Decorations are not impacted by the United Forces update. If you have more than one Legacy which are combined as part of the update, you will have access to each decoration equal to the highest decoration among your Legacies. Ex: On the “Skywalker” Legacy you have 4 Basic Metal Chairs, on the Organa Legacy you have 15 Basic Metal Chairs. After the update, you will have a combined Legacy with 15 Basic Metal Chairs. It is possible that you may end up with more decorations placed than you own after the update. If this happens, you cannot place any more of that decoration until you go below your owned value.

 

So in fact they ARE affected, because using your own example someone who previously owned 19 of an item will now own only 15 - this seems very unfair to me. We pay for those decorations, sometimes on the AH and sometimes with actual real money on the Cartel Market. We craft for some of them too. And you think it's OK to just take some of them away?

 

I think it would be fairer to add them together, as long as that would not exceed the 'maximum allowed out of 100' that most decs have. Otherwise you seem to be saying to me "Hey, we just took away those expensive 2 [whatevers] you bought on Red Eclipse, because you had 3 of them on Progenitor. If you want to have 5 again, you can just spend those Cartel Coins or credits all over again." Not very friendly, is it?

 

I do understand that I can 'keep' them all if I put them down and never ever move them again, but that seems pretty harsh also as they are then not available in any really useful way (eg, I couldn't take them out of one stronghold and put them down again in a new one).

Completely agree that adding is better. I had thought that was what was meant by the "you may have more of an item than you started with", but that's now what they're intending. Edited October 4, 2017 by gntlmanslfe
My post is incorrect.

Yeah seems stupid considering they all cost money, credits ,w/e. If I bought one stronghold bundle from CM on one server, then bought the same bundle on another. That cost me coins, maybe even money to get those coins. I should have all those combined not just the one bundle after merge. I think their main concern is that some that transferred before have what decos they had on previous legacy when they transferred. So if those legacies merged again, they would actually get double decos where they really only bought half. It's a pickle. Edited October 4, 2017 by Malphicious

I've spent millions of credits across multiple servers to have one GTN kiosk per each of several servers. To have all but one taken away is unacceptable.

So in fact they ARE affected, because using your own example someone who previously owned 19 of an item will now own only 15 - this seems very unfair to me. We pay for those decorations, sometimes on the AH and sometimes with actual real money on the Cartel Market. We craft for some of them too. And you think it's OK to just take some of them away?

 

 

Your logic is wrong here. Highest number wins, regardless of the number. Don't fixate on 15. 15 in the example is simply "highest number."

 

Whether you have 4, 15, 19, or 999, highest number wins. Trust me. I've transfered well over 20 toons in this game for the specific purpose of refreshing my legacy on other servers after increasing my main server's legacy with new/interesting/a lot of decorations, and it's always been the case that highest number wins.

Edited October 4, 2017 by xordevoreaux

But we *haven't* chosen to move anything anywhere - it's being forced on us. It isn't a case of 'move if you want, but it will cost you some of your stuff' - it's a case of 'we are moving you and taking some of your stuff'. I'm still confused as to how taking items away can in any way be described as 'not impacted'. I'm not obsessed with the number 15 any more than I am obsessed with Basic Metal Chairs, I promise. I just want to know how it is fair to *force* me to give up items I actually paid for and seriously wonder why there isn't a different way to handle this - it feels kinda like being punished for having spent money, time and efffort on the game - 'thanks for your efforts, here's a kick in the teeth just to rub salt into the wound of forcing a server merge on you'.

Your logic is wrong here.

 

No, the OP's logic is quite correct :

 

From the FAQ :

Ex: On the “Skywalker” Legacy you have 4 Basic Metal Chairs, on the Organa Legacy you have 15 Basic Metal Chairs. After the update, you will have a combined Legacy with 15 Basic Metal Chairs.

So in fact they ARE affected, because using your own example someone who previously owned 19 of an item will now own only 15

 

What the OP was saying is that in the developers' example, a player had purchased or acquired a total of 19 Basic Metal Chairs (15 on one server and 4 on the other). After the merge, the player will now only have 15, and the other 4 simply disappear. Poof, gone.

 

As has been pointed out here, this means that players who acquired very expensive decorations across multiple servers will see some of them simply disappear, with nothing left to show for what was spent on them.

 

Highest number wins, regardless of the number. Don't fixate on 15. 15 in the example is simply "highest number." Whether you have 4, 15, 19, or 999, highest number wins. Trust me.

 

It sounds to me like you thought that the OP believed that the developers were saying that all Decorations quantities would be reduced to 15. No, that wasn't the issue. This is about the lesser quantities of Decorations on merged servers simply vanishing. The developers' FAQ claimed that Decorations would not be impacted by the update, but that simply isn't true.

No, the OP's logic is quite correct :

 

 

 

 

What the OP was saying is that in the developers' example, a player had purchased or acquired a total of 19 Basic Metal Chairs (15 on one server and 4 on the other). After the merge, the player will now only have 15, and the other 4 simply disappear. Poof, gone.

 

As has been pointed out here, this means that players who acquired very expensive decorations across multiple servers will see some of them simply disappear, with nothing left to show for what was spent on them.

 

 

 

It sounds to me like you thought that the OP believed that the developers were saying that all Decorations quantities would be reduced to 15. No, that wasn't the issue. This is about the lesser quantities of Decorations on merged servers simply vanishing. The developers' FAQ claimed that Decorations would not be impacted by the update, but that simply isn't true.

 

Trust me, I've experienced this, and it's quite fine. The merge is not additive. You have 4 metal chairs on server x, you have 15 metal chairs on server y, you'll have 15 metal chairs when they're both merged into server z. That's how it's always been. The rules aren't changing just for the server merge. Highest number wins. Merging legacies has never, ever, been an additive experience, where server x + server y = server z. Never.

Think about it this way: I buy a 2100 cartel item off the cartel market and add it to my legacy.

2100 cartel coins that Bioware would want you buy via your hard-earned real money.

So then you transfer that legacy, with the 2100 cartel item, to a new server. It gets that item. Thank you bioware.

Then you transfer that legacy back to the original server.

 

You'd say that you now have two of those items, because item from server A + item from server B = two items,

but you never actually paid for two items, just one, where one was copied from the other legacy.

 

Were it additive, where merging = A +B rather than A= A if A > B , then you are, in fact, creating stuff that never existed. The way the OP is thinking, I could systematically copy a toon back and forth between server A and B and build up as as many copies of that 2100 cartel coin item as I could stand to transfer back and forth.

 

Not permitted. Doesn't work that way.

Think about it this way: I buy a 2100 cartel item off the cartel market and add it to my legacy.

2100 cartel coins that Bioware would want you buy via your hard-earned real money.

So then you transfer that legacy, with the 2100 cartel item, to a new server. It gets that item. Thank you bioware.

Then you transfer that legacy back to the original server.

 

You'd say that you now have two of those items, because item from server A + item from server B = two items,

but you never actually paid for two items, just one, where one was copied from the other legacy.

 

Were it additive, where merging = A +B rather than A= A if A > B , then you are, in fact, creating stuff that never existed. The way the OP is thinking, I could systematically copy a toon back and forth between server A and B and build up as as many copies of that 2100 cartel coin item as I could stand to transfer back and forth.

 

Not permitted. Doesn't work that way.

 

Maybe I misunderstood the OP, but I do not think the OP is not asking for "copies" to be "additive", only those decorations that were acquired legitimately, whether those decorations were purchased or earned via achievement, drops or some other means.

 

Example:

 

Johnny purchased 5 GTN kiosks. He divides those kiosks among his legacies on 5 different servers, giving one kiosk to each legacy.

 

Each legacy only shows one kiosk available, but Johnny purchased 5 kiosks. Why should Johnny "lose" 4 kiosks that he purchased when the servers merge?

Maybe I misunderstood the OP, but I do not think the OP is not asking for "copies" to be "additive", only those decorations that were acquired legitimately, whether those decorations were purchased or earned via achievement, drops or some other means.

 

Example:

 

Johnny purchased 5 GTN kiosks. He divides those kiosks among his legacies on 5 different servers, giving one kiosk to each legacy.

 

Each legacy only shows one kiosk available, but Johnny purchased 5 kiosks. Why should Johnny "lose" 4 kiosks that he purchased when the servers merge?

 

The same functionality that prevents extraneous copies from being created is the same functionality "robbing" the OP of the decorations. The OP can gripe about it, but that's how it works, even with the rarest, most expensive decorations, and I've been on the receiving end of that myself. It's just how it works. I'm not saying it's the best way, but to prevent the duplication as I mentioned, that's the net effect.

The same functionality that prevents extraneous copies from being created is the same functionality "robbing" the OP of the decorations. The OP can gripe about it, but that's how it works, even with the rarest, most expensive decorations, and I've been on the receiving end of that myself. It's just how it works. I'm not saying it's the best way, but to prevent the duplication as I mentioned, that's the net effect.

 

I understand the way it works now and the reasons for it working that way.

 

The point is that up until now, "merging legacies" via transfer has been voluntary and the original legacy, including any decorations purchased or earned, has remained on the origin server, so nothing was "lost". Those decorations did not move to the new server so they weren't "copied", but they were not removed from the origin server, either.

 

A server merge is NOT a voluntary transfer or "legacy merge". It is a forced "legacy merge" and there will be no "origin servers" on which legacies, and their decorations, can remain.

 

Unless I am mistaken, all that the OP is asking is that BW take into consideration that these server merges WILL cause people to lose decorations that they legitimately purchased or earned, and to make adjustments to their processes so that no legitimately acquired decorations are "lost". This is not an unreasonable request, IMO.

OK, but what about a counter-example:

* Player X creates a legacy on server Alpha, and acquires 4 Basic Metal Chairs.

* Now he transfers a character to server Beta. It, too, has 4 Basic Metal Chairs.

* Now on server Alpha, he acquires another 11. Alpha as 15, Beta has 4.

* Now Alpha and Beta are merged into Gamma. Should it have 15 or 19? X didn't pay for 19.

* What if it was Cartel Market decorations?

* What if it was a decoration that exists as CM and as in-game purchases?

 

Discuss.

OK, but what about a counter-example:

* Player X creates a legacy on server Alpha, and acquires 4 Basic Metal Chairs.

* Now he transfers a character to server Beta. It, too, has 4 Basic Metal Chairs.

* Now on server Alpha, he acquires another 11. Alpha as 15, Beta has 4.

* Now Alpha and Beta are merged into Gamma. Should it have 15 or 19? X didn't pay for 19.

* What if it was Cartel Market decorations?

* What if it was a decoration that exists as CM and as in-game purchases?

 

Discuss.

 

I bought a Cartel Market item off the GTN with credits, not cartel coins, and added that to my legacy. The game doesn't know that I did that versus having bought it off the CM directly.

 

After I built up my main legacy with 27 senator rugs, 13 male twi'lek dancers, a ton of stuff from the Nightlife festival, Life Day fireplaces, etc. etc., I then copied that level 50 legacy to every server in the game. I subsequently refreshed all the servers with that same legacy after completing most of the datacrons, including the one on fleet and Rishi.

 

During all that, at no time did the game keep track of where a decoration in a legacy came from. There is no tag, from one decoration to the next in my legacy, whether that legacy came from credits that I spent on it on the GTN or whether I used cartel coins to acquire it, or whether a friend just handed me a ton of stuff (such as the senator rugs, those were gifts from a guildie).

 

Therefore, with no way having ever been put in place in the game's database to track the source of any one given decoration in a legacy, what should or should not happen is really a moot point. The devs, when they create the merge scripts, have absolutely way to distinguish who should have what preserved where, because they've no way to know what came from where.

 

Again, people can complain about it, but unless Bioware suddenly decides to get very generous and give me 135 senator rugs after the merge (because I have 27 rugs on each the 5 east coast servers) which aren't easy to get these days because they require cartel certificates, I seriously doubt I'll be seeing 135 after the merge. I'll have 27.

Edited October 5, 2017 by xordevoreaux

OK, but what about a counter-example:

* Player X creates a legacy on server Alpha, and acquires 4 Basic Metal Chairs.

* Now he transfers a character to server Beta. It, too, has 4 Basic Metal Chairs.

* Now on server Alpha, he acquires another 11. Alpha as 15, Beta has 4.

* Now Alpha and Beta are merged into Gamma. Should it have 15 or 19? X didn't pay for 19.

* What if it was Cartel Market decorations?

* What if it was a decoration that exists as CM and as in-game purchases?

 

Discuss.

 

I agree that "copied" decorations should not be "additive". That would be far too susceptible to abuse. I do not think anyone has asked that "copied" decorations be "additive", only those decorations legitimately obtained.

I bought a Cartel Market item off the GTN with credits, not cartel coins, and added that to my legacy. The game doesn't know that I did that versus having bought it off the CM directly.

 

After I built up my main legacy with 27 senator rugs, 13 male twi'lek dancers, a ton of stuff from the Nightlife festival, Life Day fireplaces, etc. etc., I then copied that level 50 legacy to every server in the game. I subsequently refreshed all the servers with that same legacy after completing most of the datacrons, including the one on fleet and Rishi.

 

During all that, at no time did the game keep track of where a decoration in a legacy came from. There is no tag, from one decoration to the next in my legacy, whether that legacy came from credits that I spent on it on the GTN or whether I used cartel coins to acquire it, or whether a friend just handed me a ton of stuff (such as the senator rugs, those were gifts from a guildie).

 

Therefore, with no way having ever been put in place in the game's database to track the source of any one given decoration in a legacy, what should or should not happen is really a moot point. The devs, when they create the merge scripts, have absolutely way to distinguish who should have what preserved where, because they've no way to know what came from where.

 

Again, people can complain about it, but unless Bioware suddenly decides to get very generous and give me 135 senator rugs after the merge (because I have 27 rugs on each the 5 east coast servers) which aren't easy to get these days because they require cartel certificates, I seriously doubt I'll be seeing 135 after the merge. I'll have 27.

 

You did not "lose" any of those rugs when you "merged" your legacies, as they remained on the origin server.

 

Now, imagine that you had bought those 27 rugs using cartel certificates across those 5 servers, with 5 on each of 3 servers and 6 on each of two other servers. After the merge you would have 6 rugs, meaning 21 of those 27 rugs that you bought with certificates simply disappeared. You might as well have just destroyed those certificates instead of using them for rugs.

 

It should be incumbent upon BW to ensure that NO decorations that were legitimately obtained will be "lost" in the server merges, however that is accomplished. Will they do so? Who knows?

 

However, it is blatantly untrue to say:

 

"Decorations are not impacted by the United Forces update. "

 

when it has already been shown that that is NOT the case.

I agree that "copied" decorations should not be "additive". That would be far too susceptible to abuse. I do not think anyone has asked that "copied" decorations be "additive", only those decorations legitimately obtained.

Does their database contain enough information to do that, though? I'm not saying it does, and I'm not saying it doesn't. In a way, I'm saying that we don't know.

 

But I *do* know that there is *no* way to make a completely unambiguous *and* correct analysis of all cases, especially not based on "oh, well, this person bought 5 of these on the CM, therefore 5". Did he do that to get the (1+1+1+1+1 = 5), or were they copied or what? Did he get one, unlock it, copy it four times, and then sell the other 4 on the GTN? (Sorry, this person doesn't deserve to have 5.)

 

It's not clear to me that they would have the complete paper trail of all those things available. Perhaps they do, perhaps they don't. Perhaps nobody thought of it until recently. (Certainly they wouldn't have thought about it at the last merges, since there were no strongholds back then.)

The only paper trail that they'd have would be independent of data in the legacy itself.

After legacies are merged, Bioware would have to run another query on the purchase history of the player.

If a player purchased 6 cartel item decorations of the same kind, 2 each for each west coast server, and after the merge, the player has 2 cartel decorations of that item (which is what would happen), then a script could be run to settle the difference between the 2 in the legacy and the 6 showing in the purchase history.

 

However, even comparing the purchase history against the merged legacy does not exclude the possibility that the player prior to the merge put 2 in the legacy from one server and sold the cartel items on the other servers to arrive at 2 (rather than getting merged down to 2).

 

Bioware doesn't have a way of sorting out the difference, and to avoid duplication, Bioware has a one-size-fits-all solution, that being to apply the same legacy merge rules during the server merge as with transferring a toon.

 

That doesn't even get into the question of whether the player acquired any via a friend or via the GTN.

Edited October 5, 2017 by xordevoreaux

The way you can know that Bioware has no tracking data on the source of what gets put into someone's decoration legacy (GTN, CM, or gifted) is how things get into the legacy. It's an icon that you click in your inventory. There is nothing on the tooltip that says "gifted from a friend" or "bought of the GTN" or "bought from the cartel market".

 

It's a token, and the programming that consumes the token and increases the count of the item in the player's legacy isn't keeping a separate list somewhere of how that token came to be in the player's inventory prior to being consumed.

Edited October 5, 2017 by xordevoreaux

Does their database contain enough information to do that, though? I'm not saying it does, and I'm not saying it doesn't. In a way, I'm saying that we don't know.

 

But I *do* know that there is *no* way to make a completely unambiguous *and* correct analysis of all cases, especially not based on "oh, well, this person bought 5 of these on the CM, therefore 5". Did he do that to get the (1+1+1+1+1 = 5), or were they copied or what? Did he get one, unlock it, copy it four times, and then sell the other 4 on the GTN? (Sorry, this person doesn't deserve to have 5.)

 

If a person bought 5 of a given decoration, added on to their legacy then sold the other 4, IMO, that person legitimately obtained only ONE of those decorations.

 

 

It's not clear to me that they would have the complete paper trail of all those things available. Perhaps they do, perhaps they don't. Perhaps nobody thought of it until recently. (Certainly they wouldn't have thought about it at the last merges, since there were no strongholds back then.)

 

I dully understand the can of worms that BW has opened with regards to merges and decorations.

 

If BW cannot ensure that NO decorations legitimately obtained are lost, then they need to be honest. They need to come clean and make a statement advising everyone that they may, and likely will, lose some, or many, decorations, possibly including very expensive and rare ones.

The way you can know that Bioware has no tracking data on the source of what gets put into someone's decoration legacy (GTN, CM, or gifted) is how things get into the legacy. It's an icon that you click in your inventory. There is nothing on the tooltip that says "gifted from a friend" or "bought of the GTN" or "bought from the cartel market".

 

It's a token, and the programming that consumes the token and increases the count of the item in the player's legacy isn't keeping a separate list somewhere of how that token came to be in the player's inventory prior to being consumed.

 

I think everyone understands how it works now. Unfortunately, server merges were not likely a consideration when decorations were introduced.

 

Can we at least agree that BW should be honest and not only change the FAQ (trying to slide it in under the radar) , but make a definitive and "loud" statement (effectively shouting it from the rooftops) to advise everyone that they were "mistaken" and every player may, and likely WILL, lose some, or many, decorations, possibly including very expensive and rare decorations?

I think everyone understands how it works now. Unfortunately, server merges were not likely a consideration when decorations were introduced.

 

Can we at least agree that BW should be honest and not only change the FAQ (trying to slide it in under the radar) , but make a definitive and "loud" statement (effectively shouting it from the rooftops) to advise everyone that they were "mistaken" and every player may, and likely WILL, lose some, or many, decorations, possibly including very expensive and rare decorations?

 

They did:

It is possible that you may end up with more decorations placed than you own after the update. If this happens, you cannot place any more of that decoration until you go below your owned value.

They did:

 

IMO, that would address the issue of "copied" decorations being placed in multiple strongholds across multiple servers, but NOT the potential for having legitimately obtained decorations taken away.

 

 

At the very least, this statement:

 

"Decorations are not impacted by the United Forces update."

 

is blatantly untrue.

 

 

I wonder if people who refuse to acknowledge this issue (effectively saying "too bad, so sad, sucks to be you) are afraid that if BW acknowledges this issue, that they may postpone serer merges or that there would be a massive loss of support for those merges.

Edited October 5, 2017 by Ratajack

IMO, that would address the issue of "copied" decorations being placed in multiple strongholds across multiple servers, but NOT the potential for having legitimately obtained decorations taken away.

 

I wonder if people who refuse to acknowledge this issue (effectively saying "too bad, so sad, sucks to be you) are afraid that if BW acknowledges this issue, that they may postpone serer merges or that there would be a massive loss of support for those merges?

 

Simply acknowledging that Bioware has no way to suss out the difference between how a player acquired a deco token prior to consuming that token for their legacy (gifted, GTN, CM) and subsequently acknowledging therefore that Bioware lacks the tools to protect all decorations under all circumstances, and, as much as I'd like to be swimming in decorations after the fact, Bioware sure as heck isn't going to write down future revenue by making the merge additive.

Simply acknowledging that Bioware has no way to suss out the difference between how a player acquired a deco token prior to consuming that token for their legacy (gifted, GTN, CM) and subsequently acknowledging therefore that Bioware lacks the tools to protect all decorations under all circumstances, and, as much as I'd like to be swimming in decorations after the fact, Bioware sure as heck isn't going to write down future revenue by making the merge additive.

 

I do not think that anyone has asked that they make decorations additive. I know I have not.

 

I do, however, ask (and EXPECT) that BW be completely honest and not try to slip something in "under the radar".

 

As another poster noted, this issue may very well have been something that no one considered since up to now and not a deliberate decision to be "less than honest". I will give them the benefit of the doubt.

 

If they cannot find some way to ensure that NO legitimately obtained decorations are lost, then they should, IMO, not only change the FAQ to remove the blatant untruth of "Decorations are not impacted by the United Forces update.", they should also "shout it from the rooftops" ( a stickied thread with a title like: "IMPORTANT UPDATE server merge and the potential loss of decorations" would work), so that every player can be advised that they may, and likely WILL, lose some, if not many, decorations, possibly including very expensive and rare decorations.