Shae Vizla Launch Updates

[AFadedMemory]

21 minutes ago, Nommaz said:

The current credit sinks were designed for a system that has so many credits in it already it's not funny and huge inflation, they are applied to a economy that doesn't have credits in it and no inflation and it's choking it. 

Why do you think so many are concerned with getting their credits over, if the server economy was in good order and people earnt enough to play the way they want to without going overboard this would not even have been brought up, but it isn't.

You might like having to choose between repairing your gear and a guild ship but when you have more than enough credits on another server to happily pay for both (which actually takes those credits out of the system btw) why should you HAVE to choose.
Not everyone wants to do that, there is a reason we earned as many as we did.

I'm not saying the sinks were designed for a system with low inflation. I'm saying the damage on the new server is not game breaking for the average player. Sure it hurts end game focused players, but it was the end game focused player and credit farmers that generated the inflation in the first place. That behavior is going to exist thus having measures to slow it down is a smart idea. Once again time will only tell if the results are more damaging then the things they are trying to prevent.

 

30 minutes ago, Nommaz said:

I know you have been told the answer to these at least twice from trixxie, are more from others, you just don't want to accept it as an answer because YOU don't see it as a problem, as I said asinine. 

They say end game activities become harder to participate in because of the credit sinks and those should be changed. I believe that said individuals want to farm vast amounts of credits as fast as possible and the changes are" impeding the routes they usually take".  Thus they want to get rid of the changes and are using operation participation to cover their real intent.  This believe is supported by the fact that one such player said they don't have any lv 80 characters on the new sever then used the level 80 required end game content, that they shouldn't even be able to participation in, as an excuse to get rid of something they dislike on said new server.  Now is wanting more credits a bad thing? I would argue it can be, but this isn't what the thread is about.

Regardless of my opinion, the credit sinks have existed on the new server since it launched. Based on the dev's comment it seem that the server was still able to produce numbers that justify keeping it open even with the credit sinks in place. Thus the damage does not appear to be game breaking.

[TrixxieTriss]

13 hours ago, Nommaz said:

Why do you think so many are concerned with getting their credits over, if the server economy was in good order and people earnt enough to play the way they want to without going overboard this would not even have been brought up, but it isn't

It’s also why some credit sellers are gaining traction in chat. And not as many people are reporting them to stop the spam.

To be clear, I’m totally against credit sellers, but they wouldn’t have a market or sellers on a fresh start server if there weren’t people desperate for credits.

Edited December 22, 2023 by TrixxieTriss

[Nommaz]

1 minute ago, AFadedMemory said:

They say end game activities become harder to participate in because of the credit sinks and those should be changed. I believe that said individuals want to farm vast amounts of credits as fast as possible and the changes are" impeding the routes they usually take".  Thus they want to get rid of the changes and are using operation participation to cover their real intent.  This believe is supported by the fact that one such player said they don't have any lv 80 characters on the new sever then used the level 80 required end game content, that they shouldn't even be able to participation in, as an excuse to get rid of something they dislike on said new server.  Now is wanting more credits a bad thing? I would argue it can be, but this isn't what the thread is about.

Regardless of my opinion, the credit sinks have existed on the new server since it launched. Based on the dev's comment it seem that the server was still able to produce numbers that justify keeping it open even with the credit sinks in place. Thus the damage does not appear to be game breaking.

So Basically, what I said, you have been told the answer you just don't agree with them because your opinion is something else.
 

[Nommaz]

1 minute ago, TrixxieTriss said:

It’s also why some credit sellers are gain traction in chat. And not as many people are reporting them to stop the spam.

To be clear, I’m totally against credit sellers, but they wouldn’t have a market or sellers on a free start server if there weren’t people desperate for credits.

Exaclty

[TrixxieTriss]

53 minutes ago, Nommaz said:

They were all doing quite well from a players point of view until some decisions were made to multiplayer and other weird things and things took a dive.
They never really recovered from that, and they went from the lists you see there to the handful of servers there is today, at the time of losing our servers there was at peak times at least on my server 4 full maps on fleet, along with similar on starting planets dropping off as the game went on.

To be fair, it was only the dedicated RP & PvP servers that were having actual issues. Dalbora probably had more active players than Star Forge & Satele Shan combined currently do when they decided to close the original 3. Where the correct solution from an APAC player perspective would have been to turn Dalbora into a mega APAC server & they could have merged the other 2 servers into it. 

[AFadedMemory]

10 minutes ago, Nommaz said:

So Basically, what I said, you have been told the answer you just don't agree with them because your opinion is something else.
 

Similar to what you said but not the same.

Edited December 22, 2023 by AFadedMemory

[Nommaz]

7 minutes ago, TrixxieTriss said:

To be fair, it was only the dedicated RP & PvP servers that were having actual issues. Dalbora probably had more active players than Star Forge & Satele Shan combined currently do when they decided to close the original 3. Where the correct solution from an APAC player perspective would have been to turn Dalbora into a mega APAC server & they could have merged the other 2 servers into it. 

Yup and I am pretty sure we all said that at the time as well.
When I said took a dive, I meant the game servers in general sorry I should have clarified that. 
Whilst Dalborra was still very busy it also did have a noticeable drop.

[TrixxieTriss]

2 hours ago, Nommaz said:

Yup and I am pretty sure we all said that at the time as well.
When I said took a dive, I meant the game servers in general sorry I should have clarified that. 
Whilst Dalborra was still very busy it also did have a noticeable drop.

Yeah, and even with that initial drop, it still had more players than Star Forge currently does 😉.
Dalbora didn’t really see a massive drop until they announced the closers. As soon as that happened the server nearly depopulated over night. 
Imagine if they’d just merged all 3 original APAC servers into a mega server? It would have been one of the biggest in the game. 
But we all know the real reason they did it & it had nothing to do with low player numbers. It was all about EA cost cutting. 

Edited December 22, 2023 by TrixxieTriss

[AFadedMemory]

45 minutes ago, TrixxieTriss said:

It’s also why some credit sellers are gain traction in chat. And not as many people are reporting them to stop the spam.

I acknowledge that the credit sinks produce a sense of urgency that can lead to bad behavior. It's actually quite humors to see how closely related everything is, and if the Devs hit to hard it can cause more issues then they fix. I don't think the credits sink cause significant issues to the game, based on the implied server continuation, and feel that they produce significant results to justify their implementation.

I do think that the most important thing for swtor's immediate future is the character transfer for SV. the devs need to make the right decision here. Having transfers is better then not having transfers. The economy needs to be considered. Not sure what issues the achievement carrying over were causing, I assume lack of group support. They can fix that without preventing transfers. The items really only effect end game content, their sudden appears doesn't automatically generate more credits in the system. 

Edited December 22, 2023 by AFadedMemory

[Jarcen]

It's interesting to note, as I'm reading over the Shae Vizla Discord right now, that people there seem to be content with the current arrangement as opposed to how it is here on the forums. Interesting. Just to note, from what I gather in ingame chat, at least from what I caught on Pub side in Coruscant, is that people are content as well with the current setup. Meaning transfer or no transfer, people seem to be okay with it and just get on with playing on the server....

[Jarcen]

Now also from what I gather, based on chat ingame and then some, that SV is being treated as a fresh start server. It may not be a fresh start server, but people are considering and treating the server as such. Again, quite a contrast from how things are here on the forums.

[Nommaz]

3 minutes ago, Jarcen said:

It's interesting to note, as I'm reading over the Shae Vizla Discord right now, that people there seem to be content with the current arrangement as opposed to how it is here on the forums. Interesting. Just to note, from what I gather in ingame chat, at least from what I caught on Pub side in Coruscant, is that people are content as well with the current setup. Meaning transfer or no transfer, people seem to be okay with it and just get on with playing on the server....

Some people, let's be honest it's not everyone, because I can see there is still a few that are not happy, I do not see much in the way of server chat imp side but what I have seen is that its split, once the newness of it all dies down though I think you will see a different story, plus there is a few players that are here for a "Fresh start", I think they skew the numbers somewhat.
The server is supposed to be a regional server.

Transfers done correctly will not affect the "fresh start " Crowd, but no transfers will result in less players for the server, you won't gain any with that, but you will lose them for current servers and those that just leave. 

It's in no one's interest to deny them, as to HOW they happen that's a different story, A properly moderated transfer with SOME restrictions is acceptable over no transfers.
Anyone batting for no transfers just because doesn't really see the big picture.

I will acknowledge there is quite a few happy with the status quo, and some even like the feeling, but that won't change with transfers done correctly, they can still have that, but we who want our mains over here cannot, and therein lies the problem.

I have not logged into to the game today to play first time since I saw APAC servers, I am semi-retired so play quite a bit, but not logging in is mostly because I don't know if it's a waste of my time, I have no interest in playing if they don't allow transfers and will not re-sub if that is the case, so I have been on the forums all day.
I wonder how many like me there are.

[Nommaz]

13 minutes ago, Jarcen said:

Now also from what I gather, based on chat ingame and then some, that SV is being treated as a fresh start server. It may not be a fresh start server, but people are considering and treating the server as such. Again, quite a contrast from how things are here on the forums.

Exactly and this is the start of the issues, they ARE trying to make it something it wasn't designed to be.

[Nommaz]

22 minutes ago, Jarcen said:

It's interesting to note, as I'm reading over the Shae Vizla Discord right now, that people there seem to be content with the current arrangement as opposed to how it is here on the forums

I just re-read the chat and I agree with that person that say, they just don't want to argue with others about it, seems a 50/50 split to me, with one person trying to lead peace lol.
The people are not content, its split, some don't mind it, some hate it, but I did not see anyone against transfers, just the perceived influx of credits, which I think is 90% of the issue. it has nothing to do with transfers per say, and as that one person said, those that have the ability already have millions. 
Feel free to pint out where I am wrong, its late I am having my wine I could be wrong.

 

[SoraRaida]

32 minutes ago, Jarcen said:

It's interesting to note, as I'm reading over the Shae Vizla Discord right now, that people there seem to be content with the current arrangement as opposed to how it is here on the forums. Interesting. Just to note, from what I gather in ingame chat, at least from what I caught on Pub side in Coruscant, is that people are content as well with the current setup. Meaning transfer or no transfer, people seem to be okay with it and just get on with playing on the server....

But how many of them are actually from APAC and have many toons from other servers? Of course those people who are in SV due to it being an untouched server would be content with the arrangement now.

Edited December 22, 2023 by SoraRaida

[Jstgetitovrwith]

13 hours ago, KeithKanneg said:

 

As a reminder, we will be making a decision based on the data we see and the player feedback we receive. So far, here's what I'm reading in terms of player feedback specifically from this thread:

• Players want character transfers allowed to/from Shae Vizla (which means your Legacy is also transferred)
• You support credit restrictions, but want us to consider credit costs such as repair bills
• Players want a reasonable time/cost to do transfers
• Players want this server treated the same as all other servers

 

As an APAC player whos been playing since near launch and went through all the server roll ins to NA,

I'm fine with this server being somewhat isolated. Achievements don't bother me for transfers, but I think allowing anything other than bound equipment and like 1mil creds would be a mistake. Credits in the game are already very easy to earn through heroics, and over the last week there has been noticeable increases in pricing on the GTN as players catch up on legacy upgrades and have more free time going into the holidays.

I believe that allowing non-bound items or any amount of credits past 1-2mil would severely disrupt the current state of the server.
While many I imagine created characters, boosted, and have been grinding and grinding credits with the presumption that they would be able to transfer over all their belongings and funds from NA or EU servers, this is disrespectful to those that are truly starting afresh on the server, treating the period between launch and transfers almost as an event, something fun and novel but not serious or meaningful. 

There is a large disconnect as well between the forum audience, those on discord, and those in game, with lots of varying opinions coming from each. 

tl;dr Keep it locked, if you allow transfers make it restrictive and not beneficial to existing legacies on the server. Otherwise we'll just see the hyperinflation happen again and the server will wither and become a dead tourist spot.

[TrixxieTriss]

1 hour ago, AFadedMemory said:

I do think that the most important thing for swtor's immediate future is the character transfer for SV. the devs need to make the right decision here. Having transfers is better then not having transfers. The economy needs to be considered. Not sure what issues the achievement carrying over were causing, I assume lack of group support. They can fix that without preventing transfers. The items really only effect end game content, their sudden appears doesn't automatically generate more credits in the

100% agree. 

And as for the achievement thing.

Honestly, if someone is achievement hunting on a new server, regardless of which one it is, all they need to do is to personally “choose” not to transfer a character over to said server until they do all the achievements. It’s not like someone is forcing them to transfer. I did the same thing on Star Forge before I transferred my characters over from SS.

And it would be exactly the same if I wanted to achievement hunt on Leviathan as a fresh experience because I have no characters there. Surely Keith & Co. wouldn’t expect everyone else be barred from transfers to Leviathan just because I wanted to achievement hunt there. Which means this achievement hunting argument that was mentioned is totally nonsensical to start with. I’m not even sure why Keith brought it up & why it’s an issue for any player at all.

And if Keith is worried so much about fresh achievement hunting on a new server, then just tell those players who want to do it, to “choose” not to transfer. No one would be forcing them too. It’s not like it’s a transfer via a forced server merge 🤯.

Lastly, even if it was an issue (which it’s obviously not 🤦‍♀️), they could offer players a choice to allow achievements to transfer over or not. Ie, this message could pop up when doing a transfer : Please ✅here if you want your achievements to transfer too. 
 

Edited December 22, 2023 by TrixxieTriss

[Nommaz]

2 minutes ago, Jstgetitovrwith said:

and over the last week there has been noticeable increases in pricing on the GTN as players catch up on legacy upgrades and have more free time going into the holidays.

You DO understand that because the server is "balanced" to fight inflation in a server that has issue that people are inflating prices just to try and get more credits to pay for things, right? 
What you are suggesting is a double-edged sword and won't help the way you think it will. 
Credit starving the general playerbase is not the way to go.
 

[TrixxieTriss]

59 minutes ago, Jarcen said:

It's interesting to note, as I'm reading over the Shae Vizla Discord right now, that people there seem to be content with the current arrangement as opposed to how it is here on the forums. Interesting. Just to note, from what I gather in ingame chat, at least from what I caught on Pub side in Coruscant, is that people are content as well with the current setup. Meaning transfer or no transfer, people seem to be okay with it and just get on with playing on the server....

Yes, but there are only a handful of people on the Shae Vizla discord at any one time. And many of us APAC players aren’t even on it at the moment.

Also I think it’s important to note for transparency reasons, the people running the Shae Vizla Discord don’t even live in the actual APAC region. One is in Norway & the other is in South Africa. So a lot of the points of view aren’t generally from APAC located players stuck on US servers. They’re from people in the EU & other parts of the world who just wanted a fresh server experience.

And honestly, I’ve no problems with them administering the discord or being on the APAC server. I think it’s awesome they want to build a community & hang out with us. But I don’t think you should be trying to say they represent the actual APAC player base that lives in the actual region, because frankly, most of them don’t. 

[AFadedMemory]

1 hour ago, SoraRaida said:

But how many of them are actually from APAC and have many toons from other servers? Of course those people who are in SV due to it being an untouched server would be content with the arrangement now.

Once again I sympathizes with APAC players. I think transfers are important and needed. However the players who are using the server now are the reason the server, most likely due to dev comment, is producing the number required to keep it open. Therefore their opinion should be considered just as much as apac players. This is why I believe transfers with limits should be the chosen path. I have stated what that could look like a few times already. 

Edited December 22, 2023 by AFadedMemory

[Jstgetitovrwith]

7 minutes ago, Nommaz said:

Credit starving the general playerbase is not the way to go.
 

Where did I say we should starve players of credits? I think my main point was that regardless of the economic measures in place, allowing full transfers from SS, SF, and others would lead to the same issues those servers had. A lot of people forget how much raiding used to cost back before players had what you could very easily call generational wealth in the game, and the last few years has been a lot cheaper in comparison. 

Yes the credit sinks need to be looked at, and yes players should be able to transfer their characters, but I don't think they should ruin a server that's not even 2 months old so people can be stupidly wealth in comparison to the systems they use.

People used to run weeklies and dailies regularly not just for rep but for credits, to fund the activities people are complaining about costs of. A lot of the players I hear in game who are pro credit transfers just want the credits so they can buy all the upgrades immediately and not have to worry about repairs or consumables ever again.

There's a difference between wanting a character transferred so you can keep playing them, and wanting them transferred so you can ignore the concept of currency in an MMO. 

If they let SV collapse like SS and others did economically, then I honestly can't see a reason to want to transfer. I played on 250ms through the hardest content in the game, had friends do it at 500ms, and while it's annoying for things like APM etc on DPS, it isn't this crippling awful horrible thing that prevents people playing. It's NICE to have a server with good ping now, sitting around 50-60 is an unreal feeling after nearly a decade of being on NA latency, but part of what I'm personally enjoying about the experience is that the game feels new again, I can go on the AH and afford something despite only being a recent 80, I'm not begging for handouts from guildies or feeling forced to buy a hypercrate to fund getting augments.

[Nommaz]

Just now, AFadedMemory said:

I think transfers are important and needed. However the players who are using the server now are the reason the server, most likely due to dev comment,

The dev comment was we started the server with the Apac, actually wait one sec..
"We opened an APAC server to create a better overall experience for the regional players and grow the number of players in that region. We also had the unique opportunity to improve the economy by delaying and possibly restricting the amount of credits that flowed into the server. That is giving us very insightful details about what defines a healthy economy." 


 

[_Izanagi]

13 hours ago, KeithKanneg said:

• Players want character transfers allowed to/from Shae Vizla (which means your Legacy is also transferred)
• Players want this server treated the same as all other servers

 

Is this supposed to be surprising? I can't believe the devs had to be told this..

You guys promoted this server as just a normal server. One in a timezone that didn't have one (anymore). But now it's up, you're suddenly treating it as a Classic WoW SWTOR server.

And you don't need a degree in economics to understand that all the heavy-handed measures to fight inflation on the old servers wouldn't work on a server without any credits in it.

[Nommaz]

1 minute ago, _Izanagi said:

Is this supposed to be surprising? I can't believe the devs had to be told this..

You guys promoted this server as just a normal server. One in a timezone that didn't have one (anymore). But now it's up, you're suddenly treating it as a Classic WoW SWTOR server.

And you don't need a degree in economics to understand that all the heavy-handed measures to fight inflation on the old servers wouldn't work on a server without any credits in it.

Perfect, it seems I can't add and more simily's today...

 

[TrixxieTriss]

16 minutes ago, Jstgetitovrwith said:

dr Keep it locked, if you allow transfers make it restrictive and not beneficial to existing legacies on the server. Otherwise we'll just see the hyperinflation happen again and the server will wither and become a dead tourist spot.

Those of us explaining our feedback for doing things are offering logical arguments why things should happen.

Can you please logically explain why you think non bound items would increase inflation on the server, let alone the sort of hyperinflation we’ve seen on the older servers in the last several years.

Because all I’ve seen from those using this false narrative is a statement that non bound items give an unfair advantage & increase inflation. But no argument to back it up. 

I’ve yet to read one answer that logically lays out how it’s supposed to do that. And I’ve read plenty of explanations on why non bound items would actually help the economy & community as a whole.

If you can’t give us a logical argument explaining how non bound items would increase inflation. Then how do you expect the devs to weigh your feedback against others who have presented a case for allowing non bound items to be transferred 🤷🏻‍♀️.