We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 109
  1. #76
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Middle Earth, Arda
    Posts
    4,778

    Exclamation

    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    ...Merges are a last resort, because they telegraph to players and the gaming community in general that the game is dying. ..."heading into the home stretch before the game shuts down"... Far fewer new players + some veterans leaving is a recipe for early closure...
    Thats precisely what they want with merge serve, just look at the names. Most people that favor this measure is the same people that constantantly post on the Forums & servers chat channel, that the game sucks & they spread the rummor that the game is dieng. The game is not bad & dieing but they want to convince the people that it is so they leave & the game trully die. This is a old measure that game competence always use to "steal" clients.
    Is this Alternate Playable Character Disorder? :

    Check my Kinship at Gladden server: The Fate of Middle Earth

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    England
    Posts
    179
    Quote Originally Posted by Wilkor View Post
    Absolutely correct, simply because my definition is THE definition. Like I said, feel free to play an mmorpg in whatever solitary way you decide but you don't get a say when the people who require a game genre live up to its established meaning ask that it do so.
    Then it has been an inaccurate definition since the genre began. UO, considered by many to be the first modern MMO, had people clustered around towns; but as soon as you left them you'd hardly see a soul. Well, apart from someone who'd managed to be quick enough to slot a house and was braving an Ophidian hive to drop off some logs. The game was busy, in the sense that people were playing, but you weren't constantly forced into a group of people and told to get on with it. And that was with a sandbox game, where you were expected to make your own quests and stories. With LOTRO, and its quest system, encountering a group of people doing the same quest breaks immersion. The epic quest tells us that we're the hero of middle-earth, and though we long since past the point where we've done too much to not be mentioned in the book it's a lot easier to excuse one overly capable character than thirty.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wilkor View Post
    It's not just group content however, it's the entire world. Population centers should be crowded with people going about their RPG tasks (and not just NPCs shoveled in there as filler) along with substantial grouping most hours of the day in order to give a world that lived in feeling. If you can think of a way for a world to be lived in without an actual significant population to live in it then I'm all ears.
    Now this I can agree with, but I don't see merges as doing anything to help. Returning to UO for a moment, it wasn't the linear format you'd have now. Someone just starting would use the same shops, and the same landscape mostly, to someone who'd been playing for a year or more. With LOTRO, we're constantly being pushed from cap to cap and causing the player base to fracture and split. And that's not accounting for the people that are in instances, skirmishes, or the open world. If you had two servers with ten people in Bree, for example, then merging them would only give you twenty. And that's if some of them don't quit the game because of the perception it's failing or general dislike of crowded and/or busy server. And if Turbine manage a smooth transition which doesn't cause people to lose characters or items and quit as a result.

    There's already enough population to make a world fill lived in, problem is we're spread out across a game world that encompasses several massive landmasses and 85 levels. How would I fix that? I'd be ruthless. Cut out the levels in favour of skill based advancement, and strip away hub status from a lot of places. I'd also remove skirmish/instance join in favour of a physical location like a reflecting pool, which would also become a place for players to meet and form groups the same way the old entrances did, and make houses rather than neighbourhoods instanced. Loading screen at the door, not at the junction.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wilkor View Post
    It's not simply a definition for it but it is one that forms the basis and grows from there. An mmorpg is an online version of an role-playing game that has a multiplayer population and is massive in this aspect. People who wish to be a hermit in an mmorpg are free to do so but they will still have to inhabit a world that conforms to the mmo part. If they do not wish to do so then there are other games (single player rpgs) where they do not have to deal with large populations.
    But it's not that we don't want to deal with large populations, it's that we don't want to deal with the problems caused by large populations. If you could promise me, absolutely, that the only thing I would see as a result of a merger is more people in towns then I could possibly be persuaded. But you can't, because we both know that some people will have problems with the transfer; and after that you'll have twice the number of people - at best - running around on servers that tend to lag well under their theoretical maximum. Then you've the problems of an increased population, such as competition for resources (open tapping removes competition for kills, thankfully) and loss of housing availability.

    I'm perfectly comfortable with other people playing, and to be honest if I wasn't then I'd agree I'm playing the wrong game. But there's a difference between having a lot of people present in game to having a veritable horde usurping client- and server-side resources.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wilkor View Post
    Except the "status quo" is catering to hermits because server populations inevitably drop over time. You are right though, a server merge does cater to a group of people. That group of people who play an mmorpg for the mmo part, that part which is in the genre title and is a component of this world. You may not change this component because you feel like it or allow it change by inaction.
    Server population drop cannot be solved by server merges. Same, or more probably less, players just in a more confined area. There's a reason why it's taken as a sign that a game is failing, it seems like an effort to show that there's still a lot of players when there simply isn't. Rather than campaign for server merges, you should campaign for an increase in players.

  3. #78
    [QUOTE=Wilkor;6956110]Absolutely correct, simply because my definition is THE definition. Like I said, feel free to play an mmorpg in whatever solitary way you decide but you don't get a say when the people who require a game genre live up to its established meaning ask that it do so. [[/qyote]No It is not. It is your definition. I negate your definition by opposing it using the game software and servers in a different way. Given the change in direction after Siege of Mirkwood in 2009 by Turbine has decided to primarily support solo and very small group play.

    Remember it is a MMORPG - Massive Multiplayer Online Role Playing Game. It is not a MMOGRPG - Massive Multiple Player Online Grouping Role Playing Game. Nor is it a MMOSRPG - Massive Multiiplayer Online Solo Role Playing Game. If LOTRO were a MMOGRPG it would offer no solo option. Log in solo you go to waiting until you form a group of the minimum size - enter the game. Lose a member - you can't do any content because the content is too difficult - you have to get another member.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wilkor View Post
    It's not just group content however, it's the entire world. Population centers should be crowded with people going about their RPG tasks (and not just NPCs shoveled in there as filler) along with substantial grouping most hours of the day in order to give a world that lived in feeling. If you can think of a way for a world to be lived in without an actual significant population to live in it then I'm all ears.
    Kind of hard to meet this requirement when you have as much landscape as Lotro does. Swtor keeps its Fleet location populated because it is the only place where you can get all services. Some services only exist once in the game. You want these services you have to go to the Fleet.

    Turbine could make Bree be crowded all the time. Only have one auction hall, one set of crafting NPCs, one set of crafting facilities, one set of guild NPCs, one set of barter coin NPCs, one forge master and relic master. Put them in Bree.

    I am really not interested in huge numbers of Avatars in a specific area because the game performance sucks. My frame rate starts to drop. It takes longer for a command to the game software to be executed. Sometimes it takes 20 seconds for the NPCs and other stuff to render. I log in at West Bree. I want to take the stable. Stuck waiting for the stablemaster to appear after logging in.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wilkor View Post
    It's not simply a definition for it but it is one that forms the basis and grows from there. An mmorpg is an online version of an role-playing game that has a multiplayer population and is massive in this aspect. People who wish to be a hermit in an mmorpg are free to do so but they will still have to inhabit a world that conforms to the mmo part. If they do not wish to do so then there are other games (single player rpgs) where they do not have to deal with large populations.
    Again this is your definition. It does not apply to me. One of the problems you have is that I am not alone in my definition. There are others like me. No idea how many. Turbine like most businesses is interesting in gathering dollars from their customers. Turbine provides us a service that I like (different that your desires). I give Turbine give dollars for meeting my wants and desires. As do the other people
    Quote Originally Posted by Wilkor View Post
    Except the "status quo" is catering to hermits because server populations inevitably drop over time.
    Please do not names like Hermit to describe us. I will describe why I play games like Lotro:
    1) Lotro is a much richer product than something like Skyrim. I can't the number of quests, landscape and features that Lotro has in a single player game like Skyrim.

    2) This point is a big one. I find games like Lotro comforting to me because they remind of real life. In real life most of the available activities can be done solo. Often I duo these real life uests with Ms. Yula because she I want to spend time with her. I may do real quests with friends or my children - usually duos so that it is one on one interaction. Sometimes I will do group activities - things that can't be done with one - like tennis.

    I rarely group with strangers in game or in real life. You will not find me buying a washing machine. Standing around begging everybody that comes near me - Please help me load this washing machine in my car. Instead I will come the store already in a group. My group will handle the transport.

    I like having people around when I am shopping and doing stuff. It is comforting to me. It is fun to stand in the grocery store line when I am soloing the groceries and talk to them. I do not want to group with them. I do the same thing in game. Talk to people even though I have no desire to group with them

    I often solo in game because I had too much group time in real life. I want to be left alone and not have to deal wants, needs and desires of someone else. My son does not have a girl friend because dealing with the "cooperate with her program" is more trouble than it is worth.
    Quote Originally Posted by Wilkor View Post
    You are right though, a server merge does cater to a group of people. That group of people who play an mmorpg for the mmo part, that part which is in the genre title and is a component of this world. You may not change this component because you feel like it or allow it change by inaction.
    You are incorrectly defining MMO. MMO stands for Massive Multiplayer Online. That does not mean:

    1) There is no G in MMORPG. It is not a forced grouping game. Grouping is one option. Just like solo play.

    Some games like League of Legends offer no Solo play. Everybody understands that the MOBA - Massive Online Battle Arena game League of Legends is a forced grouping game. There is no need put a G in the name.

    2) The definition of allowable game play is set by Turbine. Turbines controls what we do via the game software. It is not up to you, me or anyone else.

    3) You have no ability to force me to change the way I use the game software. You have to deal with my refusal to go along with your proposal.

    4) Turbine as the game owner and operator is welcome to change Lotro to be more group centric. Merge servers to try and increase world populations.

    Turbine been down the group centric game road before with their second game Asheron's Call 2. One of the problems AC2 had was that it was a very group centric game. I was very difficult to make progress in the game because so much of the content could not be soloed. The game became like Lotro top heavy with a lot of level capped characters. New players could not level their characters because the inability to find people at their level that were willing to do the content element they were on.

    The folks high level characters some quit because they were bored. New players quit because they could not get anything done. Some High level players quit because they no longer had friends - could not find groups.

    Turbine merged the servers. A lot of people quit because of name changes and other problems. New customers would not come because the game was dieing. More old timers quit because they were bored, their friends had quit or they could not find people to group with after the merge. Turbine merged the servers causing more loses amongst the player base. Finally Turbine decided to shut the service down.

    AC2 recently returned with a single server. You get access to the AC2 server as a perk for being a subscriber to Asheron's Call 1. That was another problem. AC2 split the AC population. A lot of people that moved over the AC2 were unhappy because AC2 only shared the Asheron's Call IP. Some of the AC2 players like me went back to AC after the novelty of a new game wore off.

    Final Thought - I've played online games since 1999. Over the years they have changed to be more solo quest content games with chat rooms, trading, role playing and crafting as group activities. I seems like the real groupers have moved on to games like League of Legends which is MOBA. Or to first person shooters.

    Games like LOTRO have moved to cater to the married couples that want little to do with others. Or people that have some free time in their busy real life that want to putter about in game - I have a married friend that is a stay at home mom - She plays Lotro when her child is napping. She can't do group activities because she may have to leave at a moment's do interact with her child.
    Unless stated otherwise, all content in this post is My Personal Opinion.

  4. #79
    Perhaps a measure that all sides of this debate would welcome is getting more detail about the servers. Using the cities example mentioned a few pages ago, I'll definitely pay to move but I know population, crime, schools and other metrics about the area. A lot of us over time learn which are the large, medium, and small servers, but would still like to narrow down which ones to "visit" (create a char) so we're not spending a couple days on 5+ servers to find out which one fits us.

    While Turbine is tip-lipped about exact numbers, they could be expressed relative to other servers. Or heck, boil it all down to an "Activity Index"; a single indicator of a servers overall activity. Just something to help people looking to transfer find a server and new players find their first server.

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    your mind
    Posts
    3,881
    Quote Originally Posted by Disparia View Post
    While Turbine is tip-lipped about exact numbers, they could be expressed relative to other servers. Or heck, boil it all down to an "Activity Index"; a single indicator of a servers overall activity. Just something to help people looking to transfer find a server and new players find their first server.
    Remember it's in constant flux. Folks looking for a small server get a surprise when it becomes one of the largest a few months later. Turbine rotates servers in the list for new players, which is why it changes so dramatically over time. Essentially every server is medium sized averaged over time, so such an index would be deceptive, as by the time a new player levels up to a quest hub, it'll be different. Obviously transferring players can measure at the time of transfer, and ironically the server they leave will probably have turned into what they desired a few months later. :-) Better to transfer to join friends or the like, than based on a fluctuating dynamic that isn't your favored environment for a brief time.
    Link to our community LOTRO store google spreadsheet pricelist and conversion rates, please contribute too!: https://goo.gl/wxPqCm

  6. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by RJFerret View Post
    Remember it's in constant flux. Folks looking for a small server get a surprise when it becomes one of the largest a few months later. Turbine rotates servers in the list for new players, which is why it changes so dramatically over time. Essentially every server is medium sized averaged over time, so such an index would be deceptive, as by the time a new player levels up to a quest hub, it'll be different. Obviously transferring players can measure at the time of transfer, and ironically the server they leave will probably have turned into what they desired a few months later. :-) Better to transfer to join friends or the like, than based on a fluctuating dynamic that isn't your favored environment for a brief time.
    True, everyone needs to realize that servers go through highs and lows. It's pretty quiet on my server now, but it'll probably be back at peak right before the HD release. However, even at peak my server might not be right for me. My personal goal would be to find a a server that has a higher "average actively" overall; I like to play all-year round, not just the one or two months after an expansion. I know my Actively Index suggestion doesn't really do much to help that, but if Turbine decided to put out some over-time statistics including such metrics at PvMP participation, I think it would be easier for me to choose a server or two to create characters on before committing to a transfer.

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    20

    To Go (or not) To Go

    Yes, merging servers would be tricky for the reasons outlined (Eg. Housing, Multiple Alts, Naming Discrepancies, Storage, Duplicated classes).
    Free Server Transfers has it's risks and is a pain to manage for Turbine.

    I suggest an alternative to breath life into the lower population servers and that is to LOCK (unless someone shows just cause - for example a family member) certain servers as FULL allowing an influx on the lower population servers.

    What this would accomplish is several fold:

    • 1. It would infuse newer players which would allow them to find others to enjoy the game with.
    • 2. Bolster the economy in the less populated worlds.
    • 3. Offer a stronger sense of community (IE Bounders Tokens)
    • 4. Have more people available for the new auto level battles to come.


    Everyone should have a right to choose what type of server they want to play on. They should also have the right to know when they first create a character what they can expect from that server. I have visited several servers and find that each has developed it's own personality. A blurb upon selecting a server, about the personality of that server, may make choosing a better option.

    I go back to when I created my first character in LoTrO and hovered over the server selection - I had no expectations about the game. I was presented with an overwhelming choice of servers with no logistical or defined information (population, RP, demeanor, progression) I made my selection based solely on the name. It would be great if there was a bit of information as you made your selection.

    OR

    Which brings me to a final point. Everyone plays the game in their own way. Some come for the comradeship, some enjoy the scenery, some spend countless hours picking daisies, most enjoy the storyline. There are others who spend night after night working on Flight T2C or what ever the current progression is. There are those that have more time and others that are limited with life schedules. There are capped players with no clue what this button does and don't really care they just want to be "in there". You also have players that have statistically graphed and honed their charterers for the best output. Some servers seem to be more mature, helpful, high energy, chatty others much less so. I suggest a survey before selecting a server that would give you a server choice geared to the best fit for your play-style. It is after all your time and your nickle.

    My 2 nickles (they did away with the penny in Canada)

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Middle Earth, Arda
    Posts
    4,778
    Quote Originally Posted by Airamena View Post
    ...an alternative to breath life into the lower population servers and that is to LOCK (unless someone shows just cause - for example a family member) certain servers as FULL allowing an influx on the lower population servers...
    This measure is already in game to some degree, when some server gets superpopulated, turbines refuse all transfers to this server. But players can still do brand new characters on that server.
    Is this Alternate Playable Character Disorder? :

    Check my Kinship at Gladden server: The Fate of Middle Earth

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    12,677
    Quote Originally Posted by Yula_the_Mighty View Post
    No It is not. It is your definition.
    Correct. MMOs are entertainment services, trying to appeal to a varied set of interests. One of those is "group adventuring", but it's not nearly the only one. Nor the defining one for a great many players.

    I rarely group with strangers in game or in real life.
    Yeah, and I've always found this quite strange in MMOs. Basically, I think they go about it backwards: they should emphasize social formation, creating very rich environments for people to hang out and talk, play mini-games, etc... then backstop that with a very rich set of features for guilds/kinships, encouraging social (not task-oriented) activities, player events, etc. Do that, and more group adventuring will occur as people become friends.

    Turbine been down the group centric game road before with their second game Asheron's Call 2.
    True. I wound up leaving that after about 6 months, for the reasons you describe. I had lots of company, and AC2 didn't last very long. And although I was a beta tester for DDO and liked some of the mechanics, the hardcore push to get people in groups past the early levels drove me off before it even went live. FFXI was a game with much that I liked, but the PUG-fest aspect of it past the early levels wound up pushing me out the door, off to play other things.

    LOTRO started out supporting solo fairly well, and has improved in that regard over time. 7 years later, I'm still playing. I've taken a few breaks, but I'll likely still be playing it until it shuts down.

    Khafar
    Last edited by Khafar; Oct 12 2013 at 01:08 PM.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Gallifrey. I need a Jelly Baby.
    Posts
    18,495
    Quote Originally Posted by Khafar View Post
    Yeah, and I've always found this quite strange in MMOs. Basically, I think they go about it backwards: they should emphasize social formation, creating very rich environments for people to hang out and talk, play mini-games, etc... then backstop that with a very rich set of features for guilds/kinships, encouraging social (not task-oriented) activities, player events, etc. Do that, and more group adventuring will occur as people become friends.

    For all of Ultima Online's faults, this is one thing they did right. Everything was in the city of Britain, like the main bank, forge, tavern next to the bank. And with the exception of party chat, all chat was done over the heads of each avatar. And you did not have to hit "enter" before talking, so all you had to do was just start typing.

    It is my own humble opinion that the habit of requiring to hit "Enter" before chatting and creating chat channels really hurt the social aspect of MMOs. With Ultima Online and Star Wars Galaxies, you always saw the chat over the avatar's heads. That is gone with chat channels. Leveling hurt too.

    For example, In World of Warcraft I never saw my guild mates, I just talked to them in guild chat. Same here in LOTRO. It's not just LOTRO, it's the entire theme park rut that the entire MMO genre is stuck in.
    Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a well preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"
    Continuing the never ending battle to keep Lobelia Sackville-Baggins in check

  11. #86
    I'd prefer to see an Instance Finder 'option' to join a global server queue ahead of any server merge. It doesn't really work(for me at least) at end game/higher levels, but I've met some interesting characters at lower levels using the IF. But generally most of the time just sitting in the queue(while watching a movie).

    Also an option to include your posted AH items to a global/cross server market, along with want adds added to the AH. Post the item you want to buy a stack of for what price.

    Just given the above as examples, not really debating those topics, point being there are many things Turbine can do before even thinking about merging servers.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Orem
    Posts
    903
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyturack View Post
    This has probably been suggested a few times before, and for good reason, but I figured I'd give it a shot as well.

    Having recently started yet another new character, I can't help but notice just how desolate the maps are on my server (Arkenstone), now while this might not be the case for all servers, I'm pretty sure there are quite a few servers out there in the same state. I've come back from a hiatus where I was playing some other mmorpg's and the difference is huge, I could travel for 2mins in any direction and see 10 other players on the way, and while it doesn't have to be that intensive, it would be nice to have some more people around.

    So the suggestion is simple: merge a bunch of the smaller servers. You have far too many servers anyway, and the less there are the stronger will be the flow of new players into servers too. The same can also be said for pvp, action is pretty lacking during weekdays non prime-time, merging would help for this too, especially if you merged say an EU heavy server with a US one, that way you'd have an increase in players during different times, so as to make it more active, but not turn 1 part of the day into a lag-fest.

    I've heard some reasons you guys don't want to merge servers is that you'd be admitting defeat or something, or that it would look like lotro's appeal is receding, but I mean who cares, if you lessen the servers and channel the new people into fuller servers then more would probably stick around anyway, since it would enhance the feel of the game.

    I'll leave it at that, so as to not turn this into a text-wall, but please think it over.
    I played a time on your server for a wile and I thought it was quite present no people fighting to get to the node first no glitching of my graphics on ultra high thus I see that your server is not too empty it is just right.

    it is so great I was even thinking of migrating from my server to it.

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by BlancoFallowhide View Post
    I like being on a lower pop server. I don't mind if the Lone Lands are lonely. What I really don't want is to see my server, Windfola, merged with another server in order to have higher pop at lower levels and then be bogged down at cap. I remember when cap was 60 or 65 and bounty runs were all the rage. There were line ups to kill the drake- on a low pop server! If you want lots of people around at low levels, there are plenty of servers to choose from. Please don't remove the option for those of us who like the low pop server.

    I doubt it's technologically possible, but the only solution to the "problem" (if you think it is a problem) would be some sort of situation in which two servers overlap at low level and then from 75 onward they split again. I know that's not "possible" but it's the only way to have lots of people at low levels without having a log jam at cap. I'm not a tech person, but I doubt that this is possible. (Yes, I know there would be lots of hurdles along the way, etc. etc.) Maybe some day when our children are all playing MMO's they'll have that option.

    That's only if you think the low pop is really a problem, which I don't.
    Its possible Aion does it. You stay on your server, but you go to this guy and he transfers you to a general server, that any one from any server can go to. Then when you are tired of it you go back to your server. I dont know what its called though.

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyturack View Post
    This has probably been suggested a few times before, and for good reason, but I figured I'd give it a shot as well.

    Having recently started yet another new character, I can't help but notice just how desolate the maps are on my server (Arkenstone), now while this might not be the case for all servers, I'm pretty sure there are quite a few servers out there in the same state. I've come back from a hiatus where I was playing some other mmorpg's and the difference is huge, I could travel for 2mins in any direction and see 10 other players on the way, and while it doesn't have to be that intensive, it would be nice to have some more people around.

    So the suggestion is simple: merge a bunch of the smaller servers. You have far too many servers anyway, and the less there are the stronger will be the flow of new players into servers too. The same can also be said for pvp, action is pretty lacking during weekdays non prime-time, merging would help for this too, especially if you merged say an EU heavy server with a US one, that way you'd have an increase in players during different times, so as to make it more active, but not turn 1 part of the day into a lag-fest.

    I've heard some reasons you guys don't want to merge servers is that you'd be admitting defeat or something, or that it would look like lotro's appeal is receding, but I mean who cares, if you lessen the servers and channel the new people into fuller servers then more would probably stick around anyway, since it would enhance the feel of the game.

    I'll leave it at that, so as to not turn this into a text-wall, but please think it over.
    There is no need to merge servers, go on Brandywine there is alot of people on that server. In fact I am prolly going to move servers because there are to many people. I just started, but i never go for more then 5 mins in all the low level starting areas with out seeing some one.

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Posts
    5,743
    Quote Originally Posted by Nymphonic View Post
    Now this is something I could go for.
    They'd have to fix the issue with Codemaster's character data not being compatible with Turbine's character data.

    Still, I like 'dead' servers. Leave my Nimrodel alone.


    Point of perspective. I am a founder of SWTOR. Lots of hype and lots of servers on launch. How many servers do they have now? I don't know, for I am not playing that game currently, but I do know that when my nephew was interested in it, I played with him and was subjected to two mergers. Didn't help the game in my opinion; but given what that game was designed to be, the merges had to be done. Losing about 2/3rds of your player accounts will do that to you.

    This game does not need merges. You want more people, go to the populated servers. Making a new character is free (or prepaid, depending :P).
    "No sadder words of tongue or pen are the words: 'Might have been'." -- John Greenleaf Whittier
    "Do or do not. There is no try." -- Yoda
    On planet Earth, there is a try.
    Indeed, in a world and life full of change, the only constant is human nature (A is A, after all :P).
    We old vets need to keep in mind those who come after us.

  16. #91
    Here is another problem:

    Dual kinship names. I wouldn't want to lose my kinship name just because some other server that we would be merging with has the same kinship name on its server, and it was founded 2 days before mine. That I would be furious about. Hell, I can live with my character name changing if it is double, but kinship names, especially if you are the founder, are quite a different story.

    It all CAN be dealt with, providing renames to kinship owners that saw their kinship renamed to Kinship Name-1, but it would upset plenty of people.
    Moved from Riddermark to Arkenstone on 9/29/2015!
    -----
    Disclaimer: The definition of "Soon™" is based solely on Turbine's interpretation of the word, and all similarities with dictionary definitions of the word "Soon™" are purely coincidental and should not be interpreted as a time frame that will come to pass within a reasonable amount of time.

  17. #92
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Nashville Tn, USA
    Posts
    521
    Well I know this has got every one up in arms but the OP is right the game need to have a few server merged for the good of game. It happens in many older MMO. As I have been in thread here discussing the populations drop that has been going on over the last few years. I feel this is a valid suggestion but this it one of those things where you have to bite the bullet and break a few eggs to make a good omelet.

    Here is the tread https://www.lotro.com/forums/showthr...021-Ghost-town

    Its getting to be that its a well know fact that server population has drop about 40% over the last 2 years I myself was a victim of the death of Arkenstone that is where my main a trapped. This is type of thing that really can't be discussed by players as the just respond of emotion and not necessarily from fact. They don't want to lose name, houses fear of the unknown and bunch more MMO game do this when its needed there may come a day when it happens here but it will come from the top down on that one as a business decision.

    One to save cost of maintenance the same reason we have this striped down no feature web site. The cost of maintaining the server for the amount of active people it serves Turbine has already do it in DDO when they shut down the EU servers so don't think for a moment it can't and won't happen it can and most-likely will happen someday . it just a matter of time once they have enough server that are running at 20% of capacity they just don't have much of a choice.

    At first it will be a bite I give you that but in the end but in the end when the time is right it should and has to be done. No the other alternative would be to boost new character set up on the dead or dying servers while Arkenstone is bad there many others much worst off.

    I would say if you don't want to see this happen we would need about everyone on each of the US severs other then Brandywine Meneldor and landrovel the rest of the US sever range from fair being kind to being down right dead to get at least one person that would join those servers that actively play.

    I was sort of lucky that I am one of the biggest alt-aholic in the game and my wife being one of 2nd biggest *LOL* as we have about 200 active character I have 3 account and she has 2. About 6 months back I started moving the majority of my main game play time to Meneldor and Landrolvel . I still play on Arkenstone since that is where our mains reside. I have 2 kinship's on that server we have 5 houses total I will play out as long as I can then I am hoping they offer some sort of a deal to move. I just don't have the money to my 16 characters on just my main account.

    I myself hope the merge some servers. I am hoping that since Arkenstone is not half as dead and a few other that I get lucky when it happens but am sure I will have some that are not so lucky too. Its really disappointing to be on a serve that was so busy Like Arkenstone was when I started. It was a great server for my wife and I when it was in its hay day. I mean the server had 2 shifts one the the US time zone peak hour and one the The Ausies we could start paying at 6pm and right thru this 6 am.

    Now there no peak at any time.

    I would rather that LOTRO would get off the tush and look back at ever change they mad in the last 2 year that caused to drop in population and revert it back

    This is A MMO and MMO games need people to play with they tried to make the game more solo friendly that was there big mistake while as a temporary fix it was a long term killer and now population has falling so low that there is no way to go back Up can't back to Group game till you get enough people back to fill the need for groups. I would say the only way to so that is merging servers

    I know you think I am crazy but I have playing on some of the dead servers in the game would be some much better is we had people to play with is a drag playing on a dead server. I know because I have toons on the most populated to the deadest.

    The problem is every time someone lands on one of those dead server that is looking for people to play with since this is a MMO and that is why most people play mmo is for the group content raiding and instances skirimis. Again here where the Solo guys start to have the heads pop off.

    They come to check out the game end up on a dead server and say I am out of here and they leave some might try another server but many just pain leave so these dead server are again helping to kill the game.

    Trying to solofiying this game it was what pretty much killed it and it still killing it. Like I said before most people that come to play MMO's expect group play and leave if they don't find it except for a few here and there that fall into the solo grove and like it but that is to small of numbers to support the game and keep refreshing the population turn over.

    One day we all face that is that name of house worth to save the game and I say they can take all my houses. and I am sure I can find a name but if there is no game I wont need a name anyway.all I ask they refund my house money ans rent that paid up.

    For me being on 10 server I would amagine some times I be on the good side of the move and others the not so good side. If I can deal with it with my 200 characters yo all will survive too


    They need the server merger or they better get real ingenious and find someway to get a lot of new faces in the game soon

    My vote is merger then servers I would like the get back to playing with people again
    Completeness is the only way to play! No fast track ever! Xp Disable Toggle Supporter

  18. #93
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Nashville Tn, USA
    Posts
    521
    Quote Originally Posted by YamydeAragon View Post
    Thats precisely what they want with merge serve, just look at the names. Most people that favor this measure is the same people that constantantly post on the Forums & servers chat channel, that the game sucks & they spread the rummor that the game is dieng. The game is not bad & dieing but they want to convince the people that it is so they leave & the game trully die. This is a old measure that game competence always use to "steal" clients.
    So your going the conspiracy theory route really man please Just because people discuss the fact that server population have taken a dive over the last 2 years they are not the ones killing the game there the ones trying to get turbine WB or who ever to do something about it, those that sit around denying it's happening are what the hero and saving the game *lol*

    Look I have been here the last 2 years there is a problem it not a rumor as you would have it so take your head out of the hole U stuck it in so you would not see whats going ans suppose if u don't see it its not happening right.

    I wish it was so easy really. Boy your going to be in shock when you get your head out the sand

    It just might be that ones writing about this Issue are doing so because they know something about it There is a population problem its real. Why do you think they have been making the game more solo friendly. You think its because most folks that play MMO's want to solo the game or was it a band aid to help the folks still left continue to play in hope they could find a way to boost new player enrollment
    Completeness is the only way to play! No fast track ever! Xp Disable Toggle Supporter

  19. #94
    so lotro went brainless and merged servers and a miracle happens with tons and tons of players coming in, over crowding the worlds, what then??? create more servers?

    if doing instance is your problem, then cross world instances would solve that

    if population is your concern then why not suggest that turbine makes an advertising blitz promoting their game, ask them to spam mail every week or month when they have store promotions, they only mail i get is their acknowledgment whenever i purchase from the store w/c is for me useless

    and for those who want companionship, ask your real life friends to play the game, they'd be more prone to spend time with you and follow you around where ever you want to go or stay in fellowship so that you could feel better knowing that their there.

  20. #95
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Nashville Tn, USA
    Posts
    521
    Quote Originally Posted by Vyturack View Post
    Well houses could present a problem, but you could probably fix that by instancing housing areas. As for storage I don't see the dilemma, if you mean it will take more resources, that shouldn't be a problem in this day and age, hard-drive space is a lot cheaper now than when lotro was first released, as for the bandwidth that would be irrelevant, since you'd have double the bandwidth from the merger.

    Capped characters on 2 servers could be tricky (what kind of person needs that many characters btw?), but I don't really see the problem in upping the cap if necessary, but that's also got me thinking about monster characters, if someone has 2 of the same class it could present a problem, perhaps allowing 2 of the same class would fix that, or maybe a more elegant solution to both problems would be to give 2 sets of character screens to such people.

    I realise it's not so simple as ctrl+a-> ctrl+c -> ctrl+v, you will always have dilemma's with such drastic action, but that's not to say it shouldn't be done. I'd have thought people would welcome an increase in general population, as opposed to having only 2 characters of each class instead of 4, or having to relocate their housing.

    The pro's outweigh the cons by a mile in my book.
    Ya that's pretty much it but remember the combining the population because there is not enough there so that mean the server that there moving to has all the space and resources needed as it was meant to and did already at one have more people playing.

    As far as monster play the could just make the same way it is on free peoples I have 2 and 3 of the same classes on the same account really no big deal the character has a name that all it need to be there just like the freep side
    Completeness is the only way to play! No fast track ever! Xp Disable Toggle Supporter

  21. #96
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Nashville Tn, USA
    Posts
    521
    Quote Originally Posted by knnindy View Post
    so lotro went brainless and merged servers and a miracle happens with tons and tons of players coming in, over crowding the worlds, what then??? create more servers?

    if doing instance is your problem, then cross world instances would solve that

    if population is your concern then why not suggest that turbine makes an advertising blitz promoting their game, ask them to spam mail every week or month when they have store promotions, they only mail i get is their acknowledgment whenever i purchase from the store w/c is for me useless

    and for those who want companionship, ask your real life friends to play the game, they'd be more prone to spend time with you and follow you around where ever you want to go or stay in fellowship so that you could feel better knowing that their there.
    Ok all this would be great but that don't fix why people left there was a reason it did not just happen Getting people to come back would be no problem but first LOTRO has to back they the last 2 year of dumb changes that drove the folks away.

    One the effect the other it the butterfly effect. Dead server lose new player because the dead Dead server lose old players because the no one left to play with

    What do you do tell you buddy to come play on the dead server that your stuck on so he can be board too.

    Right now there are servers even on the best world still are not where they where 2 years ago so they miracle your talking about is never gong to happen and there only going to have to merge a few server it not like the merge 1/2 to the other half dont worry there will be room
    Completeness is the only way to play! No fast track ever! Xp Disable Toggle Supporter

  22. #97
    I would suggest, instead of the thought of merging servers, why not force new players (brand new to the game) the ability to make new accounts on the lowest/lower populated servers, thus fill them up.
    This is just a band-aide in my opinion. As far as populating the servers some what.


    Ideas of how to get people to come back to this game, well, I'm at a loss for ideas. Having been on this game since the first beta, I have seen this game go through soooo many changes. Some good, some bad.
    But then again, some I may have liked, others my not have and vice versa. You can't always please everyone. Sad, but true.
    Last edited by Jurny; Oct 17 2013 at 03:41 AM.

  23. #98
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Nashville Tn, USA
    Posts
    521
    Quote Originally Posted by Disparia View Post
    True, everyone needs to realize that servers go through highs and lows. It's pretty quiet on my server now, but it'll probably be back at peak right before the HD release. However, even at peak my server might not be right for me. My personal goal would be to find a a server that has a higher "average actively" overall; I like to play all-year round, not just the one or two months after an expansion. I know my Actively Index suggestion doesn't really do much to help that, but if Turbine decided to put out some over-time statistics including such metrics at PvMP participation, I think it would be easier for me to choose a server or two to create characters on before committing to a transfer.
    all the talk about server population is not about the highs and lows it about game wide decrease of about 40 percent over the last 2 years the 10 percent ebe and

    flow is not the concern My main server Is Arkenstone when i started playing 2 year ago the server was humming it was so busy it make the brandywine of today look mediocre. Now it one of the server i would put in the category of just hanging in there there are servers much worst but its is sad shape compared to itself 2 years ago when it had 2 full blown peak times 1 US peak and 1 Aussie peak it was awesome back then now it don't really have a peak. Right now its mostly just my wife play on our mains and it a real same because we had all our craft done to westfold and guild capped. we restarted over on Meneldor and landrovel butr we are no where close to where we where on Arkenstone!

    when folks take about server mergers that now over a few percent it really sad to have to give up after 2 years of hard work and I have 25 characters on that server on on 3 account I would sure like to see the server population come up 20 percent at least and 3 would be great
    Completeness is the only way to play! No fast track ever! Xp Disable Toggle Supporter

  24. #99
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Nashville Tn, USA
    Posts
    521
    Quote Originally Posted by Jurny View Post
    I think the only reason Turbine will never merge servers is due to there being so many types of accounts on this game. And for that reason alone it would be highly unlikey for them to even want to merge servers.

    Just think about it.....Since they have Lifetime, VIP , Premium, and FTP accounts, how on earth would they be able to merge a server and not compromise exsisting accounts in some way? By this I mean..... say I have 4 accounts (which I don't, I have 1 account) where on 1 of those accounts I'm VIP and the other 3 accounts are FTP , and suppose my 3 FTP accounts are on another server. Now say they merge my FTP account server with the server my VIP account is on. Hmmm ...now suddenly all my characters are on 1 server and all have become VIP. See the problem here?


    I would imagine it would be alot more difficult then we could even imagine , what with people having multiple accounts through out multiple servers, with varying degrees of account status, (Lifetime, VIP , Premium, FTP) impossible to do without compromising accounts in some way.


    I would suggest, instead of the thought of merging servers, why not force new players (brand new to the game) the ability to make new accounts on the lowest/lower populated servers, thus fill them up.
    This is just a band-aide in my opinion. As far as populating the servers some what.


    Ideas of how to get people to come back to this game, well, I'm at a loss for ideas. Having been on this game since the first beta, I have seen this game go through soooo many changes. Some good, some bad.
    But then again, some I may have liked, others my not have and vice versa. You can't always please everyone. Sad, but true.
    First off account types have nothing to do with it your account is the same no matter what server your on. I think your a bit confused all that happens when they merge server is move all your characters form sever A to server B it has no bearing on account types If your VIP on server A u will still be VIP once they move your toons to server b

    And turbine has already done server mergers long ago already when then closed the EU server in DDO it was no big deal
    Completeness is the only way to play! No fast track ever! Xp Disable Toggle Supporter

  25. #100
    Quote Originally Posted by Fearless.one View Post
    First off account types have nothing to do with it your account is the same no matter what server your on. I think your a bit confused all that happens when they merge server is move all your characters form sever A to server B it has no bearing on account types If your VIP on server A u will still be VIP once they move your toons to server b

    And turbine has already done server mergers long ago already when then closed the EU server in DDO it was no big deal
    Oh my , you're right, my mistake. I'm sorry. I was some how thinking the accounts would merge also, not sure how I came up with that thought, silly me. I must be more tired then I thought.

 

 
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload