World Transfer Applications Begin (03/01/2012)

[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. I don't see that as unlikely possibility at all. How many people is this really a problem for anyways? Most people are perfectly happy staying with their server.

If they went with option 4, you should consider that:

The most popular servers were overfull already 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.

Plus you would have had the added problem of screwing over everyone without an active account.

[Intense]

If population was going to be this tight they could have kept 11 servers open...

[Narfalicious]

If population was going to be this tight they could have kept 11 servers open...

Why? Server 10 has plenty of space.

[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]

If population was going to be this tight they could have kept 11 servers open...

What would you want to bet that Ragnarok is only 1/5th full at the most now?

Spreading 4/5ths of server space across the cap on the 9 other servers would have freed up plenty of room for the transfers.

[TheFatHousecat]

Plus you would have had the added problem of screwing over everyone without an active account.

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.

[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.

[Intense]

Why? Server 10 has plenty of space.

With with the other Option maybe, but not with this one.

[Answa]

With with the other Option maybe, but not with this one.

What do you mean? There's a circle on it.

[Wynn]

With with the other Option maybe, but not with this one.