If ever an XI-style server merge occurs, SHUNNNN the non-subscribers!

I have no idea if anything like this will ever cross the XIV team's minds. But if a server merge ever comes about that mimics XI's Server A -> Server B style, please change how name conflicts are resolved. In many ways these A->B transfers are preferable, as players with multiple linkshells can go without worrying, and communities stay together. But please allow names to be first-come-first serve AFTER the merge. Why? Because (though I can't prove this fact) I'd say that a huge number of characters are probably deactivated now that the game is pay-to-play, and a lot of them are going to stay that way. I logged on ASAP at launch to get a name I liked, and I still like it. Deferring my name to a character that will never be played would suck. This won't be a problem for people with original names, but for anyone with a "popular" name (John Doe, Pac Man, White Mage, Oprah Winfrey, etc.) it will be a problem. It also annoyed many of my friends in XI that they had no control over whether or not they could keep their names, because SE picked for everyone.

To solve both of these problems relatively easily, I suggest that, in the case of a name conflict, the precedence would not go to the "receiving" server's player, but to the first player to log in after the update. It makes sense to me, if this is technologically possible.

EDIT: I'm pretty sure the thread's turned up better ideas than first come first serve. I've struck it through it so people will hopefully not just read the OP and comment. ^^

What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mychael

I have no idea if anything like this will ever cross the XIV team's minds. But if a server merge ever comes about that mimics XI's Server A -> Server B style, please change how name conflicts are resolved. In many ways these A->B transfers are preferable, as players with multiple linkshells can go without worrying, and communities stay together. But please allow names to be first-come-first serve AFTER the merge. Why? Because (though I can't prove this fact) I'd say that a huge number of characters are probably deactivated now that the game is pay-to-play, and a lot of them are going to stay that way. I logged on ASAP at launch to get a name I liked, and I still like it. Deferring my name to a character that will never be played would suck. This won't be a problem for people with original names, but for anyone with a "popular" name (John Doe, Pac Man, White Mage, Oprah Winfrey, etc.) it will be a problem. It also annoyed many of my friends in XI that they had no control over whether or not they could keep their names, because SE picked for everyone.

To solve both of these problems relatively easily, I suggest that, in the case of a name conflict, the precedence would not go to the "receiving" server's player, but to the first player to log in after the update. It makes sense to me, if this is technologically possible.

---

Gath thinks you spelled "Michael" wrong.
Gath does not approve of the spelling.
Gath's 1 gil is worth more than your 1 gil.

I don't like first in first serve policy for name priority. IMO the character age and current activity should be the priority...would sucks someone playing in a regular-basis one year and then losing the name to a mule during server merge because the mule is at the receiving server or because he was able to come back from the maint faster than i do.

I don't see the names really being an issue with server merges. Having a surname eliminates a lot of the overlap to begin with. People that run around with a name such as White Mage; I'm sure they can come up with something equally creative.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RemVye

What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.

---

My internets. . .take them.

The priority should go:

1) Active players
2) world priority (natives get to keep their name)
3) character creation date

Lets say Servers A B and C all got merged to server A.
These 3 server each had a player named "Joe Dirt" (Joe Dirt-a , Joe Dirt-b and Joe Dirt-c to keep them straight)

1)If Joe Dirt-a and Joe Dirt-b aren't currently subscribing then Joe Dirt-c gets to keep the name. (if a & b resub they have to change their name)

2)If Joe Dirt-a is still active, then Joe Dirt-b and Joe Dirt-c must change their names.

3) If Joe Dirt-a isn't subbing and Joe Dirt-b and Joe Dirt-c are, then it goes by "born on date." If Joe Dirt-b was created in December of 2010 and Jor Dirt-c was made June 2011; Joe Dirt-b gets to keep the name.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChiefCurrahee

The priority should go:



1) character creation date
2) character creation date
3) character creation date
4) character creation date

---

Fixed that for you.

I shouldn't have to change my name because my server was less populated.

As for "active" if you mean by "is currently paying to play" I agree.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DoctorMog

Fixed that for you.

---

Put your pretentiousness aside for a minute.

Active players are players who are currently subscribing. They get first dibs.

If three "active" players have the same name. The player that is native to the server keeps the name, the other two have to change it.

If the target server has no native player named "Joe Dirt" but two incoming players do; the player who created the account first gets to keep it.

So you as Doctor Mog, shouldn't have to worry about changing your name. Unless of course if you happen to merge into a server with a person named Doctor Mog already there, and currently active.

I thought about putting Character Creation Date as #2 but it's not fair to a person who has been playing on their home server for 8 months to be renamed by a person who is merged over and happens to have the same name but was made 9 months ago.

Unless of course they say Servers A B and C will be merged and become server #1 then you can fairly put creation date as #2 in priority because now there is no target server therefore no one keeps their home, they all move.


So now, try and be constructive with your next post. How would you propose they handle server merge and why?

http://www.polyvore.com/cgi/img-set/...AAAEc2l6ZQ.jpg

In a one-character-does-all, a name is a strong form of identity.

ALTHOUGH, I would also say that a name from an existing SE or media character should have be avoided. Since the identity already belongs to something mainstream and published. If anything, a name enforcement policy should come into play and all those that do not meet it should be given a chance to rename themselves.

No one should sully the name of Leeroy Jenkins, Ranma Saotome, or dare I say... Cloud Strife.

In terms of finding people post linkshell, it's going to be a pain. Through use of these and other forums, I imagine... it will be similar to enduring the end of the umbral era and doing a head count of the survivors.

Funny story.

I originally started FFXI on Diabolos server. My name was Ryuko.

At some point many years later, I switched servers, and was able to keep my name.

Later on, I saw a guy with the name "Ryuku" or "Ryoko" or something like that.

He commented on how he used to be on that same server, but transferred away before I joined the server, and then came back after I was already there. People were constantly thinking I was him for a looong time.

With the first name/last name system, most names SHOULD NOT be taken, although if you picked a popular one (John Doe, etc), don't be surprised when you have to choose a new one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChiefCurrahee

The priority should go:

1) Active players
2) world priority (natives get to keep their name)
3) character creation date

Lets say Servers A B and C all got merged to server A.
These 3 server each had a player named "Joe Dirt" (Joe Dirt-a , Joe Dirt-b and Joe Dirt-c to keep them straight)

1)If Joe Dirt-a and Joe Dirt-b aren't currently subscribing then Joe Dirt-c gets to keep the name. (if a & b resub they have to change their name)

2)If Joe Dirt-a is still active, then Joe Dirt-b and Joe Dirt-c must change their names.

3) If Joe Dirt-a isn't subbing and Joe Dirt-b and Joe Dirt-c are, then it goes by "born on date." If Joe Dirt-b was created in December of 2010 and Jor Dirt-c was made June 2011; Joe Dirt-b gets to keep the name.

---

Character creation date should have more priority than native players...would be a shame a mule keeping the name over a main character just because the mule was at "right server". Priority at native players' names already brought some bad issues at FFXI when merges started...so repeating this here would be, at least, reckless of SE.

Unfortunately if a mule was created at the same time as the main character, they would have priority as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ryuko

Funny story.

I originally started FFXI on Diabolos server. My name was Ryuko.

At some point many years later, I switched servers, and was able to keep my name.

Later on, I saw a guy with the name "Ryuku" or "Ryoko" or something like that.

He commented on how he used to be on that same server, but transferred away before I joined the server, and then came back after I was already there. People were constantly thinking I was him for a looong time.

With the first name/last name system, most names SHOULD NOT be taken, although if you picked a popular one (John Doe, etc), don't be surprised when you have to choose a new one.

---

Dude Ryuko! It's ME! HOLDEN! from FFXI! I haven't seen you back in game yet. I see Teiko all the time.

Note to self, make mules of popular community members and high ranked players just to piss em off if "original server" comes before "character creation date" on naming priority.

Check.

/notreallythough

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lienn

Character creation date should have more priority than native players...would be a shame a mule keeping the name over a main character just because the mule was at "right server". Priority at native players' names already brought some bad issues at FFXI when merges started...so repeating this here would be, at least, reckless of SE.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fiosha_Maureiba

Unfortunately if a mule was created at the same time as the main character, they would have priority as well.

---

But how does SE classify what is a mule vs what is a main? Do they just look at creation date? do they look at play activity? does the character with more levels win?

You have to draw a line somewhere. No one likes to lose, but someone has to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DoctorMog

Note to self, make mules of popular community members and high ranked players just to piss em off if "original server" comes before "character creation date" on naming priority.

Check.

/notreallythough

---

Thats 3 bucks a character, maybe SE would give you a special achievement for doing so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChiefCurrahee

But how does SE classify what is a mule vs what is a main? Do they just look at creation date? do they look at play activity? does the character with more levels win?

You have to draw a line somewhere. No one likes to lose, but someone has to.


Thats 3 bucks a character, maybe SE would give you a special achievement for doing so.

---

Ok, Ill just take your name.

I understand your concern. But is it fair if a player is named Doctor Mog on Melmond, and has been playing for 10 months, for you to come in and take his name because you've had yours for over a year?

Answer honestly.

What can SE do to put people at ease?
If they put creation date as top priority, they then need to merge servers under a new name. So no one can stake their claim as a"founder" or what have you. Then the active character with the longer history wins. regardless of duplicate names.

Or once they announce how merges will work, any newly created character from that point on, their name is subject to renaming if a character with the same name and a longer history is merged over. To prevent name claiming and immature actions by the children in the community.

Lets see some more constructive posts from you Doc Mog, you used to be such an upstanding member of this community what happened to you?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChiefCurrahee

The priority should go:

1) Active players
2) world priority (natives get to keep their name)
3) character creation date

---

how about:

1. Active players
2. Active game time

On the first priority, I think supporters and critics of SE with active characters alike, agree that non-active players get no privilege to retain their characters' names. It also reduces the amount of data that needs to be handled. So this is a given, really.

Now on my second priority, I think this gets around competing arguments over whether host should get priority or earlier account creation. I think both arguments have equal merit, and there is the problem, stalemate again.

My active game time argument is that if a player's character wasn't played much then it can't have been too important to the player.

I'd also wager than active game time is quite a unique variable.

There's no good way to solve this problem. I suggested first-come-first serve because then it comes down to how quickly you can get back on--the blame would all be on the player, rather than on SE. No matter how SE chooses, unless players have some "choice," people will be mad at SE.

Character creation date doesn't mean much. Many people have had alts since launch, and I would hope that someone's main character, even if they started last month, would take priority over my alt. Active game time is a pretty good idea, but there are people like me who leave our games up 24/7--we have an obvious advantage over people who log in for events, and out. On the other hand, it does provide a much more realistic view than anything else proposed so far. People would not have their alts/mules logged in for much time.

In any case, the very last thing I would like to see is the "native" players of a server taking precedence. If this was a war of servers, and I had a chance to fight for my server which tragically lost to your server, it would make sense that I should have to defer to someone. But this isn't a war, and if SE simply tells us where we're going, the "native" server's population has done nothing better than/different from the other(s). So it's really not fair that they should keep their games--yeah, I know, life's not fair.

You guys have some pretty good ideas, I hope someone from SE takes the time to read through them. ^^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gath

Gath thinks you spelled "Michael" wrong.
Gath does not approve of the spelling.
Gath's 1 gil is worth more than your 1 gil.

---

Because Mychael Danna is almost as awesome as Gath.

The funny is that there are ppl that would be willing to change name during server merge. I bet there would be many players willing to rename their characters regardless of having or not name conflict.

Maybe they should simply ask before hand if someone want or not to change name and/or surname, already having most active characters flagged as if they want or not change name in case of conflict. It would potentially eliminate a large part of the conflicts, also already giving people that golden chance of renaming already thinking foward, when new races pop.

I just thought I'd post some bits I found in Reinhart's translations:

Quote:

---

こんにちは。
Hello,

もろもろ詳細をお知らせできるのはもう少し先になるのですが、大変気になるところだと思いますので先んじてお伝えしたいと思います。
To explain the full details it going to need some more time but thought this was something everyone was wondering about so would like to let you all know.

ワールド統合により同一ワールド内に同名のキャラクターが存在することになった場合、優先された1キャラクターを除き、改名が必要になります。
Upon server merge if there are duplicate character names aside from 1 character with priority you will need to rename the character.

な お、優先順位については現在仕様を詰めている段階ですが、いくつかの条件により優先するキャラクター名が決定される予定です。優先順位の詳細、実施時期、 実施方法については、ワールド統合に関するお知らせとして改めて告知させていただきますので、お知らせまで今しばらくお待ちください。
How the priority for that one character is still being decided at this time but we're planning to make it for the character that meets couple requirements. For details, timing and method we will announce at another time so please hang in there.

Quote:

---

苗字つきでかぶるとはおもわないけど、名前が変わるのはまぁいいとして
名前が変わった時ヒストリーってどうなるんでしょう？
With last name don't think there will have too much duplicated and not really worried about changing the name but when you do that what's going to happen to the history?

---

キャラクター名やワールドが変更になった場合、Lodestoneの該当箇所が自動で更新されますが、ヒストリーなどはそのまま引き継がれます。
If the character name or world changed parts of Lodestone will automatically be updated but for history it will carry over.

---

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

ワールド統合につきものの、名前問題。優先順検討中とのことで恐らく杞憂だと思いますが、単にワールド順で優先 順位が決まるような事だけにはならないよう配慮願います。単純に考えるとキャラクターの作成日時が早い方が優先なのかなあ、と思いますが‥‥。
For world merges the name problem always exists. I really hope the priority isn't based off on order of the worlds simply thinking might be priority by character creation date.

---

はい、その辺りは充分に配慮して検討しています。多くの皆さんに納得感のあるルールになるようにしたいと思います。
Yes, we will look into this carefully and make a rule where most of you can agree on.

Quote:

---

リテイナーの名前がかぶった時の、改名ルールが気になります。
Wondering how the rules will apply for the retainers with duplicate names

---

リテイナーについてもプレイヤーキャラクター名と同様にルール化しています。後日の発表時にあわせてお伝えできると思います。
Same for retainers there will be similar rules juts like player character. Hope to announce this at same time.

Quote:

---

私の勘違いかもしれませんが、ワールド統合とは「各サーバー＝各ワールド」が１つとして扱われると言うのでいいのでしょうか？

確か、よしＰが説明していたのはセルビナ鯖からフィガロ鯖の人を誘って一緒にパーティが組めるようにすると言われていた気がするのですが「ワールドが変更になった場合」と言うコメントもあるようです。
Might just be my misunderstanding but by saying world merge means (some server = some world) I think YoshiP explained about where player from Selbina server can invite player in Figaro server and party together but this is when the world has been changed.

---

おそらく仰っているのは、吉田Pがインタビュー等で「コンテンツファインダー」として紹介しているものだと思いますが、ここでいうワールド統合はそれとは別のもので、現在あるワールドを再編してワールド数を減らすということを意味しています。
I think you're talking about the contents finder Yoshida Producer mentioned in a interview, for the world merge it's different, it means to lessen the amount of worlds by bringing other worlds together.

具体的な手法や手順についていは先述のとおり改めて詳細にご案内しますので、もう少々お待ち下さい。
We will announce the details/specifics on this one once ready so please hang in there

---

Looks good. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lienn

I don't like first in first serve policy for name priority. IMO the character age and current activity should be the priority...would sucks someone playing in a regular-basis one year and then losing the name to a mule during server merge because the mule is at the receiving server or because he was able to come back from the maint faster than i do.

---

I agree with this. Character age should be taken into account. Older char + active account should take priority.

I don't feel it's fair if server natives automatically get to keep their names. Players have no control over whether they will have to move to a new server or not. I feel whoever had the name longer should be able to keep it (but only if their account has been active for a while).

Good way to put your mind at ease is to do a lodestone search^^ See if anyone else already has your exact names.

I am all for the person who created the name first to be the one to keep, however. It's really unfortunate if they choose to allow whoever is on the first server to get to keep the name, when those moving have no say what-so-ever when they merge. I believe, looking at my server pop, it won't just be one server merging, but surely several. If the target is 2k players a server (I'd be quite a happytaru)

I was sorta under the impression as well that I thought they were allowing you to freely choose your server from a list, but I could be totally wrong on that :p

NO point of a server merge when they game wont be finshed till jan 2013 @_@

if the game has a low population after the free period of 2013 then we might have to worry.

one reason to no use any charater names from other games, cartoons, etc..

The whole "older character" takes priority is silly imo. If someone buys the game, starts up their account a month ago or so..and is enjoying the game and plans to continue to play it..why should they have to change their name or lose it because "older" players feel entitled? They both bought the game and both paying monthly fee...the amount of time shouldn't really matter.

However inactive characters or "dead" ones I can understand that. Maybe they could let people /random or something. That would take a long time though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChiefCurrahee

The priority should go:

1) Active players
2) world priority (natives get to keep their name)
3) character creation date

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DoctorMog

The priority should go:



1) character creation date
2) character creation date
3) character creation date
4) character creation date


Fixed that for you.

I shouldn't have to change my name because my server was less populated.

As for "active" if you mean by "is currently paying to play" I agree.

---

I guess SE does listen to reason.

Thanks SE

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DoctorMog

I guess SE does listen to reason.

Thanks SE

---

I was thinking about that thread. :3 But then they screwed us in the who goes where... I titled that thread "If ever an XI-style server merge were to occur..." I was hoping for A->B or A+B+C=1. ; ;