Transfer Restrictions and Roleplayers

[Texa]

My main concern with the new restrictions is that with the big servers closed off RMT spammers are probably going to devote more resources towards all of the mid-sized servers. It seems like they've been noisier than they were before on mine but that might be my own flawed perception.

[MomomiMomi]

My main concern with the new restrictions is that with the big servers closed off RMT spammers are probably going to devote more resources towards all of the mid-sized servers. It seems like they've been noisier than they were before on mine but that might be my own flawed perception.

Won't really change. Those servers have been locked down for a very long time already.

[Texa]

Won't really change. Those servers have been locked down for a very long time already.

That eases my mind, thank you.

[Lexia]

My main concern with the new restrictions is that with the big servers closed off RMT spammers are probably going to devote more resources towards all of the mid-sized servers. It seems like they've been noisier than they were before on mine but that might be my own flawed perception.

Rarely ever see a shout or get a tell from a RMT person on balmung before anyways. So the restrictions don't really affect anything there for these larger locked servers.

[MomomiMomi]

Well I'm going to excuse myself from this thread. But before I do, I wish all you people in locked servers good luck.

And since I just saw Atreyu's sig, I shall leave you with some parting words.



Existence is reasonable, let's make things better.

[Mature]

I personally think this was a good idea. If the world is collapsing from time to time it's a bit silly to carry on pushing more people into it.

I just would like the Gil restriction remove completely. I don't see the point of having such a thing after 3 years.

[Oaken]

Restricting transfers to high population servers will not alleviate congestion during the SB launch. Hundreds, if not thousands, of inactive players are likely to return for SB. Restricting another 500-1000 individuals willing to pay $18 to play with friends on high population servers will not alleviate this problem. It will only divide friends and potentially damage long-running player communities.

It is extremely amusing how many PVEers have not considered that SE could have resolved the alleged population woes (which are actually signs of a vibrant, healthy, and active server) on high-population servers by implementing a variety of other measures that don't divide friends and harm established communities.

For example, SE could: (1) assess a higher server transfer fee for transfer to high-population servers and make transfers from those servers free; (2) provide additional in-game incentives to encourage players to transfer from high-population servers; (3) devote additional resources to banning bots and RMT schemes; (4) raise monthly subscription rates to compensate for the cost of maintaining high population servers; (5) designate official roleplay, hardcore raiding, and special interest servers to encourage player groups to transfer from over-populated worlds; (6) implement anti-idling features that disconnect players who idle for extended amounts of time; and/or (7) reallocate server resources to concentrate players on fewer servers, and divert resources previously used to sustain small, dead servers to supporting high population servers.

Instead, SE took the easy way out and implemented an overly broad and ineffective "remedy." Please take this into consideration before you hop on the "restrictions are the only way to solve the problem" hive-mind bandwagon. Thanks.

[CyrilLucifer]

For example, SE could: (1) assess a higher server transfer fee for transfer to high-population servers and make transfers from those servers free; (2) provide additional in-game incentives to encourage players to transfer from high-population servers; (3) devote additional resources to banning bots and RMT schemes; (4) raise monthly subscription rates to compensate for the cost of maintaining high population servers; (5) designate official roleplay, hardcore raiding, and special interest servers to encourage player groups to transfer from over-populated worlds; (6) implement anti-idling features that disconnect players who idle for extended amounts of time; and/or (7) reallocate server resources to concentrate players on fewer servers, and divert resources previously used to sustain small, dead servers to supporting high population servers.

RE bolded; Why should people with no interest in Balmung be required to pay for Balmung's server population? It's your choice to overpopulate it, not ours. Maybe you can pay those higher rates.

Anti-idling doesn't help anything because it's not only the population currently online at a time that is the problem. It's the overall population being so high compared to everyone else. Not to mention the login congestion. SE is rightfully channeling an Elidibus and wants balanced servers.

Also, as someone from Mateus, a small server -
LOLNO at 8. Why is your server worth more than ours?
I personally left a larger server because I wanted a quiet server with fewer people. Are you so arrogant to believe that other servers should be sacrificed for Balmung's well being? How absurd.

[MistakeNot]

Anti-idling doesn't help anything because it's not the population currently online at a time that is the problem. It's the overall population being so high compared to everyone else.

Are you really sure about that? I think it is the other way around - that it is the number of people online at the same time which is the problem.

If you look at https://ffxivcensus.com/ it seems that if you look at all characters created then Balmung actually has a below average population.
It is only when you look at active characters that Balmung looks overpopulated.

[anony11]

We need some official labels for server. I'm an RPer, but also a PvPer.
It would be nice to see RPPvP server and PvP servers, where the queue for PvP is much smaller.