Server Mergers VS Char Transfer

Beerbeer · 2013-01-09, 02:45 PM

I hope they reconsider this.

First, flat-out merges are needed for almost all servers and this could be done in such a way that minimizes faction imbalances, by taking a heavy TR server, for example, and merging it with a heavy VS and NC dominated servers. While this won't be perfect, it is controllable.

Second, this could be bad from multiple perspectives:

1. This could create a feast or famine effect, where everyone dog piles on a few servers leaving those that cannot or choose not to transfer for whatever reason (e.g., clans, free to play, etc.) left on completely famished, deserted servers, which would hasten their exit.

2. This could create massive empire imbalances on those servers that live. I can see it now where the average TR player dog piles to Waterson, where imbalance is already poor. Or, conversely, the VS or NC on Waterson departs en-masses because of the existing imbalance, making the situation bad for everyone.

Stop monetizing something that should be free to fix. If you want us to play, merge the servers and give us the activity we deserve, don't put the burden on us you greedy bastards. This has the potential to ruin the game even more.

Assist · 2013-01-09, 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

I hope they reconsider this.

First, flat-out merges are needed for almost all servers and this could be done in such a way that minimizes faction imbalances, by taking a heavy TR server, for example, and merging it with a heavy VS and NC dominated servers. While this won't be perfect, it is controllable.

Second, this could be bad from multiple perspectives:

1. This could create a feast or famine effect, where everyone dog piles on a few servers leaving those that cannot or choose not to transfer for whatever reason (e.g., clans, free to play, etc.) left on completely famished, deserted servers, which would hasten their exit.

2. This could create massive empire imbalances on those servers that live. I can see it now where the average TR player dog piles to Waterson, where imbalance is already poor. Or, conversely, the VS or NC on Waterson departs en-masses because of the existing imbalance, making the situation bad for everyone.

Stop monetizing something that should be free to fix. If you want us to play, merge the servers and give us the activity we deserve, don't put the burden on us you greedy bastards. This has the potential to ruin the game even more.

IF they were to merge servers, I would still want the option to transfer my character. Just because YOU want it to happen one way doesn't mean the whole population wants it to happen that way. I'll gladly pay to have my character transfered, just like I did in numerous other MMO's.

Beerbeer · 2013-01-09, 02:56 PM

That's fine. Merge servers first, then allow paid char transfers.

Assist · 2013-01-09, 03:00 PM

Originally Posted by Beerbeer

That's fine. Merge servers first, then allow paid char transfers.

So doing it the opposite way won't work? It's the same effect, except you're allowing players to choose where to go right off the bat.

I'd prefer the option be left to the players and not dictated by SoE.

Beerbeer · 2013-01-09, 03:04 PM

No, I bet most people will not find the need to transfer if they merge servers and do it in a way the benefits everyone.

Second, why would anyone want to transfer in the first place knowing that server mergers are inevitable?

Better to merge first, then allow those that want to transfer do so knowing that future mergers are not as likely.

Kerrec · 2013-01-09, 03:05 PM

Server mergers or Character Transfers. There are HUGE logistical problems with both.

1) Population imbalances can vary by timezone. Even though a server may be east coast, that doesn't stop a west coast player from joining. So your experience on your server may lead you to believe that your faction population is dead when you tend to play, but at other times, it may be over-populated. Same goes for population in general. Your server may be dead when you play, bit it may be rocking at other times.

2) You pay for a character transfer to go to a "populated" server. When you get there, it ends up being abandoned, because everyone on that server transfered because they had the "grass is greener" syndome. So you've paid real world money to move, and you're in no better situation.

3) I'm not sure about this, but if same names are allowed across multiple servers, then that can cause a huge logistical nightmare, especially if someone will not want to give up their name, for any reason.

I'm sure there are lots more. Either way, I'm flat out against character transfers. I already witness what human nature does when I see 3 separate faction zergs on 3 different continents. Too many people choose to farm easy xp, instead of seeking challenges and risk. IMO, character transfers will just allow people to join servers where their faction dominates. So we'll see faction zergs on servers, instead of faction zergs on continents.

QuantumMechanic · 2013-01-09, 03:05 PM

Tell me what will server transfers fix?

Unless you are in Europe and don't play on Miller, transferring servers is basically pointless. You can buy a token that lets you transfer from your current dead server to a different dead server. Sweet.

Crator · 2013-01-09, 03:07 PM

Agreed, sounds like a money grab. I'd rather they just allowed all SC purchased items to be used on another (single) character on another server. Probably too hard to code that in a timely manner though, same for server merges, so they are allowing character transfers.

Assist · 2013-01-09, 03:12 PM

Originally Posted by QuantumMechanic

Tell me what will server transfers fix?

Unless you are in Europe and don't play on Miller, transferring servers is basically pointless. You can buy a token that lets you transfer from your current dead server to a different dead server. Sweet.

They don't 'fix' anything, I don't think they're being sold as a fix. I think they're there for either the people that want off their server for various reasons. The grass is always greener on the otherside and this allows people to get to the otherside.

You've never played a game and found out a month down the road that you have friends on another server you would want to play with ? It's a bit of both for me, either way I don't see offering paid transfers as a bad thing. Free transfers could be bad, but paid ones not as many will leave as to ruin the population of a server.

Beerbeer · 2013-01-09, 03:16 PM

Look at it this way future, potential transfer customers:

How would you feel if you paid money to transfer to a server only to find out a month from now those two servers will be merged.

Don't do it; they have to merge servers, the sooner they realize this the better. They waited far too long in ps1 and I hope to God they don't make the same mistake this time around (which they probably will). In fact, those Einstein's already have IMO.

Sledgecrushr · 2013-01-09, 03:17 PM

Im kind of disappointed with the paid for server transfers. I was really hoping they would be free. It would be so much fun to go raiding another server with your outfit.

QuantumMechanic · 2013-01-09, 03:20 PM

From Higby's tweets this morning I get the feeling they know that server merges are required, but that's going to take them some time (didn't prepare for this eventuality??).

So in the meantime, the paid server transfer is the temp solution. But as Beerbeer points out above, that's just gonna piss people off when they pay to transfer to a server that later just gets merged with their original server.

Misato · 2013-01-09, 03:51 PM

I know a couple of mmos do this character transfer for money (WoW for $25 for example) so it is not a big surprise to me. Is it a money grab? Perhaps, but honestly we didn't shell out 50-60 bucks for the game either. You are not required to have a paid subscription. Sure you can spend money for SC, but no one is forcing you to. But apparently the demand is there to spend the money and you know people are going to buy the token.

Tatwi · 2013-01-09, 05:16 PM

The best (and non-money-grabbing) solution is to make character account bound rather than server bound. Let people log in, pick their character, and pick the server they want to play on. After 15min of play time, that server choice "sticks" for that character for 12 hours. Simple, functional, and solves all population issues without milking customers.

FYI - SOE knows how to make account bound characters. They've been doing it with FreeRealms (using the Forgelight backend) for years, so this is nothing new or strange to them.

Simo · 2013-01-09, 05:35 PM

If they are going to merge servers, the should give every character 1 free transfer. Problem fixed. People go where they want. Populations across remaining servers is upped.

I honestly have no problem with them charging for a server transfer. Unless they're moving things around themselves. If they're moving things then players ought to be able to move themselves.