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

EzioMessi's Avatar


EzioMessi
06.09.2017 , 10:23 AM | #551
Quote: Originally Posted by Ratajack View Post
It's pretty clear to me that some do not acknowledge the concerns that many have with regards to server merges, and only see their desires to have the servers merged.
So what you're saying is, you don't have an answer. Good to know.

Lay off with the victim complex, most of us acknowledged literally every other concern including RP griefing, money+time investments, and even freaking name changes.

But when someone says "every new group content player and every stranded veteran group content player should get no group content because of my respawn timers" that's asinine.
The Harbinger - The Raider Legacy
Attair - Level 70 Sentinel
If you like my comment, please click my referral link for free goodies for both you and
me: http://www.swtor.com/r/3XbB9h

TUXs's Avatar


TUXs
06.09.2017 , 10:28 AM | #552
Quote: Originally Posted by AscendingSky View Post
If EAWare properly moderated and policed in-game behavior in this game (like Square Enix does with FFXIV and their zero tolerance policy), then I would be far less opposed to the idea of RP servers being merged with non-RP ones.
This is absolutely a necessity...not just for RP servers, but for all of them. Chat has deteriorated to what it is because there is no oversight or accountability...a mistake I believe Bioware must rectify ASAP.
All warfare is based on deception If his forces are united, separate them If you are far from the enemy, make him believe you are near A leader leads by example not by force
My referral code: here What you get: here (1 FREE transfer 7-day FREE sub FREE Jumpstart and Preferred Bundles)

Ratajack's Avatar


Ratajack
06.09.2017 , 10:28 AM | #553
Quote: Originally Posted by DWho View Post
One suggestion for dealing with it was reducing instance size, but as I said, that is a coding issue that won't be solved quickly. With the reduced populations now it is not as big a problem as it was when server populations were much higher. Creating instanced areas for more mission objectives could also be done but once again that is a coding change that is not quick to implement.

Respawn timers for some are quite extensive. To give an example maybe people are familiar with since there was a whole thread dedicated to it at one point. The bonus mission in the Heroic Face Merchants on Coruscant is kill 15 Black Sun. The area that is applied to contains 15-20 NPCs that count. On a typical weeknight, even on JC which some would classify a low pop server, there are 4-6 people (most of which refuse to group up) in that area waiting for the mobs to respawn (respawn timer there is something like 2 or 3 minutes). If you are lucky you can get 3 or 4 NPCs per respawn cycle before they are all gone again. So it can easily take you in excess of 20 minutes just to gather those up assuming you are lucky enough to get one set in each spawn cycle. That is one where all of the spawns are close together. Now think about the slave collar mission on Coruscant where the objectives are spread all over a fairly large map and you have to run around trying to find one that hasn't been taken. I have heard a number of people complain that waiting more than 5 minutes for a WZ pop is unacceptable but these same people are fine with someone waiting 15-20 minutes to complete one mission objective (and many missions are affected by high population). Another that comes to mind is Mutations on Taris (the respawn timer there I think is in excess of 5 minutes and requires you to kill 6 - I think - in an area containing only 7). While the heroics are "optional" content they are illustrative to this discussion because due to the CXP payout they are currently heavily played and thus are somewhat indicative of what a higher population server would experience with open world objectives.
Thank you for providing a couple of specific examples of open world objectives, not that it will make a difference to some, of course.

Quote: Originally Posted by DWho View Post
As far as the old PVP servers go. I don't recall anyone saying these should not be merged. It's possible but I don't recall it and those that are "opposed", and I'll use that term lightly, to server merges on those servers have grave concerns about assets as has been said many times so I will not go into it further.
In the interest of fairness, I have said that I do think those "dead" servers are the only ones that should be considered for merges. I also stated that they should be considered for merges ONLY if BW can resolve ALL the issues surrounding those merges, ensuring that no one those servers loses anything or is negatively impacted in any way. Those are just my opinions, though.

Ratajack's Avatar


Ratajack
06.09.2017 , 10:34 AM | #554
Quote: Originally Posted by EzioMessi View Post
So what you're saying is, you don't have an answer. Good to know.

Lay off with the victim complex, most of us acknowledged literally every other concern including RP griefing, money+time investments, and even freaking name changes.

But when someone says "every new group content player and every stranded veteran group content player should get no group content because of my respawn timers" that's asinine.
I specifically said BOTH play styles need support.

Foambreaker's Avatar


Foambreaker
06.09.2017 , 10:44 AM | #555
Quote: Originally Posted by RobertFKennedyUS View Post
...
(2) Your 66% statistic is made up.
...
If 3 servers merge and all three had a toon named "Nakita" then 2 out of 3 are forced to change their name. 66%.

That is the best case, the west coast, if they merge all the servers it is more like 85%.

And here is more good news, that is a per toon statistic.

It is almost certain that every account will have to rename at least one char.

And don't tell me you have been here since '12; those are the people with the most common names, and every server has someone with the common name that has been here since '12. If anything the older accounts with the better names are most likely to face a conflict.

And that is if they do it by first come first serve. If they do it the way they did last time, by destination, then it is much worse for everyone except the destination server(s).

The only people who will beat the odds are the people with lousy names that no one else has copied.



People with forced name changes are likely to quit.

So in the end this is a feature that will be expensive to implement and cost subs.

XServer is better.

Jedi_riches's Avatar


Jedi_riches
06.09.2017 , 11:04 AM | #556
Quote: Originally Posted by TUXs View Post

Alternatively, what if RP had their own instance and secluded chat from the rest of the server? In the RP instance, you would only see chat from that instance, not like it is now where you see everything...would that help? Basically, you'd be on the same server as others, but you'd be separated by your instance choice. If you elected to go to the PvP or PvE instance, you'd see that chat but not RP chat.
The problem with that is it's too easy to swap just to harass someone on their own server someone really has to go out of their way to troll but if it's 2 clicks away...... Also it won't do anything for those who end up in a 'rp flashpoint'
How PvP balance is achieved - Bioware please nerf paper its OP, scissors are fine as they are.
Regards,
Rock

forestguard's Avatar


forestguard
06.09.2017 , 11:05 AM | #557
Quote: Originally Posted by TUXs View Post
I do have a question for the RPers...

As long as you're segregated on your own server, doesn't that impact your ability to draw in new RPers? If it were an instance that I could load into, like a PvP instance, wouldn't that increase exposure to RP and potentially enlarge the RP playerbase?

I understand the fear of griefing...but that's why I think we need better policing of chat...I just don't quite understand how isolating RPers helps RP grow and attract new RPers. It doesn't effect me in the least, just as many people despise PvP, I have no desire to RP...but I would be curious to observe an RP server/setting...I just won't create or move a character to experience it.

So...how does segregating your community help in the long run exactly?
Speaking only from personal experience, I decided to roll on EH when I did because it was labelled an RP server. I was on Shadowlands to start, and wanted to actually watch scenes and if I said something in character, the group was just like "what are you doing?" So I swapped when I saw it was an RP server, even though I had never really RP'd before that. It was the idea of being in a community that was full of RPers that caught my interest and drew me in. I am very much an advocate for it to get the official label back.

As far as chat, it's also very easy to lose emotes in the slew of chat, like on Korriban on Ebon hawk for example, when people sit at the academy entrance and just duel and use say to talk to each other out of charcter.
Soli Deo Gloria - Tank main on Ebon Hawk:

Xukol - 70 Darkness Assassin ** Xayis - 70 Kinetic Combat Shadow * Linium (current) - 70 Shield Specialist Vanguard

Foambreaker's Avatar


Foambreaker
06.09.2017 , 11:25 AM | #558
In the end we are all going to meet when it comes to FP and PvP, they have to do something, it is either XServer or Merge.

What I would like to see is:
1. Ignore be account wide or at least legacy
2. Ignore works on all queues including PvP

Ignore is their excuse for not policing behavior, fine, make it actually work.

Ratajack's Avatar


Ratajack
06.09.2017 , 11:35 AM | #559
Quote: Originally Posted by Foambreaker View Post
In the end we are all going to meet when it comes to FP and PvP, they have to do something, it is either XServer or Merge.

What I would like to see is:
1. Ignore be account wide or at least legacy
2. Ignore works on all queues including PvP

Ignore is their excuse for not policing behavior, fine, make it actually work.
I agree that ignoring one character should ignore that player's entire legacy and that ignore lists should prevent players from being grouped with anyone on their ignore lists for ANY AND ALL queues and types of activities.

That said, ignore lists are only so big, and they do nothing for certain types of "less than desirable behavior".

DWho's Avatar


DWho
06.09.2017 , 11:49 AM | #560
I guess the question I have is that if Bioware were to remove the impediments to characters moving servers (to a bigger server for better group content pops, better markets, more people around) would that fix the pop rate for group content. Or is there a sizeable enough community that believes the pop times they get are adequate, that they can do the group content they want to do, and prefers for whatever reason the server they are on.

In the end I am starting to think this is the real issue with server mergers, that there may not be enough population that wants to be on large servers and wants better access to group content to get to where some group players want to get. This is obviously bad for group content players and maybe time and effort is better spent trying to get cross-server to work or find some other way to let people get together for group content (short term transfers - transfer for a day or week or something like that for those that get an urge to binge on group content and are on a lower pop server but don't want to make a permanent move). Right now it is relatively cheap to transfer a character and if legacy transfer could be implemented, would enough people move to say Harbinger to get pop times where people want them? Allowing people who made a "mistake" and created a character on a low pop server could also be addressed relatively simply with a free character transfer.

I am not against server mergers if the technical issues we have been discussing in this thread could be worked out. It just seems that to work them out may take longer than some of the merge server people want to wait.