Temporarily splitting Green?

[cd288]

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

A lot of weird speculation being toted as fact in this thread.

Why even make arguments based on servers being merged when Rogean himself said they don't know anymore if they are gonna merge green into blue or not? Time will tell. Just like the staff doesn't know if they need to make any changes to the current system via further increasing the spawns rates or even opening up a new server, to which they said was a possibility, or anything else because again time will tell.

Also, while polls are a relevant source of information to (possibly if the staff wants), make a decision based on said poll, it's not a 100% guarantee. I think we all know that Rogean and Co does what they want in many situations regardless of popular opinion because it's their sandbox.

Yea green kinda sucks right now. Low levels are amazing in my experience as a level 7 SK Troll (don't judge me and my obscene EXP penalty). But I have heard from multiple friends that 20+ can be an absolute nightmare as soon as leveling spots start dwindling and be mostly dominated by pet classes controlling everything level relevant in their range.

But the most important aspect of it all is we don't know what will happen in the future. But I'm positive the staff is watching and will make changes when absolutely necessary, regardless of a poll that didn't have a clear majority.

TL;DR - play or don't play based on population. Staff will do what they think is best, not what the beard on your neck thinks is the right call.

I think you misunderstood the commenters merging comment. They weren’t talking about merging green and blue, they were talking about the effect of creating two greens and then eventually merging them together.

[astuce999]

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

Because if you split the server and then merge it back, you have doubled the rate of entry of plat and loot drops into the system for that time period... so there's a bit more of a ramification than you let on. You'd have to halve the drop rates to maintain the integrity of the economy, but now that solution doesn't look so good, does it?

This is the first logical argument against a server split that isn't tainted by an agenda. I think it would only come true if there is a time-based forced merge, instead of a population-based potential merger.

If they split the server and say that no matter what happens in 6 months they merge, then yes, you will have a doubling of available loot/money than normal, and there will be certain undesired consequences.

But if they split the server and say that they will only merge back if the population dwindles enough, then the issue is greatly mitigated as a lot of items/money will not make it back in circulation as those people who own them have stopped playing.

thanks,

Astuce

[Baler]

My friend is on server 1 and I'm forced to play on server 2 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[zodium]

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

Gotta call incorrect and rose tinted glasses on this one.

I did play during vanilla launch and a newbie zone wasn't packed with 350 players sitting in a single exact spot waiting for that mob to spawn.

Hint - there wasn't a single sever on original live during launch week that had 2k+ active players that knew all the in and outs of EQ

we are saying the same thing, you are just saying it harder. that's cool. i like that. our chakras are aligned: vanilla was a badly designed game, intended for--shot from the hip here, guesstimating class and level distributions--maybe 800 to 1000 people per server tops.

[cd288]

Originally Posted by astuce999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is the first logical argument against a server split that isn't tainted by an agenda. I think it would only come true if there is a time-based forced merge, instead of a population-based potential merger.

If they split the server and say that no matter what happens in 6 months they merge, then yes, you will have a doubling of available loot/money than normal, and there will be certain undesired consequences.

But if they split the server and say that they will only merge back if the population dwindles enough, then the issue is greatly mitigated as a lot of items/money will not make it back in circulation as those people who own them have stopped playing.

thanks,

Astuce

True, but technically you couldn't even mitigate the issue by merging if the population dwindles enough unless you completely wiped characters who hadn't played in X period of time. If you split Green, the pop dwindles, and then you merge it again you could easily see an influx of people coming back to their characters now that the servers are merged and the population is viable enough to play. Then the issue is still in existence.

[astuce999]

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

True, but technically you couldn't even mitigate the issue by merging if the population dwindles enough unless you completely wiped characters who hadn't played in X period of time. If you split Green, the pop dwindles, and then you merge it again you could easily see an influx of people coming back to their characters now that the servers are merged and the population is viable enough to play. Then the issue is still in existence.

I think we're saying the same thing, which is why I said mitigated and not eliminated. However impactful it can end up being, I believe we can both agree it's not going to be a true 2:1 ratio, correct?

My personal opinion is that classic EQ is such a great game that there's enough current population to split it to 4 servers and that there won't be a need to merge any of them until at least a couple of years after velious, and by then the impact will be near nil.

I'd be very curious to see stats on how many 'unique' accounts have logged into green so far; I suspect that the sustained 2600ish players at once gives a false impression of the actual interest, which I would speculate is likely closer to 4000.

The classic solution to overpopulation was more servers, it was not an increased spawn rate and lists. Within the spirit of this project, I'm on the right side of history [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Astuce

[zodium]

Originally Posted by astuce999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The classic solution to overpopulation was more servers, it was not an increased spawn rate and lists. Within the spirit of this project, I'm on the right side of history [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

the classic solution was to abandon the classic model, as it was not viable at the population scale everquest ended up on

[cd288]

Originally Posted by astuce999 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think we're saying the same thing, which is why I said mitigated and not eliminated. However impactful it can end up being, I believe we can both agree it's not going to be a true 2:1 ratio, correct?

My personal opinion is that classic EQ is such a great game that there's enough current population to split it to 4 servers and that there won't be a need to merge any of them until at least a couple of years after velious, and by then the impact will be near nil.

I'd be very curious to see stats on how many 'unique' accounts have logged into green so far; I suspect that the sustained 2600ish players at once gives a false impression of the actual interest, which I would speculate is likely closer to 4000.

The classic solution to overpopulation was more servers, it was not an increased spawn rate and lists. Within the spirit of this project, I'm on the right side of history [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Astuce

IMO, unique accounts isn't really relevant to the decision of whether or not to split the server. All that matters is what the population is consistently at. Around 7:30 PM eastern time last night it was just barely over 2k, which IMO is not sufficient to requrie a server split. You can have 4,000 accounts that have logged into the server at one point or another, but that has nothing to do with the averag active population at any given time.

Personally, I'm not sure where the concern is coming from; beyond the level 1-4 content, I have had zero issue finding groups or mobs to kill (I can find one within seconds of finishing medding) and that includes being in zones with 50+ people in them all XPing.

[Skosh]

The real issue as previously mentioned will be when folks reach the 24-40 level range and start packing the zones for those levels as well as bottom feeding the lower end for cash. Kunark zones aren't available - it's just the same old basic zones. Weekend prime time hours will be hellish.

[Nilstoniakrath]

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

Pretty sure the community was split 50/50 and the staff were the ones that decided no.

Lots of misunderstanding on this in this thread. The poll was split 50/50 and Rogean said that the staff would not make any changes in light of no clear mandate and that they may revisit the issue again.

Obviously, those who forumquest are against, and overrepresented here. That doesn't mean that is the opinion of the community as a whole.

Myself, there are pros and cons to both and I don't have a strong opinion either way.