I want on the GTN or having to pay astronomical prices because no one else is selling!"

That people like their small guild community? If servers merge there is nothing stopping you from retaining your small guild community. You can still keep a very small discord community as well. None of that changes with a server merge.

That people on SF think their Erotic Role Play will be destroyed by people from SS making fun of them? Sorry, SF already makes fun of ERPers when their Erotic Role Play about licking feet or lap dancing starts leaking into gen chat. Having more players isn't going to change that.

That SS has a superior PvP community? SS has a much smaller PvP community, not super elite PvPers that far exceed the PvPers on SF. Trust me, I see the same bad PvP on every server including the EU servers.

What negative other than possibly losing your name are you talking about?

Edited July 24, 2023 by Darkestmonty

[black_pyros]

9 hours ago, SteveTheCynic said:

Well, except for the mobs in the front area of The Face Merchants, whose groups have a respawn delay of five minutes

I think 5 minutes respawn wouldn't be that much of a problem if there was not a bonus requiring to wipe all the mobs in the area and the associated selfish (or simply uneducated) players insisting to complete said bonus only to get the laughable credits/xp for it.

[Darkestmonty]

5 minutes ago, black_pyros said:

I think 5 minutes respawn wouldn't be that much of a problem if there was not a bonus requiring to wipe all the mobs in the area and the associated selfish (or simply uneducated) players insisting to complete said bonus only to get the laughable credits/xp for it.

but the bonus is pretty good for new players. Timers need to be reworked though. There are a few heroics, mostly the bonuses, that I still run into that need a bit of work.

Most of the time I don't even run into people on SF but I always pick the PvP instance or drop down to the one with the lowest population.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Darkestmonty

[black_pyros]

5 minutes ago, Darkestmonty said:

but the bonus is pretty good for new players. Timers need to be reworked though. There are a few heroics, mostly the bonuses, that I still run into that need a bit of work.

Bonus quests requiring to kill substantial amount of mobs (especially those with slow respawn) are terrible way of earning xp since the time used can be rather spent doing next heroic/quest and earn even more xp.

Edited July 24, 2023 by black_pyros

[Darkestmonty]

10 minutes ago, black_pyros said:

Bonus quests requiring to kill substantial amount of mobs (especially those with slow respawn) are terrible way of earning xp since the time used can be rather spent doing next heroic/quest and earn even more xp.

completely agree about it being inefficient but some players aren't playing for efficiency. Plus some classes benefit from gathering 5-10 enemies at once and AOEing them down. It's good practice since our training dummies are only single target.

I miss the own renown system which gave some players a reason to finish up some quick bonus missions or push themselves beyond the weekly conquest goals. The sad part is once you hit your weekly conquest goal with 7.0, bonus missions, even if they only take you another 10 seconds, is a complete waste of time at max level.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Darkestmonty

[TrixxieTriss]

1 hour ago, Darkestmonty said:

The only real loss from a merge is character names and from what I read who gets to retain character names depends on more factors than who created the character first on that server. That will only effect 50% of the people with clashing names.

People wanting to play in empty worlds? The very real time numbers I took disprove the idea that the lower population of SS will always let people play in world instances with lower populations. SS had 1 instance of Coruscant with 59 players. SF had 3 instances up, one with 120 players, and two others instances that split the remaining 59 players. That means if you wanted to encounter less people, SF would have been a better option than SS; a bonus for SF being that with 3 instances open you had more options for avoiding players if you did encounter them.

That people like having a GTN stocked with less items? That doesn't happen. I want to meet the person who says "You know what, I enjoy never finding what I want on the GTN or having to pay astronomical prices because no one else is selling!"

That people like their small guild community? If servers merge there is nothing stopping you from retaining your small guild community. You can still keep a very small discord community as well. None of that changes with a server merge.

That people on SF think their Erotic Role Play will be destroyed by people from SS making fun of them? Sorry, SF already makes fun of ERPers when their Erotic Role Play about licking feet or lap dancing starts leaking into gen chat. Having more players isn't going to change that.

That SS has a superior PvP community? SS has a much smaller PvP community, not super elite PvPers that far exceed the PvPers on SF. Trust me, I see the same bad PvP on every server including the EU servers.

What negative other than possibly losing your name are you talking about?

Ok, now I know you’re just here to troll people. Easy fix. #ignore

Edited July 24, 2023 by TrixxieTriss

[Darkestmonty]

20 minutes ago, TrixxieTriss said:

Ok, now I know you’re just here to troll people. Easy fix. #ignore

and completely refusing to answer what the loss was. Again, the only real loss on a server merge would be names which in my mind will always be secondary to having a healthy population.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Darkestmonty

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

3 hours ago, Darkestmonty said:

SF players would gain in every category unless the larger population causes server instability. GTN inventory would increase around 60%, a population increase of at least a 30%, faster queues for all group content, and more world instances opening up spreading people out.

It doesn't need any help on any category. The GTN is fully stocked, no issues there. The quece times are already very good.

How many instances could we need, if we already have 3 instances, that aren't always full, than some more people isn't necessarily gonna lead to more instances.

Also, I'd be interested in what you based your calculations on that lead you to the 60%/30% increases in the areas you listed.

Lastly, if SS is as dead as you guys are saying it is, than I don't imagine adding that small amount of players to SF would have much of a noticeable change. Changes that are not needed at any rate.

3 hours ago, Darkestmonty said:

Do you really think character names are more important than all players on a server being able to find group content outside of a few hours during prime time? That is a very odd argument for an MMO. If that is how you feel we may as well lock up SS so no new accounts can make characters there just so we can try and retain more players.

For me personally, the names thing is a total non-issue for me. I only play one Character and I doubt severely someone on SS (or any other server for that matter!) is also using the name Grim'alkun.

All I will say to this is that, names are extremely important to many players in the game, as you have seen in these discussions like we're having here, the name thing keeps on popping up as a major concern for many players due to server mergers, and in many cases that is based on their personal experience from the last time they merged servers.

Whether it is more important or not, that is a bit subjective, it really depends on who you ask.

If I had to change my character's name after playing him in this game exclusively for over 10 years, I would be pissed as hell.

This is however easily addressed to the concerns of players on SF by making it if a server merge does take place based on SS need for it, than all name conflicts should go in the favor of people on SF, and it should be the people who needed the merge who would have to change their names. - As you yourself said, in your opinion the name thing isn't more important, if that's so than I'm sure you would agree with me this is how it should be handled in the event of SS needing to be merged with SF. That's my only feeling on the name's issue as it isn't a small thing and I can understand how players on SF would be against such changes.

3 hours ago, Darkestmonty said:

Nothing kills an MMO faster than a lot of dead servers with very little group content. Look at LV, their server started dying and a lot of French people play TH or DM. They didn't want to stick

That very well may be the case, so all we need to do here is to first establish whether or not SS is in fact a dead server with little group content. I can't say either way, I'm not over there. I don't have a clue. What I do have, however, is some very contradictory statements being said on the status of SS.

There are several people in this string who have stated from their own personal experience playing on SS currently that SS is neither dead, nor has little group content.

Furthermore, without accurate figures regarding the true active player populations on the servers, all of this is just speculative. The only people I'm aware of with the exact figures is BW/BS. If SS is dead with little group content than BW/BS will take the necessary steps out of that necessity. If they don't merge the severs, than the likelihood is that SS isn't as dead as some people are claiming.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by WayOfTheWarriorx

[Darkestmonty]

19 minutes ago, WayOfTheWarriorx said:

It doesn't need any help on any category. The GTN is fully stocked, no issues there. The quece times are already very good.

How many stances could we need, if we already have 3 instances, that aren't always full than some more people isn't necessarily gonna lead to more instances.

Also, I'd be interested in what you based your calculations on that lead you to the 60%/30% increases in the areas you listed.

Lastly, if SS is as dead as you guys are saying it is, that I don't imagine adding that small amount of players would have any significant change. Changes that are not needed at any rate.

For me personally, the names thing is a total non-issue for me. I only play one Character and I doubt severely someone on SS (or any other server for that matter!) is also using the name Grim'alkun.

All I will say to this is that, names are extremely important to many players in the game, as you have seen in these discussions like we're having here, the name thing keeps on popping up as a major concern for many players due to server mergers, and in many cases that is based on their personal experience from the last time they merged servers.

Whether it is more important or not, that is a bit subjective, it really depends on who you ask.

If I had to change my characters name after playing him in this game exclusively for over 10 years, I would be pissed as hell.

This is however easily addressed to the concerns of players on SF by making it if a server merge does take place based on SS need for it, than all name conflicts should go in the favor of people on SF, and it should be the people who needed the merge who would have to change their names. - As you yourself said, in your opinion the name thing isn't more important, if that's so than I'm sure you would agree with me this is how it should be handled in the event of SS needing to be merged with SF. That's my only feeling on the name's issue as it isn't a small thing and I can understand how players on SF would be against such changes.

That very well may be the case, so all we need to do here is to first establish whether or not SS is in fact a dead server with little group content. I can't say either way, I'm not over there. I don't have a clue. What I do have, however, is some very contradictory statements being said on the status of SS.

There are several people in this string who have stated from their own personal experience playing on SS currently that SS is neither dead, nor has little group content.

Furthermore, without accurate figures regarding the true active player populations on the servers, all of this is just speculative. The only people I'm aware of with the exact figures is BW/BS. If SS is dead with little group content than BW/BS will take the necessary steps out of that necessity. If they don't merge the severs, than the likelihood is that SS isn't as dead as some people are claiming.

 

 

 

 

 

you admit you only play SS and only play 1 character. How can you even begin to imagine how low your servers GTN is compared to other servers. In many categories your servers GTN is barely above TH and lower in some cases. The only server that has less items in every category than SS is Levaithan. But I wouldn't expect you to understand how bad that considering you only play 1 character on one server and have never logged on to any other servers.

Your GTN has about 57% of the items SF has. Even DM has a better stocked GTN than SS. I make billions on SS because I can sell CM items and resources there with almost no competition. On SF and DM there is a lot more competition to sell so my prices are usually much cheaper.

Considering your admittedly have no experience on other servers, saying that the SS server is well stocked while being the third lowest stocked GTN should tell you something.

again, a sever merge isn't for the benefit of SF, it is for the benefit of players on SS and to help retain new players before they find out SS is pretty much dead outside prime time hours. SF will benefit from more players if the servers can handle it, but the server merge is better for SS players and the overall health (population wise) of the game.

Names

It doesn't matter how important yours, mine, or Billy Bobs name is, having a healthy population trumps character names.

I don't understand how you can sit there arguing that SS is fine when you admit you have issues finding group content out of prime time hours, you admit you only play one server, and you admit you only play one character. You don't even have the ability to fully check your own servers status on both factions.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Darkestmonty

[Jdast]

1 hour ago, Darkestmonty said:

and completely refusing to answer what the loss was. Again, the only real loss on a server merge would be names which in my mind will always be secondary to having a healthy population.

This is my first foray into this thread (and probably my last since it is going around in circles).

Darkestmonty, there is a very easy way to test your theory that the only downside is name changes.

The answer, as outlined by StrikePrice in their OP, is to offer transfers at a significantly reduced price. Many others in this thread have agreed. Heck, I would even go so far as to make transfers free or virtually free for a period of time announced well in advance.

The obvious caveats would apply: I don't know the cost of running a second server in the DC Metro region, and I have no idea what the implications are of the presumably forthcoming AWS (I won't bore you with what I do for a living, but I will tell you I'm not an action hero movie star and I most certainly am not in a field that has anything to do with information technology).

If you're right then Satele Shan will cease to exist completely and there will be an exodus en masse, particularly if the only variable preventing that now is the prohibitive cost of transfers.

But I see no harm in respecting our fellow players and affording them the opportunity to decide for themselves. I've just read too many posts / spoken in chat about how many players like SS. Personally, I only play on Star Forge for many of the reasons you identify. I just don't think it is my place to impose my preferences on others.

Bottom line: I agree with StrikePrice and a multitude of others in this thread.

Dasty

Edited July 24, 2023 by Jdast
Stupid Typos!

[Darkestmonty]

32 minutes ago, Jdast said:

This is my first foray into this thread (and probaly my last since it is going around in circles).

Darkestmonty, there is a very easy way to test your theory that the only downside is name changes.

The answer, as outlined by StrikePrice in their OP, is to offer transfers at a significantly reduced price. Many others in this thread have agreed. Heck, I would even go so far as to make transfers free or virtually free for a period of time announced well in advance.

The obvious caveats would be, I don't know the cost of running a second server in the DC Metro region, and I have no idea what the implications are of the presumably forthcoming AWS (I won't bore you with what I do for a living, but I will tell you I'm not an action hero movie star and I most certainly am not in a field that has anything to do with information technology).

If you're right then Satele Shan will cease to exist and it will be exodus en masse. But I see no harm in respecting your fellow players and affording them the opportunity to decide for themselves. I've just read too many posts / spoken in chat about how they like SS. Personally, I only play on Star Forge for many of the reasons you identify. I just don't think it is my place to impose my preferences on others

Bottom line: I agree with StrikePrice and a multitude of others in this thread.

Dasty

There is a reason SWTOR no longer has 209 servers. Once a population gets too low to maintain a decent level of group content, or support the cost of maintaining that server, it gets merged. The idea that a game company will forever maintain a dying server so players can keep their character names is insane. We may not need a server merge now, but it's getting closer. The fact that people are still asking for free transfers off of SS to SF shows I'm not the only one seeing the issue.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Darkestmonty

[Eckrond]

9 hours ago, WayOfTheWarriorx said:

There is no argument on this. Not everyone who's into mutli-player aspects of MMOS wants megaservers.

You're objectively wrong.

You tried to argue your points, you failed, you backpedaled, that is the end of the story here.

Megaservers with optional instancing are the optimal for any MMO, you are objectively wrong if you believe otherwise.

[Darkestmonty]

9 minutes ago, Eckrond said:

You tried to argue your points, you failed, you backpedaled, that is the end of the story here.

Megaservers with optional instancing are the optimal for any MMO, you are objectively wrong if you believe otherwise.

I love the idea of mega servers. I've experience limited mega servers with Asian MMOs and it's great. You can play with anyone you want, your friends don't have to be on your server. There are no low pop servers like Leviathan and Satele Shan. Group content happens regularly through out the day.

The only issue is I don't know if that is even possible with SWTOR. I'm not even sure cross server queues and a cross server GTN is even possible.

What I do know is possible are server merges so that is the only thing I will keep suggesting to fix low pop servers.

But yeah, if mega servers were possible that would fix any low pop issues with the game. Maybe players on Leviathan can actually buy and sell things on the GTN and play PvP more.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Darkestmonty

[Eckrond]

2 minutes ago, Darkestmonty said:

The only issue is I don't know if that is even possible with SWTOR. I'm not even sure cross server queues and a cross server GTN is even possible.

Yeah, that was my original point, separate servers are a necessary limitation currently, not a feature.

[TrixxieTriss]

9 minutes ago, Eckrond said:

Megaservers with optional instancing are the optimal for any MMO, you are objectively wrong if you believe otherwise.

That’s not true because of distance & performance issues.

I can categorically tell you that playing with 220-350ms ping is far worse than playing with 20ms ping. 

MMO’s that don’t offer regional servers are bound to do poorly compared to those with regional servers. 

Of course, that depends on the game too & the IP. But if you think a mega server that only caters to those who live the closest to the server is the best experience for players, then you’re 100% wrong.

[Darkestmonty]

32 minutes ago, TrixxieTriss said:

That’s not true because of distance & performance issues.

I can categorically tell you that playing with 220-350ms ping is far worse than playing with 20ms ping. 

MMO’s that don’t offer regional servers are bound to do poorly compared to those with regional servers. 

Of course, that depends on the game too & the IP. But if you think a mega server that only caters to those who live the closest to the server is the best experience for players, then you’re 100% wrong.

mega servers should still try to match players based on connections and locations if possible. They aren't haphazardly matching up the first people who queue up for pvp when one person has a 23ms ping and the other person has a 550ms ping. That usually only happens when there is no other choice... like when a server has an extremely low population and no one else is queuing up.

Edited July 24, 2023 by Darkestmonty

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

1 hour ago, Darkestmonty said:

you admit you only play SS and only play 1 character.

I admitted no such thing. I do not, nor have I ever played on SS. I play on Star Forge.

1 hour ago, Darkestmonty said:

. How can you even begin to imagine how low your servers GTN is compared to other servers. In many categories your servers GTN is barely above TH and lower in some cases.

My server's GTN isn't low. I see it everyday. It is more than adequately stocked.

1 hour ago, Darkestmonty said:

But I wouldn't expect you to understand how bad that considering you only play 1 character on one server and have never logged on to any other servers.

I made absolutely no claims to the status of anything on any other server other than SF.  I specifically stated that I don't have a clue on the status of SS. My point was, that even though I don't have a clue what the state of things on SS is, that doesn't automatically or necessarily mean that what you are saying is definitely correct/true, out of hand.

What I do have, however, is several contradictory statements on the state of SS from people who also play on SS. There are several people in this string, and other strings that have existed on this topic in the past, that also play on SS and state that it's not dead and doesn't need a merger.

Both claims made about SS can't possibly both be true. And I cannot see the logic behind someone playing on SS saying it isn't dead if it is, and doesn't need a server merger if it does. They also have to play on that 'dead server' and would also be effected by all the downsides that come with playing on a dead server.

I would say, based on that logic, I am more predisposed to believe the people saying it isn't dead and doesn't need a merger because most people don't seek to perpetuate their own miseries (so to speak).

Could they be lying/wrong and it's you that is being truthful/correct, well, that is within the realm of possibility. Lying and being wrong can happen.

1 hour ago, Darkestmonty said:

again, a sever merge isn't for the benefit of SF, it is for the benefit of players on SS and to help retain new players before they find out SS is pretty much dead outside prime time hours. SF will benefit from more players if the servers can handle it, but the server merge is better for SS players and the overall health (population wise) of the game.

I agree. A server merger with SS wouldn't be to SF's benefit. If SS is in fact dead, than a merger would be solely for their benefit.

Would it be better for SS? Yes. - Would it be better for SF? No.

Would it be better for the overall health of the game? I don't believe so. One sever for all of North America = sinking ship. And most people don't book passage on ships that are sinking.

It really wouldn't matter whether SS needed it or not, because even if SS did need it, IMO the ramifications from a such a merger would be the same either way. Signing the death warrant of the game. BW/SS know that.

If they have to do it, than they'll do it. But at that point, the writing's on the wall. It'd  just be a temporary reprieve for the people on SS before the end.

 

1 hour ago, Darkestmonty said:

I don't understand how you can sit there arguing that SS is fine when you admit you have issues finding group content out of prime time hours, you admit you only play one server, and you admit you only play one character. You don't even have the ability to fully check your own servers status on both factions.

I never said anything of the kind. I never said SS is fine, and I never said I have issues finding group content out of prime time hours on SF. Again, I have no idea what goes on on SS. I only know what I see people saying about the state of SS on the forums and what I see is several people not agreeing with your appraisal of the situation on SS.

If SS is dead and there is very little group and things are bad over there, they should do it.  If it isn't dead and there is adequate group content availability than they shouldn't do it.

I don't need to check anything, I see it every day on Star Forge. The population, quece times, availability of group content and GTN stocks are all self evident to anyone playing on SF. They are all more than adequate.

 

 

Edited July 24, 2023 by WayOfTheWarriorx

[WayOfTheWarriorx]

35 minutes ago, Eckrond said:

You tried to argue your points, you failed, you backpedaled, that is the end of the story here.

I disagree.

You said all people who enjoy multi-player content in MMOs want a mega server.

That is objectively false.

Multi-player content is all that enjoy and I don't want a mega server and several other people said they didn't want it either.

Unless you can read minds, you don't get to speak for everyone else.

Edited July 24, 2023 by WayOfTheWarriorx

[Addictress]

I just became a legendary player on Satele Shan server this past weekend (yesterday/day before that). I have 1 character on Star Forge I don't play much. 

This past weekend on SS was a little concerning. Queueing up for Flashpoints took far longer than usual all day on Saturday - even Saturday evening. It was only fast on Sunday evening. Before this past weekend, however, I didn't have such problems. I suspect this thread is actively discouraging SS players. 

I attended two guild induction ceremonies on two alts. Each ceremony has 3-4 inductees, plenty of Lords/Masters in attendance.

I don't mind moving my legacy to SF but it would have to be done carefully and yes I would be upset if I had to chain the name on my Main.

[Addictress]

Ah, also, on SS, all the forward-positioned Kingpin machines were occupied and I had to go to the Kingpin machines in the back of the casino. I'm sure if I were on SF, even the machines in the back would be full.

[DWho]

3 hours ago, TrixxieTriss said:

Ok, now I know you’re just here to troll people. Easy fix. #ignore

I think he is opposed to transfers because that would allow people to move in the opposite direction too (or very few people move from SS to SF). People who are casual group content players would move to the server that best promotes their preferred style taking their group content queue presence with them potentially making it worse for group players on SF. With free (or low cost) transfers I'd definitely move my most often played characters and spend most of my play time there maintaining just a token presence on SF (two guilds in "maintenance mode"). If you forcibly transfer them with a merger, they get no choice.

There are lots of good active guilds on SS if you want to play the more "hardcore" content. Many of the "lone wolf" group players hate to join guilds because they have to behave. Group Finder is a toxic mess on SF.

[TrixxieTriss]

5 hours ago, Darkestmonty said:

mega servers should still try to match players based on connections and locations if possible. They aren't haphazardly matching up the first people who queue up for pvp when one person has a 23ms ping and the other person has a 550ms ping. That usually only happens when there is no other choice... like when a server has an extremely low population and no one else is queuing up.

I don’t think you actually understand what you’re suggesting.

Have you ever played swtor at 200+ms? How about 400+ms? 

It would not matter if they matched all people with high ping together or not. The lag & dysnc, especially in group content is horrendous. And totally ruins the experience. 

And when you have games like swtor, which are global, there will be players with 600-700ms ping & everything in between. 

If MMO’s only released on one MEGA server in one location, the genre would have failed a long time ago.

[TrixxieTriss]

3 hours ago, DWho said:

I think he is opposed to transfers because that would allow people to move in the opposite direction too (or very few people move from SS to SF)

That wasn’t what Strike was asking for or others. They specifically said free transfers off dead servers. There is no reason to offer cheap or free transfers off SF or DM

[Toraak]

6 hours ago, Darkestmonty said:

There is a reason SWTOR no longer has 209 servers. Once a population gets too low to maintain a decent level of group content, or support the cost of maintaining that server, it gets merged. The idea that a game company will forever maintain a dying server so players can keep their character names is insane. We may not need a server merge now, but it's getting closer. The fact that people are still asking for free transfers off of SS to SF shows I'm not the only one seeing the issue.

If this is true, then that simply means SS has plenty of players on it playing that BW, and now Broadsword feels there is no need for a server merge, or they had done it already.

 

Less population doesn't mean SS is dead, it's just not as healthy as SF. Also not everyone likes to pug, so how do you know how many people on a server are doing exclusive MM FP in full 4 man guild groups, or doing full guild 8/16 man Operations with guilds fully? Just because random groups on fleet don't happen like they do on SF doesn't mean such things don't happen. Not all group content like PvP, and GSF are done through Group Finder.

 

And once again having only 1 US server is a bad look for this game, so merging SF, and SS would be a clear sign to new players to just look for a different game to play instead.