Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

Server Population ProblemFollow

#1 Mar 23 2011 at 9:26 AM Rating: Good
9 posts
Rift is a great game that is really taking off. But as of right now I don't think Trion made the right decisioin to have so many servers in the beginning. Granted its great at times to have entire areas to myself but that also effects the the ever changing zone content such as invasions and rifts that public groups are great for. Also this is causing problems for guilds when recruiting. When servers have a med - high population guilds thrive and the economy does well. When a sever is consistantly low, options lack which is going to drive people away. Anyone else see this as a problem that needs some immediate attention?
#2 Mar 23 2011 at 9:35 AM Rating: Excellent
*
139 posts
A month ago this post would have been laughed at. While the que problem seems to have died down; I agree that the emptiness of the zones that are not near endgame is making it difficult to get things done. I almost miss tripping over everyone and having to wait for mobs to spawn...
#3 Mar 23 2011 at 10:12 AM Rating: Good
1 post
I have to say I agree with the last poster.
#4 Mar 23 2011 at 2:14 PM Rating: Excellent
9 posts
Thinking about this I question how Trion will fix this problem? Maybe it would be smart to open up server transfers sometime soon for a limited basis so that people who have worked so hard on their characters can move them to a server more suited to their liking. This would also give Trion a chance to see if current Shards are needed. I am guessing the game is in a virtual enviornment so it should not be a difficult thing to do.
#5 Mar 23 2011 at 2:51 PM Rating: Good
**
272 posts
There was mention by devs at some point in some interview concerning getting the tech in place for server transfers.

I for one welcome lower pop servers, but given the tendency to make so few rp-pvp servers I doubt I'll ever see that >.>
____________________________
Always check for black-on-black text.
#6 Mar 23 2011 at 3:16 PM Rating: Good
9 posts
I can see your point about PVP servers. When I used to PVP the lower the population as long as it was still competitive and interesting was welcome. I havent seen PVP servers on Rift but can imaging they have a higher population then the PVE servers right now. My statement in the beginning about the overall population of the game vrs the amount of servers.
#7 Mar 23 2011 at 3:50 PM Rating: Good
***
2,208 posts
I just hope they don't merge the servers. I would hate to lose the names I made for my characters due to duplicates. The whole reason I joined pre-release was so I could pick any names I wanted pretty much. I do agree though that 58 english servers is quite to many!

Edited, Mar 23rd 2011 5:50pm by Proroc
____________________________
[ffxivsig]587056[/ffxivsig]
FFXI: Maddog - 99 BST, BLM, RDM, WAR


#8 Mar 23 2011 at 3:56 PM Rating: Good
*
200 posts
I am actually on Faemist, I think the 4th extra PvP server added on Headstart day (they added at least 15 that day). The population is pretty low. I have never played a game from day 1 before so it might not be weird but I definitely know more than half of the 50's and have worked with the rest at least once before with a few exceptions. I don't know if the PvE servers could be much worse than that.
#9 Mar 23 2011 at 4:54 PM Rating: Good
9 posts
I totally agree with you on this. Names are part of the game and when server's merge having the name = NameX is not desired. But I think eventually a server merge will be necessary. There are just way to many.
#10 Mar 23 2011 at 5:57 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
17 posts
I'm going to agree to this post as well, at times it's great that i can do my quests with minimal wait time on mobs, but when it comes to the big stuff i see a lack of participation from people who just want to get to high levels.
as far as server merging i think it might happen in the future.
____________________________
Sequester - 39 Defiant Cleric on Leathys
#11 Mar 23 2011 at 7:03 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
*
208 posts
i dont get why MMOs dont just go with a system that will auto place you in a server to keep all the populations balanced, and then give you the option to get a guest/buddy key or whatever you want to call it, and then you can have you friends use it to join your server for those who want it. I think this is sort of the system FFXI used? Anyways, just my two bits, seems to me like this would be the best way to keep all servers balanced, but im sure some of you will point out the downside to this idea pretty quick....
#12 Mar 24 2011 at 11:23 AM Rating: Good
**
272 posts
Some do. Tabula Rasa (RIP), Champions Online and a few others use a number instance system where new instances get generated when the others are too full.

It leads to a disconnected social experience and in the end harms the community somewhat.

Most of society hasn't reached the stage of social maturity where they get past the Tribal/Nationalist mentality phase. Named servers root themselves in that and allow people to self-identify with a social group. Numbered cyclical instances do not.

Soloists don't generally care at all.
____________________________
Always check for black-on-black text.
#13 Mar 26 2011 at 8:58 AM Rating: Decent
*
64 posts
The que problems died down because at launch they had the servers at 45% cap and 1mill subs, The reason for the cap is so when we all logged into that first area for the first week we only had to slightly fight for mobs so once the majority of players were 25+ they up the caps to there potential. I havent noticed a change in population at all on reclaimer
#14 Mar 26 2011 at 11:43 AM Rating: Decent
9 posts
So I guess I question then is the population on your server enough to keep up with the amount of guilds that are trying to flourish?
#15 Mar 26 2011 at 1:24 PM Rating: Default
Sage
**
551 posts
Personally, the guild problem would be easily solved if they put a limit on guilds period. 95% of all guilds on any server in any game out there consist of 1-5 people who thought "herp derp, let's make a guild roflcopter". No server needs more than maybe 10 guilds, 20 to be generous. You'd have a lot less people crying about their "poor dead guilds" if the population was dividing between 10 to 20 large established guilds rather than having hundreds of ragtag wannabe guilds.

Edited, Mar 26th 2011 3:27pm by Zorvan
____________________________


[ffxivsig]1815523[/ffxivsig]
#16 Mar 27 2011 at 8:18 PM Rating: Good
*
64 posts
Zorvan wrote:
Personally, the guild problem would be easily solved if they put a limit on guilds period. 95% of all guilds on any server in any game out there consist of 1-5 people who thought "herp derp, let's make a guild roflcopter". No server needs more than maybe 10 guilds, 20 to be generous. You'd have a lot less people crying about their "poor dead guilds" if the population was dividing between 10 to 20 large established guilds rather than having hundreds of ragtag wannabe guilds.

Edited, Mar 26th 2011 3:27pm by Zorvan


there are only a couple problems with that idea. Who controls these guilds and why do they get to run them and not me? Who sets the requirements for these guilds? Who sets up the instances groups, who determines raid times for these huge guilds? How will you control the Clique problem within these mass guilds? The problems this poses can go on and on.
#17 Mar 27 2011 at 9:07 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
777 posts
Zorvan wrote:
Personally, the guild problem would be easily solved if they put a limit on guilds period. 95% of all guilds on any server in any game out there consist of 1-5 people who thought "herp derp, let's make a guild roflcopter". No server needs more than maybe 10 guilds, 20 to be generous. You'd have a lot less people crying about their "poor dead guilds" if the population was dividing between 10 to 20 large established guilds rather than having hundreds of ragtag wannabe guilds.


I don't know if I like this idea. Currently I'm running with a small group of RL friends; why do I need to be forced into a mega guild if I don't want to be?
#18 Mar 27 2011 at 10:33 PM Rating: Excellent
***
3,702 posts
Hemptation wrote:
Zorvan wrote:
Personally, the guild problem would be easily solved if they put a limit on guilds period. 95% of all guilds on any server in any game out there consist of 1-5 people who thought "herp derp, let's make a guild roflcopter". No server needs more than maybe 10 guilds, 20 to be generous. You'd have a lot less people crying about their "poor dead guilds" if the population was dividing between 10 to 20 large established guilds rather than having hundreds of ragtag wannabe guilds.

Edited, Mar 26th 2011 3:27pm by Zorvan


there are only a couple problems with that idea. Who controls these guilds and why do they get to run them and not me? Who sets the requirements for these guilds? Who sets up the instances groups, who determines raid times for these huge guilds? How will you control the Clique problem within these mass guilds? The problems this poses can go on and on.


I believe you've laid out in just one paragraph the exact reason this type of social structure is never attempted

Well done
____________________________
svlyons wrote:
If random outcomes aren't acceptable to you, then don't play with random people.
#19 Mar 28 2011 at 2:59 AM Rating: Excellent
Repressed Memories
******
20,908 posts
Zorvan wrote:
No server needs more than maybe 10 guilds, 20 to be generous. You'd have a lot less people crying about their "poor dead guilds" if the population was dividing between 10 to 20 large established guilds rather than having hundreds of ragtag wannabe guilds.

I want you to know I'm trying really hard to not be a jerk, but a thousand jokes are running through my mind about how hilariously bad of an idea this is.
#20 Mar 29 2011 at 11:09 PM Rating: Decent
**
526 posts
Danex317 wrote:
I am actually on Faemist, I think the 4th extra PvP server added on Headstart day (they added at least 15 that day). The population is pretty low. I have never played a game from day 1 before so it might not be weird but I definitely know more than half of the 50's and have worked with the rest at least once before with a few exceptions. I don't know if the PvE servers could be much worse than that.


This has actually changed. I have noticed a big pick up in 50's in Stillmoor on our server.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 12 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (12)