Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Server Merge Discussion Thread

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > General Discussion
Server Merge Discussion Thread
First BioWare Post First BioWare Post

CrazyCT's Avatar


CrazyCT
06.25.2017 , 03:34 AM | #1181
Quote: Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
That Bioware has looked at this, that they are throwing it out there for us to discuss.
The same as the "Official Armour Thread" or the "What Would You Like To See For Direct Sale" thread, where they pick up every suggestion and go with it? Or is it maybe that they were fed up having to keep merging threads from the same ten people stamping their feet about this perceived "death" of the game, and have somehow convinced themselves that a server merge is required?

Quote: Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
First of all, did you miss the part where I said that I was on Ebon Hawk?
Try not to pretend that there aren't any griefers and trolls there, okay? Stop acting like everyone's in RP-mode 24/7.
OK, go to Harbinger, and try to RP on there and see what happens. Yes, there are trolls on every server, and we'll never be rid of all of them, but to put all of us together on the one server, to make it so much easier for them to troll, would be foolhardy at best.

Quote: Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
But you sound like the sort of person that would just quit rather than try.
I prefer to think of it as someone who doesn't want to quit, who is happy with the game, and doesn't want to change just to support someone else's PvP queue pop lust. But if I'm forced to play alongside people who think it's funny to try to ruin my enjoyment, just so someone else can have their precious queue pop 3 seconds faster, then I probably will quit.

Quote: Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
That without even knowing if you could keep your name you would just assume the worst and cry about how they "ruined" the game.
Again with focusing on the name. Losing the name alone wouldn't make me quit. I've spoken to some people who are even more invested in their characters than me, and they've said if they lose their name, they'd quit. For me, it'd be annoying, since I've managed to keep the same names for over 5 years, but that alone wouldn't stop me playing. Losing my name, my guild assets, random stuff from my vaults, my outfits, having those other people I play with quit, putting up with trolls, all the gold spam condensed onto one server, the frequent server breaks and rollbacks that Harbinger already gets - THAT would make me quit.

Quote: Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
Yes, because giving people things to help smooth over some inconveniences is just like giving people things that can kill them if used.
It's called hyperbole. Getting a free reskinned copy of a pet I already have about 5 of to replace all the things I just mentioned, won't help me keep playing the game.

Quote: Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
In an earlier post I said that if they could find a way to make legacy names unique, and that if they could maybe "fix" last names to be capitalized, that maybe no one would have to lose any name that really mattered.
STOP fixating on the names.

Quote: Originally Posted by Mithros View Post
What ideas do you have besides complaining or "keep things the same and let people log on to empty servers"?
I like choice. If you like playing on a busier server, play on a busier server. No-one is trying to take that option away from you. If you want a quieter server, one where there aren't 15,000 togruta jedi calling themselves Ahsoka (it's almost like a clone army itself), then you have that option too.

This whole campaign is just to suit the wants of a few players who think 5 minutes in off-peak time is too long to wait on a queue pop. Forcing people who mostly won't even use that queue off their home server, which in turn is going to force a lot of people out of the game - people who probably spend more on average on the Cartel Market to buy crates, outfits and decoration packs.

But hey, at least your queue will pop ever so slightly faster than before the merge.
"An argument must have opposition if it is to prove itself."
Queen of the White Knights <==== Click to pay tribute to your Queen
Once managed to use "Obfuscate" in a sentence. Allegedly sounds like.....Robbie Williams?

HuaRya's Avatar


HuaRya
06.25.2017 , 07:11 AM | #1182
Quote: Originally Posted by EzioMessi View Post
That johnny/billy bullsh*t is their most transparent baiting attempt, and it's pretty funny when you consider that it does the exact same thing they keep insisting the pro-merge crowd are doing: assuming that the other side's complaints are somehow less important.

Say you want merges, they say that those are harmful to guild assets. Say you want merges with guild assets solved, they say you can't assume they'll be solved. Say you want free legacy transfers off of depopulated servers and their response is a very open "but what about meeeeeee" response, questioning why players should get free transfers off of dead servers and this imaginary johnny who hates the "cesspool" shouldn't.

And then they have the audacity to claim that YOU'RE the one who's uncompromising.
The keep the status quo folks don't want people to leave their server for a new mega server. They continually craft an argument where no consensus can be reached. If they feel someone is making a good point they attack them in tandem. They themselves used to have a larger audience when the people who solo'd heroics for millions of credits were around but have disappeared since that practice was nerfed. Conversely, the pro-nim raiders and ranked pvp'ers don't have the voice they once did. The proponents of each side share a diminished audience.

It comes down to one simple principle. You either want to bring people together in an MMO or keep them a part. Pick.
I grok in fullness.
― Robert A. Heinlein, Stranger in a Strange Land

RudeDog's Avatar


RudeDog
06.25.2017 , 08:51 AM | #1183
[QUOTE=HuaRya;9342553It comes down to one simple principle. You either want to bring people together in an MMO or keep them a part. Pick.[/QUOTE]

Hyperbole. I would guess most people don't want their personal play style impacted and could care less about other people as evidenced by this thread. My stance is I do not want to server merges unless I can be guaranteed to keep my name / assets and get to choose the server where I am forced to migrate. I am not opposed to free transfers and think it is lame that transfer have an associated cost. I am not even opposed to restricting the free transfers to specific servers if BW is trying to increase population on some servers and reduce population / close other servers. I would think most people would find this a reasonable solution, but it seems most people on this thread want to force mergers come what may with little regard for the people impacted.

Ratajack's Avatar


Ratajack
06.25.2017 , 10:50 AM | #1184
Quote: Originally Posted by Icykill_ View Post
Sometimes you just don't get it.. you argue about not wanting mergers because YOU don't want to give anything up if a merge happened
But someone suggests something other than mergers and it isn't anything that will affect you and you trash the idea because you want to argue... no one can say anything positive or helpful without you turning the discussion into a full on argument about nothing or you twist everything everyone says just to make it toxic.

You know what, merge the servers for no other reason than you want to argue with everyone trying to help and about any suggestion or idea so we don't have to merge or if we do merge, any help ideas to make it smoother...you are only hurting the game.

I'm sorry to you other guys who don't want forced mergers.. I've tried to find solutions so we don't have to... I've tried to find solutions on making it smoother if we do have to merge...I'm just so sick of some of the antagonist people in this thread who aren't here to help, only hinder.

Some people won't be happy unless the people who need group content leave the game. Why can't you get your proverbial message together on wether you want what's best for the game. We have a shrinking population and we are now all in a symbiosis wether we like it or not. If we lose a big chunk of any group, the game will fail completely. That includes group content. If people can't play group content they will leave. The same goes for story people if they stop making story content.

All these people are doing it in this thread are doing a disservice to everyone and makes people more extreme in their views that we should merge to fix the group content problem
I used to believe we should merge, I thought it was the only option. I've listened to all sides and now think forced mergers aren't the best idea, there are other options to try first...

I can tell you that lots of the group people I talk to don't understand your position on not merging because they say you can play your content on any server. They don't understand your community or how merging will affect you. The more certain people high jack the discussion, the more your msg is being drowned out. That just means that group players harden their position when they see intransigent people against everything except their own precious part of the game.
Every part matters, everyone should get to play the way they want.

If anyone can come up with a fairer system to get the group content people together, with all of their stuff in one move and it not cost them anything, then I'm open to ideas.
As far as I see it, we either have free legacy transfers like myself and others have pointed out or we merge. It's the only way we get to keep all of our things the same as people who don't want to merge.
Fair is fair, some people shouldn't get to keep all their stuff at the expense of others.

Anyway, I should know better than to look at this person's posts, I've already got them hidden, but sometimes I look. I even made the mistake of agreeing with them publically. I can tell you that will never happen again and I will never look at another of his posts because I know he is just looking to bait me and others.

To everyone else, sorry for the tirade, I'm pretty sure that's the response he was looking for. So I apologise to the rest of you for having to see it.
Did I strike a nerve, or was it just the fact that I had to audacity to not just blindly agree with your "suggested compromise".

I was not trying to "trash the idea". I was trying to expand on it and make it more equitable for all players. My suggestion would not take away player A's opportunity to move his entire legacy TO server X, but it wold also give Player B the opportunity to move AWAY from server X. It would also give Player C the opportunity to move some of his characters to server X, some to server Y and leave some on server Z.

I notice that you chose not to answer the two questions. Why is it "fair" for person A to be able TO server X for FREE but player B should have to pay to move AWAY from server X? Why should it be FREE for player A to move his entire legacy to server X for FREE, but player B should have to pay if he only wants to move some of his characters?

fushnchips's Avatar


fushnchips
06.25.2017 , 12:07 PM | #1185
Quote: Originally Posted by Ratajack View Post
Did I strike a nerve, or was it just the fact that I had to audacity to not just blindly agree with your "suggested compromise".

I was not trying to "trash the idea". I was trying to expand on it and make it more equitable for all players. My suggestion would not take away player A's opportunity to move his entire legacy TO server X, but it wold also give Player B the opportunity to move AWAY from server X. It would also give Player C the opportunity to move some of his characters to server X, some to server Y and leave some on server Z.

I notice that you chose not to answer the two questions. Why is it "fair" for person A to be able TO server X for FREE but player B should have to pay to move AWAY from server X? Why should it be FREE for player A to move his entire legacy to server X for FREE, but player B should have to pay if he only wants to move some of his characters?
You don't give up do you it's like a seagull picking at rubbish, If Player A is on a dead server it should be FREE but if player B is on the harbinger for an example of course they should pay it's pure logic and a great move that they should do it would give players on those dead servers a great choice of a new home.
Pineapple on Pizza for life

Free stuff for you and me click here : Refer a Friend

HuaRya's Avatar


HuaRya
06.25.2017 , 12:16 PM | #1186
Quote: Originally Posted by RudeDog View Post
Hyperbole. I would guess most people don't want their personal play style impacted and could care less about other people as evidenced by this thread. My stance is I do not want to server merges unless I can be guaranteed to keep my name / assets and get to choose the server where I am forced to migrate. I am not opposed to free transfers and think it is lame that transfer have an associated cost. I am not even opposed to restricting the free transfers to specific servers if BW is trying to increase population on some servers and reduce population / close other servers. I would think most people would find this a reasonable solution, but it seems most people on this thread want to force mergers come what may with little regard for the people impacted.
Atypical specious reply and going backwards in the progression of this thread. All of that is addressed and mostly demystified in Keith's podcast.
I grok in fullness.
― Robert A. Heinlein, Stranger in a Strange Land

RudeDog's Avatar


RudeDog
06.25.2017 , 01:42 PM | #1187
Quote: Originally Posted by HuaRya View Post
Atypical specious reply and going backwards in the progression of this thread. All of that is addressed and mostly demystified in Keith's podcast.
Your arguments are weak. It is obvious that you don''t understand the meaning of the words "atypical" or "specious", but thanks for trying. Just yesterday people were debating various forms of compromise. I provided a form of compromise that should work for all players. There was nothing "atypical" or "specious" of me providing a compromise when the debates were around various forms of compromise.

You are also the one who made the statement "It comes down to one simple principle. You either want to bring people together in an MMO or keep them a part. Pick". You have tried to make this an either or choice and made it seems as those against server merges are against bringing people together in a MMO. That is an unreasonable position to take which is why Ratajack keeps destroying the arguments of you and the other server merge supporters.

The people against server merges don't want to be negatively impacted and they want the people that want to leave their server to be able to leave. There is no push from the non-server merge supporters to negatively impact the game play of anyone. It is the server merge supporters that are advocating to negatively impact other players.

Ratajack's Avatar


Ratajack
06.25.2017 , 02:58 PM | #1188
Quote: Originally Posted by fushnchips View Post
You don't give up do you it's like a seagull picking at rubbish, If Player A is on a dead server it should be FREE but if player B is on the harbinger for an example of course they should pay it's pure logic and a great move that they should do it would give players on those dead servers a great choice of a new home.
So, player A is on Pot5 and Player B is on Harbinger. Neither player is happy with their current server.

If I understand you correctly, you want to say that Player A is "trapped", but Player B can transfer if he wants to be on a different server. How exactly is that "logical" and NOT hypocritical?

I'm not advocating preventing players from transferring to a more populated server if that is what they want. I am only advocating giving ALL players the SAME opportunity to change servers, whether that be through paid transfers or "free" transfers. What is "good" for one player should be "good" for all players.

Andryah's Avatar


Andryah
06.25.2017 , 03:19 PM | #1189
Quote: Originally Posted by Ratajack View Post
So, player A is on Pot5 and Player B is on Harbinger. Neither player is happy with their current server.

If I understand you correctly, you want to say that Player A is "trapped", but Player B can transfer if he wants to be on a different server. How exactly is that "logical" and NOT hypocritical?

I'm not advocating preventing players from transferring to a more populated server if that is what they want. I am only advocating giving ALL players the SAME opportunity to change servers, whether that be through paid transfers or "free" transfers. What is "good" for one player should be "good" for all players.
Generally, in MMOs, when the studio sees underpopulated servers, they give incentives (which include free transfers) to encourage people to move from a more populated server TO a less populated server.

Which is the exact opposite of what the person you are replying to actually wants. They clearly are devoid of understanding of how server transfer incentives actually work in the broader MMO market.
When you find yourself surrounded by hostile Clowns... always go for the "Juggler" first.

Exly's Avatar


Exly
06.25.2017 , 04:07 PM | #1190
Quote: Originally Posted by Andryah View Post
Generally, in MMOs, when the studio sees underpopulated servers, they give incentives (which include free transfers) to encourage people to move from a more populated server TO a less populated server.

Which is the exact opposite of what the person you are replying to actually wants. They clearly are devoid of understanding of how server transfer incentives actually work in the broader MMO market.
The problem is that a majority of servers are now lightly populated 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and only a couple are populated enough to have the server status reach BioWare's standard level. Gone are the days of heavy, very heavy and full servers, and so what is BioWare's incentive to get people to move away from the more populated servers to less populated ones.

If anything, I would think that in this case they need to do the math on their end and decide which option is the best for business, and I think that is why they want our input on the matter. On one hand, it might cost them less to operate fewer servers, and so they might want to shut some down, and on the other hand, they need to assess how many people will resub or unsub as a result of shutting down servers so that they don't end up loosing more money in sub fees than they will gain in cost savings.

Of course their are probably more to it than just that, like making sure that they have a good checklist of things to do before enacting any plans that they may have to merge them.

Whatever reason, I personally doubt that they will incentivize people to move from a server with a standard population to one with a low population, and I think that if any incentives are offered they will probably go, and should go to people currently on the low population servers.