Removing unaccessed lvl1 characters

[Alexander_Dragonfang]

I would support this idea completely.

SE is always using the excuse of "server limitations" refering to the space characters use (which is a lot suggest SE itself) we all know items use also quite a bunch of server data, all starting character have not only the allocated room they use in the servers which is all inventory slots (even if unused they still "reserved" for them) but they start with some gear and items. Basically they wasting server space by being level 1 forever.

Just as people supported housing decay, a 6 month rule to delete level 5 or lower characters, with a warning in the character selection screen would be a good idea to free all the server space is always the first excuse SE blands for basically every single problem this game has.

[Kosmos992k]

Just as people supported housing decay, a 6 month rule to delete level 5 or lower characters, with a warning in the character selection screen would be a good idea to free all the server space is always the first excuse SE blands for basically every single problem this game has.

That's not only very unfair given you're talking about deleting data, but it's irreversable.There is no way back, no compensation when a player retuens to a deleted character. Actually, your opinion is downright draconian, and all because someone cant be bothered to change up the spelling of their name for uniqueness? Yeah, trample on others for your own good why dont you.

If they were to implement a system to "delete" characters, I would imagine that it would simply be moving that character to "deep storage" and would require the player to do a process on the website in order to bring them back out. Additionally, this process would require the player to "rename" their character because they would have been literally placed outside of the server storage space and would mean the separation from any housing, Free Companies, and mail they might have had previously. This of course would only apply to characters that were below the maximum level at the time they stopped playing, and would probably require the player to be out for at least a year.

Why should that player have to rename their character? Why not the johny come lately who wants the name, let them change, and forget this deletion of player characters.

[basketofseals]

I don't think that is fair at all. I don't think that they should ever remove characters to free up certain names. However I have to say that irrespective of anything else if the account that a character is attached to is active, even if the character hasn't been touched in 3 years, then that character needs to be considered to be active.

I don't understand, why is it not fair? After 3 years, I'm willing to bet most people wouldn't even know what names they reserved. That's assuming they come back at all. At that point it's not even someone's character. It's some data that nobody has accessed. Three years is a LONG time for a game.

[Niwashi]

I don't understand, why is it not fair? After 3 years, I'm willing to bet most people wouldn't even know what names they reserved. That's assuming they come back at all. At that point it's not even someone's character. It's some data that nobody has accessed. Three years is a LONG time for a game.

No it's not. I've had my LOTRO characters for nine years, and several times taken long breaks from them while I focused more on this game instead, but I'm no less attached to them for that. For Guild Wars, it's even longer and with more multi-year breaks (though admittedly I'm not as attached to that one). Most of the games I've been playing longer than that are single player, so a bit different, but there's still lots of games I spend well over a decade on. Just because you may not have been playing games for long doesn't mean other people don't. A mere three years is barely any time at all.

[MomomiMomi]

No it's not. I've had my LOTRO characters for nine years, and several times taken long breaks from them while I focused more on this game instead, but I'm no less attached to them for that. For Guild Wars, it's even longer and with more multi-year breaks (though admittedly I'm not as attached to that one). Most of the games I've been playing longer than that are single player, so a bit different, but there's still lots of games I spend well over a decade on. Just because you may not have been playing games for long doesn't mean other people don't. A mere three years is barely any time at all.

I'm attached to my house, but I lose it after 45 days. 3 years is a LONG TIME.

[The_Last_Dragoon]

Why should that player have to rename their character? Why not the johny come lately who wants the name, let them change, and forget this deletion of player characters.

You're trying to defend players who are literally not even bothering to get a single class to max level and then leaving the game for a whole year straight. It wouldn't mess with people who legitimately care about this game and actually want to continue playing it even if they take a year break. The point is that they'd completely lose their housing at that point anyway, and as long as they weren't holding on to a name like "Naruto Uzumaki" then they'll probably be able to get their name back easily since it was genuinely unique.

On the flip side, if you have a low level alt that you don't play for a year, are you really so attached to them that you are willing to rob other people of their experience when playing the game?

[Alexander_Dragonfang]

That's not only very unfair given you're talking about deleting data, but it's irreversable.There is no way back, no compensation when a player retuens to a deleted character. Actually, your opinion is downright draconian, and all because someone cant be bothered to change up the spelling of their name for uniqueness? Yeah, trample on others for your own good why dont you.

Exactly what everyone supporting the decay system back in the day did. Why this should be any diferent now? Delete level 10 or lower unaccessed characters in 6 months.

[Kosmos992k]

Exactly what everyone supporting the decay system back in the day did. Why this should be any diferent now? Delete level 10 or lower unaccessed characters in 6 months.

Because removing a home (limited in-game resource) does not delete the character, inconvenient and annoying as it is, the player's character still exists.

Deleting characters to free up names is not required because names are an unlimited resource and it results in the deletion of a player's character - the character will no longer exist.

Since it is as simple as can be to add an extra vowel, an extra consonant, an apostrophe, or whatever else to make a name the same but unique, there is absolutely no need to remove existing characters for the vain convenience of others.

Honestly, this discussion is tired, rather than calling for the deletion of another player's character, people might be better to spend the same time coming up with a name that satisfies their need, and is available.

[The_Last_Dragoon]

Because removing a home (limited in-game resource) does not delete the character, inconvenient and annoying as it is, the player's character still exists.

Deleting characters to free up names is not required because names are an unlimited resource and it results in the deletion of a player's character - the character will no longer exist.

Since it is as simple as can be to add an extra vowel, an extra consonant, an apostrophe, or whatever else to make a name the same but unique, there is absolutely no need to remove existing characters for the vain convenience of others.

Honestly, this discussion is tired, rather than calling for the deletion of another player's character, people might be better to spend the same time coming up with a name that satisfies their need, and is available.

There is an argument to be made that beyond just the availability of names, the server can become overpopulated with alts and characters under level 10 like Alexander_Dragonfang is describing, which causes the players to be unable to start a character on the same server as their friend's. If a level 10 character no longer exists, you're talking about an hour of game time and trying to say that character is precious to the player. I'm just calling into question how valuable that character could be to a player who plays it for an hour and then leaves the game for half a year.

[Kosmos992k]

There is an argument to be made that beyond just the availability of names, the server can become overpopulated with alts and characters under level 10 like Alexander_Dragonfang is describing, which causes the players to be unable to start a character on the same server as their friend's. If a level 10 character no longer exists, you're talking about an hour of game time and trying to say that character is precious to the player. I'm just calling into question how valuable that character could be to a player who plays it for an hour and then leaves the game for half a year.

You're actually not quite right there, there could be 10's of thousands of dormant characters on a server and they will have no impact on whether or not the server allows you to create a new character (except for the use of the same name of course). The only thing that matters in that regard is concurrent active characters. If a server is extremely busy and well populated with active characters, it may be 'locked' but there are times when you can get a character to create on it because you catch it when the server is not especially loaded. Now, the proactive locking is based on the trends in the server load, it's not real time, but servers can lock against character creation if they are extremely busy.

The value of a character is entirely a personal thing for the player that created the character, who are you or I to decide their character that exists has less value than another yet to be created?