World Transfer Applications Begin (03/01/2012)

[TheFatHousecat]

Yeah because servers couldn't possibly fill up if everyone and not just 5% of the population was forced to choose a new server (like for example in every MMO launch ever).

Can't see any problems with that, lol.

The problem, if you'd call it that, with this option is the existing populations creating very limited space for transfers between servers. In option #4, every server would have been empty and people would have been able to migrate in larger amounts. There are exceptions either way, but yeah. Would have been much different had we gone with the other option, at the least for those who wanted to join other communities rather than merge with the defaults.

[Murugan]

The problem, if you'd call it that, with this option is the existing populations creating very limited space for transfers between servers. In option #4, every server would have been empty and people would have been able to migrate in larger amounts. There are exceptions either way, but yeah. Would have been much different had we gone with the other option, at the least for those who wanted to join other communities rather than merge with the defaults.

There's no difference if server 1 and 10 filled up by 3 am too, and only half of a linkshell got in.

The most popular servers were overfull during the Collector's edition pre-launch access, causing horrendous lag. But they didn't have a limit then. With option 4 there would have been a limit, and the most popular servers would still fill up very fast. You would have the same problem.

[TheFatHousecat]

There's no difference if server 1 and 10 filled up by 3 am too, and only half of a linkshell got in.

But there is a difference, because in option #4 there would have been a higher chance that entire communities could migrate with few casualties because the server in question is EMPTY. In this option, there's barely enough room for a full endgame LS in the allowed spaces, so if more than one LS or more than a few large groups of people decide to move to the same server, chances are a lot of people are going to get the short end of the stick, unfortunately.

The most popular servers were overfull during the Collector's edition pre-launch access, causing horrendous lag. But they didn't have a limit then. With option 4 there would have been a limit, and the most popular servers would still fill up very fast. You would have the same problem.

Difference being that that was RELEASE. There were more people vying for servers because we were still somewhat oblivious to the failure of a game XIV would prove. And the lack of limit back then just meant that when people left because of disappointment in their gaming experience, we ended up with very unbalanced server populations. It makes sense that SE wants to downsize, so to speak, so that the people that still play can feel like they're on lively servers.


Yes, like I said, in both options there would have still been exceptions, but what you're failing to see is that people assumed that option #2 would still allow a large amount of server transfers. While we get some transfers, we're not exactly allowed to go wherever we want (option #4) because in this option the existing populations of the servers involved are taken into account when creating a capacity for transfers.

[Murugan]

But there is a difference, because in option #4 there would have been a higher chance that entire communities could migrate with few casualties because the server in question is EMPTY. In this option, there's barely enough room for a full endgame LS in the allowed spaces, so if more than one LS or more than a few large groups of people decide to move to the same server, chances are a lot of people are going to get the short end of the stick, unfortunately.



Difference being that that was RELEASE. There were more people vying for servers because we were still somewhat oblivious to the failure of a game XIV would prove. And the lack of limit back then just meant that when people left because of disappointment in their gaming experience, we ended up with very unbalanced server populations. It makes sense that SE wants to downsize, so to speak, so that the people that still play can feel like they're on lively servers.


Yes, like I said, in both options there would have still been exceptions, but what you're failing to see is that people assumed that option #2 would still allow a large amount of server transfers. While we get some transfers, we're not exactly allowed to go wherever we want (option #4) because in this option the existing populations of the servers involved are taken into account when creating a capacity for transfers.

There is a higher chance that communities trying to transfer together could. But since everyone would have to transer, there would be more people overall having problems getting on the same server.



How many people there were doesn't matter, because obviously the cap is different. I'm sorry but Selbina has a good population today, but it is nowhere near as big as it was at launch. Obviously the current server cap is much lower than the heavy populations at launch.

Unless you believe that the 18 servers which weren't even all full with the 400k some subscribers the game started with, could be shrunken down to 10 with the current population and still be at cap.

I'm no pessimist but that is way too many players for how many are likely subscribing at this moment.

While someone could be inactive for a variety of reasons (military leave, important familial event, disinterest in the game, college/work woes, etc), I would rather that the people who are currently playing the game and paying for their subs get priority over where to go. Yoshida already said that in 2.0 (little more than a year from now), we'd once again get free transfers in order for inactive accounts to go to their friends' servers.

Would you rather screw over the people who are currently playing the game and paying for their subs, or screw over the people who won't be playing for another couple months to even a year from now? You have to choose one, I thought the second option would be most fair.

No one extra is being screwed over.

There would have been the same issues with option 4 (servers would have filled up_. This option has less issues.

[TheFatHousecat]

There is a higher chance that communities trying to transfer together could. But since everyone would have to transer, there would be more people overall having problems getting on the same server.

Like I've said before, in either option there would be people who got unlucky. In this option, large groups of people who wanted to go to a different server get the short end of the stick because there's a very limited cap; actually, in a lot of cases it seems like a large LS has tried to transfer over, with a few people getting stuck, but that ends up messing up all the individuals who were trying to transfer alone.

In the other option, people wouldn't have been as restricted because there would have been more room to transfer, although, you're right, there still would have been issues when the servers got full and people got stuck on undesirable servers.

One option is a merge with very restricted space for transfers, the other is starting fresh, so to speak. People simply took one for being the same as the other and assumed it would work out fine.

I'm no pessimist but that is way too many players for how many are likely subscribing at this moment.

I'm not quite sure what point you were trying to make, here, but mine was that you can't compare this merger to release server selection for several reasons, namely that the drop off of players caused an uneven distribution of characters, active and inactive, across the servers. These are two different situations, in one, you're starting a game and allowing people to go wherever the heck they want, and have a relatively large member base. In the other, you're trying to merge servers because of uneven population in comparison to others, as well as allowing for more people of the same timezone to play together.