Temporarily splitting Green? - Page 3

Lonedrahon25 · #1 10-30-2019, 03:52 PM

Anyone ever thought that due to the overpopulation of zones is causing people to hang up green prematurely? IMHO if the servers were split like it was asked day one, Green's overall server(s) health would last longer. Again, my own personal opinion.

WaffleztheAndal · #2 10-30-2019, 04:16 PM

No to a server split. Never split servers.

Hagglebaron · #3 10-30-2019, 04:19 PM

People voted no to a server split when Rogean polled. Splitting is a bad idea imo. The risk of high population is far better than the risk of low population.

Lonedrahon25 · #4 10-30-2019, 04:21 PM

IIRC correctly, Rogean said the vote was actually pretty even.

cd288 · #5 10-30-2019, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonedrahon25 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

IIRC correctly, Rogean said the vote was actually pretty even.

And clearly a majority voted no. Regardless of what the percentage was on each side, a vote was taken and the majority said no. If the pop is still high in a month or so, maybe they'll take another poll. Who knows.

But in the meantime, the majority of the server voted no and that is what it is. These posts from the minority who voted yes serve no point.

Lonedrahon25 · #6 10-30-2019, 04:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And clearly a majority voted no. Regardless of what the percentage was on each side, a vote was taken and the majority said no. If the pop is still high in a month or so, maybe they'll take another poll. Who knows.

But in the meantime, the majority of the server voted no and that is what it is. These posts from the minority who voted yes serve no point.

Where was the vote at? Are you going by the player made one on the forums, or the broadcast that Rogean asked on opening night? Because he stated in the broadcast that the votes he was received via tell was pretty even split. I dont know where you're getting your information from that says Rogean is a liar. If you could kindly point me to where it does that may help your case here.

cd288 · #7 10-30-2019, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonedrahon25 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Where was the vote at? Are you going by the player made one on the forums, or the broadcast that Rogean asked on opening night? Because he stated in the broadcast that the votes he was received via tell was pretty even split. I dont know where you're getting your information from that says Rogean is a liar. If you could kindly point me to where it does that may help your case here.

...? If the majority of the server had voted yes, we would've had a split. We don't have one, so clearly the majority voted no. "Pretty evenly split" can mean something as close as 51% vs 49%.

Lonedrahon25 · #8 10-30-2019, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

...? If the majority of the server had voted yes, we would've had a split. We don't have one, so clearly the majority voted no. "Pretty evenly split" can mean something as close as 51% vs 49%.

Do you read what you type before you hit enter?

Sunderfury · #9 10-30-2019, 04:28 PM

I think it is a valuable learning experience seeing what 2500 people do to a server, even with increased spawn rates. I think the classic way is key for Green 202X... determine areas that, for example, would instantly respawn mob A+B+C if all 3 were dead. Typical newbie zones, areas of the karanas, low level dungeons, etc.

This is not custom content, but classic. Instant respawns (with potentially variable spawn locs / holders to prevent exploits of neckbeards) can handle an even larger influx of population without the need for additional servers.

I would personally not like to see a split on current server.

Midoo · #10 10-30-2019, 04:27 PM

I can understand all the love for the impractical, exaggerated "hardcore" version of EQ but in 2019 variables are different and non-classic measures must be taken to ensure a smooth classic experience.

Good points were raised in this thread but I'd like to add some clarifications to my initial proposal:

I don't think it would be too technically challenging to split Green's population into equal parts depending on the time of creation of their character (first 500 since launch, second 500, third 500, etc..) and have character transfers available in case you and your friend created your characters too far apart for some reason.

But most importantly I'm only suggesting this split goes into effect for the time it takes most of the population to get past the "newbie yard" zones. Maybe just a few days up to a week, but for now it's a literal traffic jam.

Say you're a level 7 barb in Everfrost and you're desperate to squeeze a level in before you have to go to work in a few hours. Having 40 Barbarians in one Blackburrow and 40 in the Tundra area (and more constantly catching up to that point) makes it pretty much impossible to get anything done since these are the only places where you'll find any blue/white mobs.

From levels 1 to 10 your leveling options are extremely restricted, and there are no alternative ways "off the beaten path" of any kind. You can't explore since anything out of your zone cons red. All you have is the yard in front of your home city and maybe a dungeon if you're lucky that's fully camped 24/7 anyway.

But once you get past that point a lot of conventional (CB, HHK, Unrest, Guk, MM) and unconventional (Up to your imagination) ways of leveling up start to open to you and that's when I suggest realms could be merged.

At this point it's just Black Friday in videogame form, and as a Barbarian player I shudder to think of what Elf and Human zones must look like.