1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Greetings Guest!!

    In order to combat SPAM on the forums, all users are required to have a minimum of 2 posts before they can submit links in any post or thread.

    Dismiss Notice

Server merges?

Discussion in 'UHall' started by Gandie, Dec 11, 2008.

  1. Gandie

    Gandie Guest

    Okay i know its been up a "few" times over the years.

    But! UO are so empty these days, and i think it would be really healthy for the game to do some server merges
    .
    And yes i know people will lose UO homes (should somehow get a large moving crate for stuff). But do people care so much for homes? Maybe we could even get a nice market for homes again with some server merges.

    Btw i play on EU shard, some im not on one of the smallest servers.
     
  2. Sarphus

    Sarphus Guest

    It does keep coming up, but it continues to be a bad idea.
     
  3. I will move to any empty shard they if they open ALL lands to keeps and castles
     
  4. Ummm, I am NOT about to lose my house, the nice spot it's in and even, perhaps, maybe lose some or all of the items I have in it. Nope. I like a possible spawn, forests or mountains or seaside ... meaning I like things as they are, thanks.
     
  5. Littleblue

    Littleblue Seasoned Veteran
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    485
    Likes Received:
    7
    Agree.
     
  6. Chaosy

    Chaosy Guest

    I personally would like to see server merges so shards are more populated, but this would be close to impossible to implement. What shards will get merged? How will people react? What will happen to their houses and items? Etc etc.

    This topic is really just beating a dead horse, as it has been brought up many times in the past.
     
  7. Maplestone

    Maplestone Crazed Zealot
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2008
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    9
    For the people who want a more populated shard, they are free to move to one.

    The only real question is whether it is worth the upkeep to keep under-populated shards going? And so far, the answer to this seems to be a resounding vote in favour of the statis quo.
     
  8. People that are in the same houses they placed the day that housing became available would answer yes, and very much so.

    People that have grandfathered houses and would have no way to regain that status would answer yes, and very much so.

    People that have houses in ideal locations that they've either saved up a lot of gold for, or got lucky enough to place sometime along the way would answer yes, and very much so.

    People that have spent very large amounts of time dropping runes on a daily basis, along with spending HUGE amounts of their gametime in order to build up a steady clientele at their vendor houses would answer yes, and very much so.

    People that finally, after either years of saving, or years of waiting for their neighbors to move or sell their houses to them, so that they can finally have that castle or keep they've always wanted would answer yes, and very much so.


    In short, I'd say yes, and very much so.

    Merging shards would cause people to quit, and in large numbers, so I'd say it would be a very bad idea, and very much so.

    :scholar:
     
  9. DHMagicMan_1

    DHMagicMan_1 Guest

    The only way they could do it FAIRLY would be for two servers... ie Pacific and Napa to BOTH merge onto New Shard A... that way no one has their existing housing or whatever... everyone has an equal chance at getting prime real estate.

    I'd be against doing it, but I'd REALLY be against them just saying "Napa is closing so all napa chars, here's your free shard transfer token, you have 30 days to find a new home on a more populated server..." That would be a horrible way to go in my opinion.
     
  10. Flora Green

    Flora Green Guest

    Agreed.
     
  11. WarUltima

    WarUltima Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2004
    Messages:
    2,385
    Likes Received:
    0
    Player housing made server merge impossible. Unless they do away with wow instanced crap.

    Or if you go to a moongate it has series of option like Napa Vally facets and Pacific facets other than that unless they give enough incentives for people to move. Origin has proven to be a failure due to lack of players.

    Best way they can do this IMO is opening another server that allows players to place a house there as a bonus 2nd house. or something like that.
     
  12. kalzaketh

    kalzaketh Guest

    I personally don't care for the idea as napa valley has amuch smaller community but feels no need to become an over bloated type of shard, our shard is small enough for most ppl to actually know alarger part of the population.
     
  13. Rubican

    Rubican Guest

    I think server merges sooo need to happen. I'm tired of feeling like the guy in "I am Legend" - even most people I run into (in Luna of course) act like mannequins.

    I typed out a number of reasons on this subject before so I won't bother again, but it was much more fun when the lands were full.

    As far as housing, why spend all this time designing and decorating if there is no one to see it? Do people just sit in there house and tell themselves how nice it is?

    If they removed all the unused housing, there would be plenty of room to combine 2 or 3 shards into 1.
     
  14. This is a serious point for a lot of us Napa players. First of all... I like my little unpopulated shard. I like the fact that I know, or at least recognize the names of, a good majority of the players. Also, I wouldn’t want to give up my castle. If it weren’t for Napa, I’m not sure I would play. I wouldn’t dream of moving shards the way it is currently.

    Now if they came out and said every single US player was going to be transferred to new shards, then I would at least give it a chance as long as the terms were fair. Example: They cut the game down to 4 or 5 US shards. Each account is allowed to place a home on the new shard that is equal to the SAME SIZE home on their current account. So my main has a castle, I get to place a castle. My 2nd acct has an 18x18 so I can place an 18x18. Also, new accounts and reactivated accounts with no home upon transfer will not be able to place for 30 days. They would have to open up new land somehow… I can’t imagine everyone for 2 or 3 shards fitting on one WITH their homes. Plus I have a castle in Fel and I want to keep my castle in Fel so that would have to be worked out too.
     
  15. Tazar

    Tazar Guest

    Show me a spot where I could duplicate my 6 18x18 homes all together as I have now on Atlantic - and I'll consider it... otherwise... NO WAY!
     
  16. Sarphus

    Sarphus Guest

    The only way shards could ever merge would be to duplicate all housing fascets on each of the merged shards and allow travel among them. That would only work if it could be done without also creating excessive lag.

    I have no confidence that goal can be achieved in a profitable way, so I say that this redundant topic is still a bad idea.

    If you don't like playing on a low-pop shard, move to a high pop shard. If you don't like playing on a high-pop shard, move to a low pop shard. It's not as hard as people make it sound...

    I see a lot more people moving from high-pop shards to low-pop shards. A lot of people like having less competition for resources :)

    I also find that people are more likely to make a move to a low pop shard when an exciting publish is coming. I have seen somewhere around 4 new guilds xshard to origin from various other shards in the last 3 weeks because of pub 57 :)
     
  17. Uvtha

    Uvtha Grand Poobah
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    6,529
    Likes Received:
    2,915
    It would be a good thing to have more people around, but no one would ever go for it in a million years. You can't risk peoples houses and items, they wigg out.

    If you could the way I would do it would be to give every one an infinite bank box, wipe all houses, then after a like 2 weeks have a lottery of everyone who is now on the shard for housing, in like 10 waves, each a day long.

    That way no one would lose items, and the chances to get your house back or a better spot are even. I personally wouldnt mind something like that at all. I have a fabulous house spot right out of the zento gate along the wall that I paid like all of my money for, but I would be all for it, if it meant more people around. Thats just me though.
     
  18. Gandie

    Gandie Guest

    First off, the idea was not to close down some servers and give transfer tokens out. But merge two+ servers together to a new one.

    I can see the problems with houses, and that people got very different views and feelings about how importent houses are for them.

    My problem is im from EU and i lagg pretty bad on US servers, and as im into PvP thats really bad.
    I want a more populated shard. But Europa shard IS the most populated EU based server. Drach being the other one. We don't even have a Seige rule shard like US/Asia :lick:

    Hmpf. Would hate to leave UO, best game out there. But for me its not fun to fight the same 15 people all the time.

    Guess i just wait for SA and see how it turns out before i decide.;)
     
  19. Setnaffa

    Setnaffa Certifiable
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    If I wanted to deal with crowds of people, I'd go to the mall.

    In UO, the only time I want to see a crowd is at a unique shard event or in town. Other than that, a few people here and there is enough for me. Actually being in a dungeon alone or with just a few friends is much more like D&D than huge crowds. Could you imagine if Bilbo and the dwarves had to take a number before entering the Dragon's lair?

    I play on Napa too, and I have to add my "nay" along with the others in this thread who like our small Napa shard just the way it is.
     
  20. How about moving the dungeons instead to a few common servers....

    Umm, as I think about that, too may exploits, and EA would lose income from the x-shard tokens.

    Never mind! :blushing:
     
  21. WildStar

    WildStar UO Baja News Reporter
    Reporter Professional Stratics Veteran Campaign Benefactor BRPA

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,265
    Likes Received:
    417
    Merging shards would be very, very, very, very bad for player-run towns. There is alot of history and blessings from the Seer Era that would be lost forever.

    WildStar
    Grand Duchess
    Kingdom of Dawn
     
  22. Sunrise

    Sunrise Guest

    I vote nay.. Im also a napa player. Hows this...

    Napa and Other shards have been small. They been small for a LONG time. The servers have to be paid for now. Heck its been 11 years. The money EA is making from us is Just gravy...

    Besides also when you start mixing servers together..What about the history of that server? Everyone says Your house would be gone..but the Events tho..

    I can see it now. This is the spot where we had to kill a dragon outside of Yew on Atl...and over on this spot 2 tiles from that is a demon we had to kill on Napa and if you look over there 3 spots there is the orc invasion we had on Chess....From our EV mods...etc etc..

    Forget about houses the rare collectors would scream....

    Lets lose more people than we have all ready. Play the game. Enjoy it. Simple as that.. :D

    Yes napa folks are the most screwed up folks in this game..but we do love our world and will fight for it...Who else can say that?


    Edit...

    Ok Im sorry Mods but I have to say this. Everyone here will agree that when EA and the Devs try to make the game BETTER...it gets worse...Cough BOS Cough Just to name a few....
    Do we really want to give the devs more ideas????
     
  23. agpga

    agpga Guest

    they could merge the servers and create a four story layout that would allow two players to occupy the same footprint it would be that one would have their on top of the other no one loses their location
     
  24. Sunrise

    Sunrise Guest

    Hrm..good point..Now what about vendors and customs designs we do on our homes?
     
  25. deadite

    deadite Sage
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend It's My Birthday

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    570
    Likes Received:
    20
    Really I think merging shards would end up being a very time consuming (ie expensive) endeavor for Mythic to pull off. So I don't think it will ever happen.

    But very few people seem to like this idea. I think if there were only 100 people left playing UO, more than half of them would *still* complain that it's a bad idea because of their housing spot.

    So it's my opinion that the game will close before the shards are merged.
     
  26. Yalp

    Yalp Guest

    'nef said. Let it die already!
     
  27. Yalp

    Yalp Guest

    Let me give you more reasons than "my perfect housing spot" *although it's a VERY valid reason.

    1) LAG LAG LAG
    2) Hackers/cheaters/dupers benefit more
    3) Community cohesion
    4) Camping events
     
  28. Yalp

    Yalp Guest

    and what about those spots that have a house on every shard? Ie. Luna, Zento? Malas? Do we stack the houses 20 high?
     
  29. Dermott of LS

    Dermott of LS UOEC Modder
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    5,320
    Likes Received:
    528
    ...

    Server merges?

    No.
     
  30. Should've done it years ago , another one of those wasted ideas UO players killed for the better of the game.. :coco:
     
  31. Haddy G

    Haddy G Journeyman
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2008
    Messages:
    172
    Likes Received:
    9
    A better idea would be to update the graphics, make discs put them in boxes and send them to stores to sell. Oh yes advertise, lots and lots of advertisements.

    Merging servers, you may as well pull the plug on UO.
     
  32. I can't even imagine having multiple Luna's on one shard. AAAAHHHHHHH :wall:
     
  33. I like your idea best Haddy. I think if EA tried to sell this game, they might actually make some money on it. There's presently no advertising that I can see and no effort on EA's part to market it.

    But what if they opened gates to other servers instead of using transfer tokens. Wouldn't this give shards more of a population?
     
  34. Cadderly

    Cadderly Journeyman
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    14
    Honestly I'm for it but it will never happen. Lets say the merged napa, lake austin, and origin into one shard. Guess what that new shard would still be empty. The player interaction will never be what it once was. To many shards and to many land masses.

    Now if they considered consolidated all american shards into maybe 4.... west coast, central, east coast, and siege. Then I'd be screaming at ppl to stop crying about there houses and do the greater good for the population so this game could feel like a mmorpg instead of just a online game... cause there isn't anything massive + multiplayer + roleplaying about uo anymore.
     
  35. Moreeg

    Moreeg Guest


    Many people would prefer a publish that allows a housing item to be able to turn 90 degrees over a publish with actual game content... so yes, I think its safe to say people do care for their homes.
     
  36. Phaen Grey

    Phaen Grey Lore Master
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 12, 2008
    Messages:
    1,053
    Likes Received:
    7
    I think if you feel you are on an empty server, its up to the individual player to seek out where they would like best to play. Buy yourself a transfer token and move to a higher populated server if you don't like where you are.
     
  37. Kith Kanan

    Kith Kanan Guest

    Yeah peopel do care about there homes..... I got 5 houses next to each other in fel , no way im giving that up....
     
  38. Cadderly

    Cadderly Journeyman
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2008
    Messages:
    207
    Likes Received:
    14
    Done it multiple times. There really isn't a populated shard anymore. Started in napa valley ages ago. When after searching for months there wasn't so much as a 8x8 to be placed. Personaly I got a steal for buying a 8x8 small tower for 1 mill gold. (alot of money)

    Now atlantic, one of the most populated shards today I found a 15 x 18 in a couple hours. Could hunt in dungeons all day and not see a single person.

    If you don't like my small shard move to a bigger one, right?... my biggest complaint is that there are no more bigger shards... they all currently small.
     
  39. Sunrise

    Sunrise Guest

    and again I will say..Enjoy this game..Nuff said..Just enjoy it...for you never know when it might be canceled..NO Im NOT jumping on the band wagon thats been going on since 1999 that the game is going to end....Heck if Ever quest can still get people to play...

    This game will NOT be like it was before AOS..or even after. Heck even 2 years ago...For the die hard fans that we ALL are..Lets enjoy this cheesy game :D

    But stilll...walking around the different worlds...Wishing I could place a house here or there back in the day..and now I can. Seening whole player run citys that are now nothing but open fields...the only place to see people is to do a champ.....

    Just enjoy the game...

    Edit..

    We are the die hard fans..we been here forever. We have taken our breaks..and this cheesy game is just like gravity..It sucks us back in..we will be here until the end too...but to be honest with ya..I think Ever crack and other online games will go under before UO even thinks about it!!!!!!!

    Its tough times for everony. People can say they are canceling there accounts for the real world is bad..Seriously tho why???? 10 bucks a month is cheaper than a 12 pack of beer which would last me a night or two. Honesty more people SHOULD play UO...than go out once a month and party..for with UO its a 24/7 party if you know where to look and to make your own fun..Not just one night..

    So making only 5 or 6 servers is a BAD idea...this game is going well right now..lets leave it at that...

    Its cheaper to play UO 24/7 than it is to see 2 movies in one month
     
  40. Basara

    Basara UO Forum Moderator
    Moderator Professional Wiki Moderator Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend Campaign Supporter

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2003
    Messages:
    8,477
    Likes Received:
    595
    I can see two ways to do mergers:

    1. Create a new shard with all the dimensions increased by a factor of 4 (currently, each "step" in terms of latitude & longitude jumps 4-5 minutes, so there's room if you wanted to redo the map into 1 step = 1 minute). This option would work best, but is very labor intensive.
    a. This will allow the devs to totally redo the server lines for efficiency with modern hardware, and tweak the terrain a bit (the return of overland spawn, even!). Luna, of course, would become a city with multiple rings of streets around the bank, not just one.
    b. Allow people to "pack up" their house and characters, and relocate it to the new shard, but the spot the house can be dropped onto in the new shard has to be within 3 degrees n/s & e/w of where it was before, in the same facet. With each clearing effectively being 16 times the acreage as before, it should be near-impossible to place houses to keep other shards' homes from fitting (the only thing that might come close might be castles).
    c. All Event stuff would be copied onto the merged shard, locations tweaked slightly if they conflict (fairgrounds, for example).
    d. All houses not moved by the players by the deadline for play to stop on the old shards would be moved by GMs to where they can fit, over 1-2 days. This would also allow the deletion of certain problem houses.
    e. After all the houses are moved, then people can start placing and resizing (and the number of castle spots will go up greatly).

    2. Option 2, convert T2A into its own pair of facets (and redrawn to be less annoying). Share Fel T2A and Ilshenar between shards.
    a. Make the Trammel T2A facet open (after terrain changes) to housing.
    b. Make the Fel T2A facet several times larger, with more champ spawn locations, and shared by all Shards at that server farm that use the same ruleset. Add a couple more NPC zones (with guards), and replace the current tunnel/teleporter system with moongates (you still can't recall or gate there) - and put heavy non-champ monster spawns around the towns, making getting to and from the exits just as perilous as the current dungeon entrances can be, and with PvP choke points along the way (only the choke points will have their monster spawns for both sides to deal with).
    c. Ilshenar gets expanded and shared the same way. Reds given the ability to enter and leave Ilshenar, but facet would only allow PvP within an alliance/guild, between warring groups, and between factions.
    d. Easier done, but might require a "cooldown" time between entering a gate and arriving/departing a shared facet, to prevent bugs and exploits that could dupe things or blackhole characters. While in a gate, characters could not be attacked, attack, or see or be seen by those outside the gate at either end, once the transfer starts.
     
  41. Chainseeker

    Chainseeker Guest

    Leave Napa Alone! I love my shard, and the island I have to myself. A merger would be heartbreaking.
     
  42. phantus

    phantus Stratics Legend
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2003
    Messages:
    8,369
    Likes Received:
    10
    I enjoy my small shard. The community is closer.

    If you want more people(one can only assume to fight) then ask for free xfers and incentive to xfer to medium population servers from low pop ones. Don't expect people to jump on board with something you want.
     
  43. NuSair

    NuSair Babbling Loonie
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 21, 2008
    Messages:
    2,989
    Likes Received:
    999
    Give me a customizible castle with the storage of the 5 houses (castle, keep, two 18x18 and a yew gate house) I have now, and I'd do it.
     
  44. Splup

    Splup Guest

    I don't care how they merge shards as long I get my items with me. But I really hope they would merger, cause shards being so empty is so sad.

    Now someone says "you can move to more populated shard". We only have 2 shards in Europa: Drachenfels and Europa, and both are pretty empty. I mainly PvP, and I do it with a mage so 140 ping isnt really an option... I would love to see Drachenfels and Europa merged.

    I wouldnt care losing my 16x16, but I know many people have feelings for their house which makes things more complicated.
     
  45. agpga

    agpga Guest

    what are you talking about the op is talking about merging 2 shards when did it become all of them
     
  46. Harb

    Harb Guest

    Gandie, I'll mostly avoid treading accross what's already been said, but I can think of few worse ideas than shard mergers, for "all of the above" reasons. One of the things I learned early on regarding UO, was that what entertains the population overall varies tremendously, so my personal "ruthers" were no more than that, my personal wants. But it's a mistake for anyone on the dev side to ignore your desires or anyone elses so long as they're not contradictory, and there are a couple posts above that speak to a solution.

    Following SA, it may be a worthwhile investment for dev to take a look at "common lands." These lands would be accessible from all shards, but unique/ tied to none of them. It would take some forethought and discussion, but aspects of play that collectively hold meaning to a significant many requiring greater population density could be included. PvP, at least in a portion of the "common land," would be a viable addition. But common land should also allow for tram ruleset play, probably most of the lands actually as that more closely follows the overall player base. I'd probably shy away from housing completely, but do suspect that some form of player towns, carefully implemented and maintained, may not be a bad addition provided facilities are not individually "owned" and player vendors are excluded. It may not be all that hard to implement, in theory at least it simply could be a "mirror" of existing lands. If nothing else, it would provide a "gauge" of player desires based on server load and may very much simplify EM type events.
     
  47. Sarphus

    Sarphus Guest

    Actually, he's using the term merge, which to most people means merging the maps and player communities.

    What he's talking about merging is xshard travel across 2 low-pop shards. That is what I understand him to be suggesting at least...
     
  48. Breeze64

    Breeze64 Seasoned Veteran
    Stratics Veteran Stratics Legend

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2003
    Messages:
    380
    Likes Received:
    4
    House do mean a lot to players! many have had there accounts for years & what about ones that have grandfathered account with more than one house.
    Do you really think they want to give them up?

    I have spent 6+ yrs to get my KEEP & CASTLE.
    placing house & waiting & waiting to aquire the space I needed for my houses.
    which are one of the few true rares let in the game.
    & no I do not want to have to give up what I work so hard to get.

    Maybe if you are so unhappy that your shard doesn't have enough players.
    then maybe you should move to another that has more players.
    How would you feel if they merged or closed your shard
    & you were the one out in the cold?? HMMM???
     
  49. Nylan

    Nylan Adventurer
    Stratics Veteran

    Joined:
    May 24, 2008
    Messages:
    97
    Likes Received:
    1
    I really wish that we would quit giving EA more bad ideas.

    If EA decided to something about the underpopulated shards they would not "Merge" shards they would only close them.
    From a financial point of view, if it is cheaper to run less shards, you close your most under populated ones.
    You would not invest more labor and possibly capital into making a "new" shard to transfer everyone to.

    When they decided to close a shard they would announce that as of a predetermined date Shard "X" will close.

    If they are tiring to appease their player base on the closings shard, they would set up some type of one way character transfer off the shard for established characters that would work the same as a transfer token, but maybe through a gate or some other means.
    And this would end when the shard was shut down.

    They would not flood the community with transfer tokens, this is still a pay to use service.

    And to answer your question about how attached players are to their houses.

    Would you want to leave behind a well placed house, a keep, a castle or even a Luna house?

    I have played for close to 10 years now and have never had more than a few million gold, but I did finally manage to get my trammel castle and just recently was able to place a keep next door on my second account.
    So yes, my housing does mean enough to me to leave the game rather than have to start over because a few people want a free shard transfer.
     
  50. Aboo

    Aboo Guest

    Agreed!

    Seems the people who keep mentioning it are those who, in my opinion, feel safe that they would NOT be the ones who would lose their homes.

    Again it is a VERY bad idea.