Reassessing the Merger of FFXIV Worlds (02/13/2012)

[Jinko]

SE you need to make a post on the lodestone with this information, many people in game are still confused whats happening as they don't visit the forums very often.

I think the EU server is doomed to fail as the information previously given out has left a bad taste in the mouth of many UK & english speaking players, as much as I want to be on a GMT timezone server I don't want to be only one of a handful, i'd rather just stay on Lindblum.

[MeowyWowie]

well if a+b =x world then that makes 9 worlds. so the 10th world will be a completely empty server unless all the euro players go there which i already know not all will. Seems like a bad idea. Out of the 9 servers im sure 1 will still be high pop and one will be the low pop. Id suggest the euro and RP player go to the low pop to help bring them up some

Well, Yoshi-P did anticipate the possibility of this happening. If it does happen, world 10 will either be merged with another preexisting world or server transfers will be opened again in the future.

Since World 10 will be a new World, some players may worry that this world will be severely underpopulated if few players desire a transfer to this world. With that in mind, we decided that as a special measure, we will look into either allowing players to transfer another time or merging underpopulated servers, in the case that there is a significant disparity in the numbers of players on each server. Therefore players should have no worries when considering World 10 as a potential destination.

[Matsume]

This Thread's Views...

[syntaxlies]

Well, Yoshi-P did anticipate the possibility of this happening. If it does happen, world 10 will either be merged with another preexisting world or server transfers will be opened again in the future.

yea, but how long will another merger take for them, or to make them organize another transfer. IF they already know what the low pop server will be just make that the euro friendly server suggestion. It would cut out an entire step.

[MeowyWowie]

yea, but how long will another merger take for them, or to make them organize another transfer. IF they already know what the low pop server will be just make that the euro friendly server suggestion. It would cut out an entire step.

I don't imagine it would take too long for them to get some real numbers. It would make sense that the sooner they did it the better since people will still be getting used to their new communities.

I would even go as far as to say that if any server comes up with a population of 1/4 that of another, that server would immediately be merged with another, before the actual mergers even happen.

Like Yoshi-P already stated, I don't think players will have to worry too much about this. His goal is to make populations even across the board. I doubt he'd let a small pop server remain desolate for too long.

[Lienn]

Now we talking...this is a WAY better server merge than the first proposal. ^^

[JackDaniels]

Whoopsie91

[Black_Rose]

i'm actually not worried about world 10 being underpopulated.
actually, even if it only had 200 active EU players that would be alot more then gysahl has.

after a server merge groups of players will still consider to rather transfer then just merge and find themself a place with players around their own timezone to strengthen up their man-power.

knowing this i fear that gysahl will also increase it's numbers of GMT-8/+8 players rather then increasing it's EU players.
that's the reason i'll move to world 10, aswell as 90% of my EU friends on gysahl will do.

this server merge/transfer is actually my last hope for this game untill 2.0 anyways.i gotta put my cards on world 10, knowing that my current server is practically dead during EU prime times.

[neorei]

there is some servers that are incredibly small, so we hope adding at least 600 active players per server would be good. i know in xi there was at least 1600 people online at anytime and the world seem vibrant.

[Bayohne]

Greetings!

Yoshida made an update to his original long follow-up post to provide details that were left out in regards to character and retainer name overlap. I've edited the original post and you can also find the updated changes below.

1. Character Name Overlap

The decision for which character keeps their original name when identical names clash on a World is based on whether they are active or not, rather than what date the character was created. If both are active, the character which was created earlier is given priority over the name (based on the time stamp at creation). All other characters with the same name will have to choose a new name.

2. Retainer Name Overlap

The decision for which retainer keeps their original name when identical names clash on a World is based on whether the player character associated with them are active or not, rather than what date the retainer was created. If both are active, the retainer which was created earlier is given priority over the name (based on the time stamp at creation). All other characters with the same name will have to choose a new name.

3. Linkshell Name Overlap

The linkshell with the most active characters at the time of the world merge will retain the name. All other linkshells will be temporarily renamed to have a number (such as “01”) at the end of their current name. Players can then request to have their linkshell renamed through GM support.

Yoshida took the time to answer a good amount of questions that players have been asking that we're working on now and will post as soon as we are finished.