Are you thinking about merging servers EME ?

11213151718

Comments

  • tisnotmetisnotme ✭✭✭✭
    Jarecks wrote: »
    close this thread please @KitTeaCup @CobaltDragon

    why its still an open topic being discussed at its points
  • voidy wrote: »
    voidy wrote: »
    Pages wrote: »
    ElinLove wrote: »
    News this fall eh? As long as the issues are solved, then I'm fine with it. AS LONG AS.

    They won't be. Server merges solve 0 issues and create infinite.

    Not even just talking about "muh names" but rather the fact that it doesn't increase player retention (as evidenced by Fey Forest) and just makes the game look even more dead when there's 3 servers that struggle to fill as opposed to 5.

    There were a lot of possible solutions and this was the worst one. You can't indefinitely merge servers. Eventually you only have 1 server left, and if that one dies, the game is in maintenance mode.

    I do agree that Tera has a lot of things that stop people from playing, but the whole Fey Forest merge only failed because it was EME merging multiple dead servers after people bled out when the steam release hype died down. Merge multiple dead servers and you get one megadeadserver.

    As for player retention, I'd say in this case a server merge would help quite a bit. People leave a multiplayer game when it feels dead. Some server transfer, but most leave. They stay when it feels alive and has people for them to play with. Merging everyone into one or two servers would cover all of the population complaints discussed in this thread and would drive people to play more because they finally feel like their feedback is heard and it's been addressed in a way that covers their concerns. Hell, I know some people who would come back because of something like this. For actual examples of it working in other games, just look at games like BDO, where the megaserver setup makes the game feel super packed, even as the game empties out because of its own separate management issues.

    >Eventually you only have 1 server left, and if that one dies, the game is in maintenance mode
    Game's already in decline except for one (maybe two) thriving server, so I don't see your point here. There's really no point in having a bunch of dead "backup" worlds. If the game dies when everyone's merged into one server, you can bet it would've happened even faster if people were spread out among 5.

    >There were a lot of possible solutions
    Like what? A shared LFG? A shared brokerage? At that point, you might as well merge the servers anyway.

    KitTeaCup wrote: »

    Thank you for starting on this; it's something most people have wanted for a long time.

    So, if we're talking dead servers, and they plan to merge the dead servers, we're just going to get mega dead servers, right? I mean, you said it yourself, so all this will do is cost some/a lot of players a lot of money for no net gain. Guess it'll be a done deal soon enough, so it's a good thing I put my wallet away before I got too heavily invested, and now I know there's no reason to get heavily invested.

    We don't know what they're planning to merge yet, since they haven't released that information yet. I'd assume they'd condense everything down to 2 megaservers, 1 pve and 1 pvp, but again, I have no way of knowing. But yeah, obviously if all they do is merge FF/AV/CH, it'll be a disaster. My post obviously assumes that they aren't going to do something that stupid.

    Reading through the two threads that have been "featured" on the first page since I've been here, we're talking 5 dead servers of 5 servers, so the only solution is to merge them all into one? Two if they hold on to PvP and PvE distinctions? We're still left with, according to these threads, dead servers all around, so any merge would be merging dead servers together, to create mega dead servers. In so far as LFG issues go, the end result is going to be another thread asking for a merge, if there's anything left to merge, likely within a month of the actual merge, maybe a bit longer. I've seen it happen in weeks, when the miracle cure-all of a merge didn't correct grouping queue type issues.
  • I apologize if I am necroing this thread in any way, but the recent news about the upcoming merge has me anxious since I do not know what to expect. Is there anything I should do in preparation for it beforehand? Many thanks!
  • voidyvoidy ✭✭✭✭✭
    voidy wrote: »
    voidy wrote: »
    Pages wrote: »
    ElinLove wrote: »
    News this fall eh? As long as the issues are solved, then I'm fine with it. AS LONG AS.

    They won't be. Server merges solve 0 issues and create infinite.

    Not even just talking about "muh names" but rather the fact that it doesn't increase player retention (as evidenced by Fey Forest) and just makes the game look even more dead when there's 3 servers that struggle to fill as opposed to 5.

    There were a lot of possible solutions and this was the worst one. You can't indefinitely merge servers. Eventually you only have 1 server left, and if that one dies, the game is in maintenance mode.

    I do agree that Tera has a lot of things that stop people from playing, but the whole Fey Forest merge only failed because it was EME merging multiple dead servers after people bled out when the steam release hype died down. Merge multiple dead servers and you get one megadeadserver.

    As for player retention, I'd say in this case a server merge would help quite a bit. People leave a multiplayer game when it feels dead. Some server transfer, but most leave. They stay when it feels alive and has people for them to play with. Merging everyone into one or two servers would cover all of the population complaints discussed in this thread and would drive people to play more because they finally feel like their feedback is heard and it's been addressed in a way that covers their concerns. Hell, I know some people who would come back because of something like this. For actual examples of it working in other games, just look at games like BDO, where the megaserver setup makes the game feel super packed, even as the game empties out because of its own separate management issues.

    >Eventually you only have 1 server left, and if that one dies, the game is in maintenance mode
    Game's already in decline except for one (maybe two) thriving server, so I don't see your point here. There's really no point in having a bunch of dead "backup" worlds. If the game dies when everyone's merged into one server, you can bet it would've happened even faster if people were spread out among 5.

    >There were a lot of possible solutions
    Like what? A shared LFG? A shared brokerage? At that point, you might as well merge the servers anyway.

    KitTeaCup wrote: »

    Thank you for starting on this; it's something most people have wanted for a long time.

    So, if we're talking dead servers, and they plan to merge the dead servers, we're just going to get mega dead servers, right? I mean, you said it yourself, so all this will do is cost some/a lot of players a lot of money for no net gain. Guess it'll be a done deal soon enough, so it's a good thing I put my wallet away before I got too heavily invested, and now I know there's no reason to get heavily invested.

    We don't know what they're planning to merge yet, since they haven't released that information yet. I'd assume they'd condense everything down to 2 megaservers, 1 pve and 1 pvp, but again, I have no way of knowing. But yeah, obviously if all they do is merge FF/AV/CH, it'll be a disaster. My post obviously assumes that they aren't going to do something that stupid.

    Reading through the two threads that have been "featured" on the first page since I've been here, we're talking 5 dead servers of 5 servers, so the only solution is to merge them all into one? Two if they hold on to PvP and PvE distinctions? We're still left with, according to these threads, dead servers all around, so any merge would be merging dead servers together, to create mega dead servers. In so far as LFG issues go, the end result is going to be another thread asking for a merge, if there's anything left to merge, likely within a month of the actual merge, maybe a bit longer. I've seen it happen in weeks, when the miracle cure-all of a merge didn't correct grouping queue type issues.

    TR and MT are way healthier than the other 3 servers. I assumed the merge would have to do with combining those two (relatively) living servers with the other deader ones. But we'll have to wait and see how it plays out.
  • CornishRexCornishRex ✭✭✭✭✭
    voidy wrote: »
    voidy wrote: »
    Pages wrote: »
    ElinLove wrote: »
    News this fall eh? As long as the issues are solved, then I'm fine with it. AS LONG AS.

    They won't be. Server merges solve 0 issues and create infinite.

    Not even just talking about "muh names" but rather the fact that it doesn't increase player retention (as evidenced by Fey Forest) and just makes the game look even more dead when there's 3 servers that struggle to fill as opposed to 5.

    There were a lot of possible solutions and this was the worst one. You can't indefinitely merge servers. Eventually you only have 1 server left, and if that one dies, the game is in maintenance mode.

    I do agree that Tera has a lot of things that stop people from playing, but the whole Fey Forest merge only failed because it was EME merging multiple dead servers after people bled out when the steam release hype died down. Merge multiple dead servers and you get one megadeadserver.

    As for player retention, I'd say in this case a server merge would help quite a bit. People leave a multiplayer game when it feels dead. Some server transfer, but most leave. They stay when it feels alive and has people for them to play with. Merging everyone into one or two servers would cover all of the population complaints discussed in this thread and would drive people to play more because they finally feel like their feedback is heard and it's been addressed in a way that covers their concerns. Hell, I know some people who would come back because of something like this. For actual examples of it working in other games, just look at games like BDO, where the megaserver setup makes the game feel super packed, even as the game empties out because of its own separate management issues.

    >Eventually you only have 1 server left, and if that one dies, the game is in maintenance mode
    Game's already in decline except for one (maybe two) thriving server, so I don't see your point here. There's really no point in having a bunch of dead "backup" worlds. If the game dies when everyone's merged into one server, you can bet it would've happened even faster if people were spread out among 5.

    >There were a lot of possible solutions
    Like what? A shared LFG? A shared brokerage? At that point, you might as well merge the servers anyway.

    KitTeaCup wrote: »

    Thank you for starting on this; it's something most people have wanted for a long time.

    So, if we're talking dead servers, and they plan to merge the dead servers, we're just going to get mega dead servers, right? I mean, you said it yourself, so all this will do is cost some/a lot of players a lot of money for no net gain. Guess it'll be a done deal soon enough, so it's a good thing I put my wallet away before I got too heavily invested, and now I know there's no reason to get heavily invested.

    We don't know what they're planning to merge yet, since they haven't released that information yet. I'd assume they'd condense everything down to 2 megaservers, 1 pve and 1 pvp, but again, I have no way of knowing. But yeah, obviously if all they do is merge FF/AV/CH, it'll be a disaster. My post obviously assumes that they aren't going to do something that stupid.

    Reading through the two threads that have been "featured" on the first page since I've been here, we're talking 5 dead servers of 5 servers, so the only solution is to merge them all into one? Two if they hold on to PvP and PvE distinctions? We're still left with, according to these threads, dead servers all around, so any merge would be merging dead servers together, to create mega dead servers. In so far as LFG issues go, the end result is going to be another thread asking for a merge, if there's anything left to merge, likely within a month of the actual merge, maybe a bit longer. I've seen it happen in weeks, when the miracle cure-all of a merge didn't correct grouping queue type issues.

    Most of the talk about dead servers here has been about FF, AV and CH. TR and MT are healthy, I don't think I saw anyone here state otherwise.
    I wish all the other servers just merged into TR and MT tbqh.
  • OPrideOPride ✭✭
    Do we think that CH be left alone because it's the Role Playing server? Or would that just be ditched?
  • Idon't think they will touch CH. they will merge FF and Av into Ch prob.
  • ElinLoveElinLove ✭✭✭✭✭
    voidy wrote: »
    voidy wrote: »
    Pages wrote: »
    ElinLove wrote: »
    News this fall eh? As long as the issues are solved, then I'm fine with it. AS LONG AS.

    They won't be. Server merges solve 0 issues and create infinite.

    Not even just talking about "muh names" but rather the fact that it doesn't increase player retention (as evidenced by Fey Forest) and just makes the game look even more dead when there's 3 servers that struggle to fill as opposed to 5.

    There were a lot of possible solutions and this was the worst one. You can't indefinitely merge servers. Eventually you only have 1 server left, and if that one dies, the game is in maintenance mode.

    I do agree that Tera has a lot of things that stop people from playing, but the whole Fey Forest merge only failed because it was EME merging multiple dead servers after people bled out when the steam release hype died down. Merge multiple dead servers and you get one megadeadserver.

    As for player retention, I'd say in this case a server merge would help quite a bit. People leave a multiplayer game when it feels dead. Some server transfer, but most leave. They stay when it feels alive and has people for them to play with. Merging everyone into one or two servers would cover all of the population complaints discussed in this thread and would drive people to play more because they finally feel like their feedback is heard and it's been addressed in a way that covers their concerns. Hell, I know some people who would come back because of something like this. For actual examples of it working in other games, just look at games like BDO, where the megaserver setup makes the game feel super packed, even as the game empties out because of its own separate management issues.

    >Eventually you only have 1 server left, and if that one dies, the game is in maintenance mode
    Game's already in decline except for one (maybe two) thriving server, so I don't see your point here. There's really no point in having a bunch of dead "backup" worlds. If the game dies when everyone's merged into one server, you can bet it would've happened even faster if people were spread out among 5.

    >There were a lot of possible solutions
    Like what? A shared LFG? A shared brokerage? At that point, you might as well merge the servers anyway.

    KitTeaCup wrote: »

    Thank you for starting on this; it's something most people have wanted for a long time.

    So, if we're talking dead servers, and they plan to merge the dead servers, we're just going to get mega dead servers, right? I mean, you said it yourself, so all this will do is cost some/a lot of players a lot of money for no net gain. Guess it'll be a done deal soon enough, so it's a good thing I put my wallet away before I got too heavily invested, and now I know there's no reason to get heavily invested.

    We don't know what they're planning to merge yet, since they haven't released that information yet. I'd assume they'd condense everything down to 2 megaservers, 1 pve and 1 pvp, but again, I have no way of knowing. But yeah, obviously if all they do is merge FF/AV/CH, it'll be a disaster. My post obviously assumes that they aren't going to do something that stupid.

    Assuming EME won't be something that's stupid is the biggest mistake anyone can do here.
    Add BHS to that too. Not to mention not like TR and MT are all that great either or are they like all fine and dandy there? Cause since not even IMs popped when I bothered with them months ago, it says something already.

    Trash server performance hype~
  • ElinUsagiElinUsagi ✭✭✭✭✭
    CornishRex wrote: »
    Most of the talk about dead servers here has been about FF, AV and CH. TR and MT are healthy, I don't think I saw anyone here state otherwise.
    I wish all the other servers just merged into TR and MT tbqh.

    Not sure what is the metric about healty but thanks to CU I can see or at least have an idea how much player activity they have.

    XxjQfMZ.jpg AV

    tVQMLlV.jpg CH

    CUBMYyh.jpg FF

    ahst8Lv.jpg TR

    QlNTgvz.jpg MT

    For TR and MT being servers feeding on transfers from other servers they are not that big on activity compared to those "dead servers", if anything I can tell MT and TR havent died thanks to server transfers and if not for that they would have been on worse situation by now. At least at MT people I most people I have found are transfers from other servers, especially from FF.
  • clfarron4clfarron4 ✭✭✭✭
    edited July 2018
    Here's the two situations that I see happening with the server merges:

    1) EME didn't learn from the mistakes of merging HW, LoT and VoT and merge FF, AV and CH, leaving TR and MT as they are. This is just going leave EME doing another server merge of the new merged server into MT or TR later on (with another painful server merge).

    2) EME learnt from the mistakes of mergeing HW, LoT and VoT, and merge FF into MT and AV/CH into TR. This would probably be a working solution for now, but does lead itself towards the situation where you have one live server and one dead server as people move to the server that is percieved to be the more active of the two (just like in KTERA).

    This opens the debate about whether we should just go to one superserver for NA and be done with it. I mean, it's readily apparent that both console and PC are losing active players faster than there are active players joining the game.
  • MeningitisMeningitis ✭✭✭✭
    clfarron4 wrote: »
    Here's the two situations that I see happening with the server merges:

    1) EME didn't learn from the mistakes of merging HW, LoT and VoT and merge FF, AV and CH, leaving TR and MT as they are. This is just going leave EME doing another server merge of the new merged server into MT or TR later on (with another painful server merge).

    2) EME learnt from the mistakes of mergeing HW, LoT and VoT, and merge FF into MT and AV/CH into TR. This would probably be a working solution for now, but does lead itself towards the situation where you have one live server and one dead server as people move to the server that is percieved to be the more active of the two (just like in KTERA).

    This opens the debate about whether we should just go to one superserver for NA and be done with it. I mean, it's readily apparent that both console and PC are losing active players faster than there are active players joining the game.
    If they do end up merging into one pve and one pvp, it might be more balanced than in KR because (to my knowledge) every KR server is pvp65 with no pve servers. So in KR people flock to one or the other because there's no difference, while in NA it might be more evenly spread because of the choice between pve and pvp65. That's what I'm hoping for at least.
  • tbh, I'd like see only one server.

    MT + TR + FF + CH + AV = "probably Tera great again.."

    We gonna have all contents more active and attractive to new/veteran players.

    About "PVP server merging with PVE server ?"... "PVP status" its a real meme, tell me what content you have in OW to do where PVP can be a "problem", most of them are safe zone..

    WBam? come on, its so ez to solve:

    • Betsael and Nyxarras turn into area pvp (unsafe zone)
    • Tempest Kanash, Yunaras, Linyphi and Divine Reaver turn into area pve (safe zone)

    Some of these areas (Habere) already turn into safe zone on pvp servers while guardian mission is on.

    And about OW events? its ez to solve... event on = area automatically turn into safe zone.

    This would be the best solution to have a more attractive game, especially for new players. We are talking about a game that is already six years old, and what I see most are people who are less interested in continuing to play, and a good part of this is because of a lack of players to make the existing content.




  • Philore wrote: »
    Idon't think they will touch CH. they will merge FF and Av into Ch prob.

    if they merge AV, FF and CH together, I don't think it will make much difference, remember what happened to FF, 3 dead servers = still dead :v
  • allofspaceandtimeallofspaceandtime ✭✭✭✭✭
    if they are going to go through the trouble of merging servers, then they should just make 1 mega server and be done with it. then all of those with the same names can fight over it. if they don't make 1 server, we will be having a merge servers thread again within a year.
  • KXRC9JMW74KXRC9JMW74 ✭✭✭
    EME doesn't know how to run a game so it doesn't matter if they have 8 servers or 1 server none will be a "mega server"
Sign In or Register to comment.