Err no he means bugged inactive houses that have stood forever and it seems will stand forever more...at least 25% of exsisting housing..mainly the old classic styles including many keeps and castles [END] whatever...
-
Hail Guest! We're looking for Community Content Contribuitors to Stratics. If you would like to write articles, fan fiction, do guild or shard event recaps, it's simple. Find out how in this thread: Community Contributions
-
Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
-
Hail Guest!, Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
-
Hail Guest! Please read the new announcement concerning the upcoming addition to Stratics. You can find the announcement Here!
Post Your Ideas Here to Repopulate Shards (Sorry Not Atlantic)
- Thread starter Nails Warstein
- Start date
- Watchers 14
- Status
*sighs*Err no he means bugged inactive houses that have stood forever and it seems will stand forever more...at least 25% of exsisting housing..mainly the old classic styles including many keeps and castles [END] whatever...
In context it appeared to me he meant houses belonging to people who are paying for their accounts (and I guess who "bounce" between accounts) but do not log in often.
If you were right then he would not have needed to specify that getting rid of the houses would be a "sacrifice" to current players. If you were right he would not have needed to suggest shard mergers because I do not think the evidence supports merging shards being the only way, or really even a terribly effective way, to get rid of that housing. If you are indeed right about his intent, then there's some ambiguities in that post.
-Galen's player
*Sighs back*
Quite simply and very easily....The answer to the OPs original question is....''The Taboo subject ''....that people cant talk about and discuss because the ''do-gooders'' of our beloved game get the post locked by doing so....
Sad really.....So we continue as we are... forever till the end .....With One shard bursting at the seams and 10 limping along nicely and 10 totally dead [whatever]
Quite simply and very easily....The answer to the OPs original question is....''The Taboo subject ''....that people cant talk about and discuss because the ''do-gooders'' of our beloved game get the post locked by doing so....
Sad really.....So we continue as we are... forever till the end .....With One shard bursting at the seams and 10 limping along nicely and 10 totally dead [whatever]
Last edited:
No need to argue. It's rough making sacrifices. My point is exactly what Galen is demonstrating... Current players and vets and paying customers will have to be willing to make sacrifices in order for players to come back. Plain and simple. I know it's rough, but there ya go.
I capably have demonstrated that the dichotomy you've set up is a false one. Indeed I could think of fewer things less conducive to getting new players than by saying "one day you'll be vets and then we'll treat you in this manner too! We'll take stuff away from you on the forlorn hope of maybe getting a new player or two!"
I also can think of few, if any, good results from what you propose, which is in essence blowing up shards and putting new ones in at the same time. Even if one assumes that shard blowups are a good idea, and they are not, the system you propose folds into itself. Destroy shard, make new one. Enough of that and we've got ourselves right back to where we've started. Do it only part of the way and we've got ourselves very near to where we started. Either way, the pattern is clear.
The way to get more returning vets, keep current players interested, and maybe even get a new player or three, is by content. Slow and logical modification of the existing areas (good examples: Shame and Wrong; bad example: Despise; mixed to negative example: Covetous) (permanent content). Continue EM events (temporary content of limited scope). Global scenarios, 2 to 4 a year or 1 long scenario lasting an entire year (temporary content of grand scope).
What you propose will not have the positive effects you have imagined for it and will have negative effects you refuse to acknowledge.
-Galen's player
Last edited:
PS: And this is to say nothing of the obvious negative effects of merging shards to begin with, which I've dealt with elsewhere in this thread and in a depressing number of other threads. These obvious effects include housing but go beyond that.
To you it doesn't. To me... a member of the population we're talking about... it does.
I want to buy shardshields from origin store!
If Shard Shields were available at the store (which they should be because they are the most unbalancing item in the history of UO) then I'd play on my home shard. Shard Shields are the most ridiculous item of all time by a landslide.
I would love to play on my home shard where I have a better connection as opposed to Atlantic.
The problem is I can't buy or sell items on my home shard so I have little choice but to play on Atlantic if I want to buy and sell items, which is what I enjoy doing.
90% of the conversations you see in Ultima Online are "Buying X or selling Y". It's a huge part of the game.
If I farm items (which I like to do) there is little incentive if I can't sell them hence I'm forced to play on Atlantic.
Transferring items off my home shard to Atlantic makes little sense as overhead involved with transferring items is way too high.
If I had access to a Shard Shield then I would play on my home shard and transfer my bounty to Atlantic once a month to liquidate.
I didnt read all the posts (ill try to do that tonight) so maybe someone else already posted it, but I think that EM event items should be shard-bound.
Atlantic has been draining all these event items from the rest of the shards and since the biggest % of UO gold is on atlantic, alot of ppl are xferring to atlantic to sell items just because its quicker to sell there and more profitable. Sadly, shard shields played a big role on that too because before shard shields the UO merchants had to think carefully when to buy then xfer to another shard then sell because the price of the xfer token was part of the equation to get profits. Now, anyone that has shard shields can just go to Atlantic and sell the items for more than what he could get on their home shard.
The results are quite easy to see for yourself, just do a search for "token" on the well-known search site and you will see there are 332 tokens for sale on atlantic and 2 on oceania. Big difference, right? And I almost forgot about Origin, 1 token on that shard but its a heritage token so not sure if we should count that lol.
Aprox a month ago, a guildie transferred to Atlantic because he couldnt find barbed kits on my home shard for weeks. A week later he moved the rest of his developed chars to Atlantic because he was able to find almost any item for sale and that did open alot of possibilities to him to build suits for their chars, try different playstyles, etc.
If all the gold/items/event-items are being transferred to Atlantic, then the players will follow. No one likes to play on a shard where you cant stone a skill because no one is selling a soul frag token.
Atlantic has been draining all these event items from the rest of the shards and since the biggest % of UO gold is on atlantic, alot of ppl are xferring to atlantic to sell items just because its quicker to sell there and more profitable. Sadly, shard shields played a big role on that too because before shard shields the UO merchants had to think carefully when to buy then xfer to another shard then sell because the price of the xfer token was part of the equation to get profits. Now, anyone that has shard shields can just go to Atlantic and sell the items for more than what he could get on their home shard.
The results are quite easy to see for yourself, just do a search for "token" on the well-known search site and you will see there are 332 tokens for sale on atlantic and 2 on oceania. Big difference, right? And I almost forgot about Origin, 1 token on that shard but its a heritage token so not sure if we should count that lol.
Aprox a month ago, a guildie transferred to Atlantic because he couldnt find barbed kits on my home shard for weeks. A week later he moved the rest of his developed chars to Atlantic because he was able to find almost any item for sale and that did open alot of possibilities to him to build suits for their chars, try different playstyles, etc.
If all the gold/items/event-items are being transferred to Atlantic, then the players will follow. No one likes to play on a shard where you cant stone a skill because no one is selling a soul frag token.
Shard Merger should have happened years ago. Theres no reason why they cannot offer those who will cry a house in space somewhere.
One house per shard needs to happen for sure. The only reason it was ever taken from us was because people couldn't get a house on their home shard. Thats not an issue now. I mean LS, GL, Chessy, Pacific, Cats are all dead now. They used to become of the top servers. Its obvious that people have migrated to ATL so that they could be part of a larger UO community.
The shard only spawns could be great but probably only if they allow a moongate of sort where you can just select servers. That likely wont ever happen though because now that EA seems to have finally gotten their **** together with the dupes they will be selling transfer tokens again.
Well yes, PVMers prefer dead servers a lot of the times because they can do spawns without interruption a lot easier.
hmmm maybe like the solution I posted. Have EM's start a 3-6 month PvP event on the smaller shards.
Well what I mean is that the largest poplation of PvPers are on ATL. They really don't care about spawning but just to PvP. Yes they raid and take spawns but that is how they make their gold. Selling PS such but they prefer to PvP more.
Raiding a spawn with a group of pvmers already swarmed with a mob and fighting them isn't pvp. That is having the upper hand and a bad mechanic design from pevious devs. Really don't know how that is considerd PvP in any terms. Must of been thought by a dev that never PvP'd.
Having PvP events on smaller shards isn't a bad idea though. Just has to have a really good reason to entice pvper away from their home shard.
Raiding a spawn with a group of pvmers already swarmed with a mob and fighting them isn't pvp. That is having the upper hand and a bad mechanic design from pevious devs. Really don't know how that is considerd PvP in any terms. Must of been thought by a dev that never PvP'd.
Having PvP events on smaller shards isn't a bad idea though. Just has to have a really good reason to entice pvper away from their home shard.
Last edited:
I've seen some games having similar problems....starting off with way too many servers.
Most of them merge servers, or delete servers and allow the "affected" people to have a free transfer.
Of course in UO's case it's pretty difficult with the housing...so i'd suggest allow people from very low populated servers to transfer all their chars for free....they only need to sacrafice their house on their old shard.
-Mina-
Most of them merge servers, or delete servers and allow the "affected" people to have a free transfer.
Of course in UO's case it's pretty difficult with the housing...so i'd suggest allow people from very low populated servers to transfer all their chars for free....they only need to sacrafice their house on their old shard.
-Mina-
I think you are all over thinking it. It may be as simple as a guild, group, or single player who offers a reason for a new player to join their server. Take NEW2 of Siege, they help new players get on their feet, get a little starter gear, and just general guidance for survival. I plan on trying a similar approach on my new shard, which has to be the lowest pop us shard we have. A little kindness and generosity might be enough to get the ball rolling for some players. I have given up on Atlantic for home shard status and just use it as a money making source, all my time and effort goes into Origin now.
Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2
Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2
Hey Skunk. I went to Siege last night during peak hours. No one in Brit, Luna, Yew Felucca, or that Japanese named city people like to craft at around the bank. So it didn't work. Great idea though...
Chessy guild helped me out a TON. I've got a full armor set (Virtue) and Soul Stealer weapon. And an 18x18 Spot. It kept me there even when I tested the waters at Atlanta and saw just what you all are talking about. I did find a log cabin sized plot on Atlanta, but it's in Felucca and I only know it's a valid spot because I had it more than a decade ago and it's not obvious.
Great idea though...Chessy guild helped me out a TON. I've got a full armor set (Virtue) and Soul Stealer weapon. And an 18x18 Spot. It kept me there even when I tested the waters at Atlanta and saw just what you all are talking about. I did find a log cabin sized plot on Atlanta, but it's in Felucca and I only know it's a valid spot because I had it more than a decade ago and it's not obvious.
If this would have happened then UO would not be here today.
#1 I enjoy my low population shard because everybody know everybody
#2 Take away what I have worked for for 15 yrs and you will lose a multi-account player with no one to replace my money to EA.
#3 Having all these servers cost the same money for EA as it would having 2 west coast and 2 east coast servers so it saves EA nothing and will cost them plenty from all the accounts that get closed.
Other games that have merged servers have nothing, I REPEAT NOTHING, compaired to UO. Shard mergers solve nothing, I REPEAT NOTHING.
CLOSE DOWN THE MOST POPULATED SHARDS AND FORCE THEM TO THE LOW POPULATED SHARDS. PROBLEM SOLVED.
Well Siege is a special case with its own rule set. You have to get in general and find trustworthy people. I think this may work on production shards, I will test this over the next couple weeks on Origin and see.Hey Skunk. I went to Siege last night during peak hours. No one in Brit, Luna, Yew Felucca, or that Japanese named city people like to craft at around the bank. So it didn't work.
Chessy guild helped me out a TON. I've got a full armor set (Virtue) and Soul Stealer weapon. And an 18x18 Spot. It kept me there even when I tested the waters at Atlanta and saw just what you all are talking about. I did find a log cabin sized plot on Atlanta, but it's in Felucca and I only know it's a valid spot because I had it more than a decade ago and it's not obvious.
Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2
bang on the button here ...but ive got em..and i love em...but yes i think everyone should enjoy these game breaking items...
THEY ARE BEYOND BELIEF....[whatever]...
This is a step in the right direction...even making a area in malas say that u cant place on now be available for affected people to even place the castle they leave behind...lets be honest some shards are 50/100 strong and they own 2-3 castles and 1 luna house each...[sorted]...[whatever]...
Hi RayHey Skunk. I went to Siege last night during peak hours. No one in Brit, Luna, Yew Felucca, or that Japanese named city people like to craft at around the bank. So it didn't work.
Chessy guild helped me out a TON. I've got a full armor set (Virtue) and Soul Stealer weapon. And an 18x18 Spot. It kept me there even when I tested the waters at Atlanta and saw just what you all are talking about. I did find a log cabin sized plot on Atlanta, but it's in Felucca and I only know it's a valid spot because I had it more than a decade ago and it's not obvious.
We are there but you won't find us at the banks and you won't find us crafting in town as we do have thieves, who will have hard keeping their fingers of a crafters backpack.
We are all over the shard, hunting or we are rafting in our shops.
If you login to gen chat and say hello, you will find some of us.
I suspect content is king. Coming in a close second would be pvp population/activity. I'd try some subtle changes.
First, I'd implement a house placement / decoration cost modifier based on shard population. Calculate the shard population based on unique logins greater than 10 minutes per day over the course of a couple weeks. The lowest populated shard could cost 1.0 the current cost to place / decorate. The highest populated shard would cost 2.0 the current costs.
Second, I'd implement roving content with reward items that had special properties only active on the shard where the item was acquired. Make the content available on lesser populated shards for periods of time, then move to the greater populated shards for a lesser amount of time. Finally, let it be active on Atlantic / highest populated shard(s) for a very brief window.
Third, I'd revamp the void pool or despise vendor. On Atlantic you'd keep the ephemeral garbage. On the least populated shards the rewards would lose that property, but only when they are kept on that shard. You could also add in some additional incentives like a power scroll that cannot be transferred to another player or some such unique rewards.
First, I'd implement a house placement / decoration cost modifier based on shard population. Calculate the shard population based on unique logins greater than 10 minutes per day over the course of a couple weeks. The lowest populated shard could cost 1.0 the current cost to place / decorate. The highest populated shard would cost 2.0 the current costs.
Second, I'd implement roving content with reward items that had special properties only active on the shard where the item was acquired. Make the content available on lesser populated shards for periods of time, then move to the greater populated shards for a lesser amount of time. Finally, let it be active on Atlantic / highest populated shard(s) for a very brief window.
Third, I'd revamp the void pool or despise vendor. On Atlantic you'd keep the ephemeral garbage. On the least populated shards the rewards would lose that property, but only when they are kept on that shard. You could also add in some additional incentives like a power scroll that cannot be transferred to another player or some such unique rewards.
Lord Nabin
High Council Sage - Greater Sosaria
Professional
Supporter
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Glorious Lord
Ok How about we do this Old Testament Style and every seven years you have to transfer back to the original shard you logged onto for a Census. Staying at an in or a relatives house for the event and story arc.
lol I can just see it now as I head back to Napa Valley
lol I can just see it now as I head back to Napa ValleyVery depressing to see how quickly a post seeking to brainstorm about incentives to boost shards became a means to shout for some to take shards away.
There's basically no substance behind that proposal, as I've demonstrated, repeatedly, in this and other threads.
-Galen's player
There's basically no substance behind that proposal, as I've demonstrated, repeatedly, in this and other threads.
-Galen's player
Your demonstrations haven't persuaded me though and I think our two opinions are mutually exclusive. You can't have one without the other.
You either want to keep your stuff the way it is or you want more players.
You either want to keep your stuff the way it is or you want more players.
Victim of Siege
Grand Poobah
Professional
Governor
Alumni
Stratics Veteran
Stratics Legend
UNLEASHED
Made you a few barrels on Siege a few months back, look me up when you are thirsty
Our anlayses are indeed mutually exclusive, but I think that your argument lacks foundation and think mine does not.
-Galen's player
Reducing the number of shards DOES NOT mean more players for UO, in FACT you will lose players. All it MIGHT do is make the fewer shards look more populated where in fact the total population of UO will not go up but could go down.
*Sighs back*
Quite simply and very easily....The answer to the OPs original question is....''The Taboo subject ''....that people cant talk about and discuss because the ''do-gooders'' of our beloved game get the post locked by doing so....
Sad really.....So we continue as we are... forever till the end .....With One shard bursting at the seams and 10 limping along nicely and 10 totally dead [whatever]
again....
* Well made Free To Play scheme up and running for UO.
* Shard they can credibly sell as"classic"in terms of ruleset, world, feel.
Sadly former at least would require so much push, recourses and engine tweaks that it takes much imagination and optimism to see it happen:l
The combination of these two is only thing I can imagine bringing anything resembling a real crowd of new(=/old) players anywhere. Free vendors, X-fer tweaks, etc etc is just preaching to crowd. It is stuff potentially exiting for people who remain more or less tapped to UO as it is.
It is saddening to know Ultima Online, to this very day, has a highly lively and vibrant pool of people playing it. It's just that such significant majority of these people don't come anywhere near "OSI" I have always found it odd how nothing was ever done to try and redeem this.
* Shard they can credibly sell as"classic"in terms of ruleset, world, feel.
Sadly former at least would require so much push, recourses and engine tweaks that it takes much imagination and optimism to see it happen:l
The combination of these two is only thing I can imagine bringing anything resembling a real crowd of new(=/old) players anywhere. Free vendors, X-fer tweaks, etc etc is just preaching to crowd. It is stuff potentially exiting for people who remain more or less tapped to UO as it is.
It is saddening to know Ultima Online, to this very day, has a highly lively and vibrant pool of people playing it. It's just that such significant majority of these people don't come anywhere near "OSI" I have always found it odd how nothing was ever done to try and redeem this.
Last edited:
But... it COULD make those shards more FUN. I've played for 15 years & if I could have all the WEST coast players on 1 shard I'd do it. This game is only fun bc of the other people around you so without them.....
^ Most everybody playing UO is at least somewhat interested/worried about amount of people still playing.
Beyond that, in terms of in-game experience, only thing that matters to anyone is how full the shard(s) we play in are. I too believe finding ways to make community bit more centered would bring much more life and fun, yas. Of course,thanks to housing it'd be very difficult feat to manage. I can't think of many ways to do this.
....If we were ever to get new expansion with new land mass, I should like to think it is a cross shard world shared by every single player no matter his " real" home shard.
Beyond that, in terms of in-game experience, only thing that matters to anyone is how full the shard(s) we play in are. I too believe finding ways to make community bit more centered would bring much more life and fun, yas. Of course,thanks to housing it'd be very difficult feat to manage. I can't think of many ways to do this.
....If we were ever to get new expansion with new land mass, I should like to think it is a cross shard world shared by every single player no matter his " real" home shard.
Last edited:
institute punk buster an make all lands felucca based.
there is rampant cheating on atl pvp wise now with no regard and I mean no regard for repercussions.
seems like uo's biggest populations were pre trammel, so go back to that.
make faction items easily attainable again so pvp'rs can again build suits and compete on the quiet shards.
there is rampant cheating on atl pvp wise now with no regard and I mean no regard for repercussions.
seems like uo's biggest populations were pre trammel, so go back to that.
make faction items easily attainable again so pvp'rs can again build suits and compete on the quiet shards.
bingo....1 shard maybe 2..would host the lot
Those are your opinions and have absolutely no FACT to support them. Just because you like to play on crowded shards does not mean everybody playing UO does. If that were the case then Pac would be like Alt on the West Coast and it is not.
Last edited:
I see comments on how people will quit in droves if a shard merger happened..I say FALSE..maybe a few maybe even 100 but you "aren't" losing much other than your pixel home! I'm not saying merge all east coast servers to ATL! No Atl will also be deleted! Don't get things twisted! A USE-1 Server and a USW-1 server are in order BIG Time! People come they see..they leave..population is a huge turn off!
Sieges excuse is..you just can't see us but we are there..I'll always love that line! What about chessy,la,ls,Sonoma,baja,cats,drach,origin,napa,Oceania,PAC? Who at peaks can maybe field 2-3 small to decent sized guilds..some have zero competition all together! I'm glad you enjoy your small community and your uncontested champ spawns..and all the afk scripting you can handle as you pile it into the ATL market! I'm not saying doomsday is approaching because well we are 15 years in almost 16..and the pop gets smaller..the dev team gets smaller the content is fewer and further apart..there needs to be a big change on getting people together..NOT for your case but for everyone's..the less people per shard the worse for the game..and heck who knows if a merge of some sort happens you won't have to just send the new players to
ATL they could actually pick based on time some again and not need lowerping to sufficiently PvP anymore..the game will cease to exist with less players! PERIOD! Research your free shards now nay-sayers! It's the inevitable..
Sieges excuse is..you just can't see us but we are there..I'll always love that line! What about chessy,la,ls,Sonoma,baja,cats,drach,origin,napa,Oceania,PAC? Who at peaks can maybe field 2-3 small to decent sized guilds..some have zero competition all together! I'm glad you enjoy your small community and your uncontested champ spawns..and all the afk scripting you can handle as you pile it into the ATL market! I'm not saying doomsday is approaching because well we are 15 years in almost 16..and the pop gets smaller..the dev team gets smaller the content is fewer and further apart..there needs to be a big change on getting people together..NOT for your case but for everyone's..the less people per shard the worse for the game..and heck who knows if a merge of some sort happens you won't have to just send the new players to
ATL they could actually pick based on time some again and not need lowerping to sufficiently PvP anymore..the game will cease to exist with less players! PERIOD! Research your free shards now nay-sayers! It's the inevitable..
This game is labeled as an MMO. That means MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER. There is nothing massive about nearly any of the shards populations and I don't think there's much multiplayer going on on these smaller shards. People who say they like their small community or like to solo spawns are ignoring the original purpose of the game IMO. People saying they don't like shard mergers cuz they like their small community, that's what guilds are for. Your sub community can exist within a larger one. You don't like the larger gen chat turn it off, again that's why guilds and parties exist.
^ It will never happen. It'd hurt and enrage community too severly. Owning property that actually feels yours is one of the biggest (if not THE biggest) charm UO has left. Stripping people from their precious property and 10+++ years worth of memories would ensure mass quitting. Even tho it'd ofc make the remaining server more busy, move in itself wouldn't bring many new players to UO. It would most assuredly banish a huge amount. People who mainly live for PvP are pretty much only ones who wouldn't be much affected and disappointed...at least not until they get to experience joys of cross Atlantic Lag. : p
Way I see it, there are only two merges that are even remotely realistic:
* Next expansion ( haha ) introducing a new land mass that is cross shard and shaered by every single player, no matter which shard he originates from.
* ' Soft Merge ' Devs start handing out free X-fer tokens and start applying some "passive pressure" for ppl to move. ie " Here is a list for Shards you might wanna migrate to!" etc. Obviously latter has number of severe issues. Former would be very cool though. And quite doable, I'd imagine. Likely? Naah.
Hmmm....Perhaps a new old world? 1:1 copies of Tram and Fel (or Malas and Fel rather) released that are x-shard in nature. This would enable devs to focus on technical side of it all. Dungeons, monsters, lands are already there, so when it comes to actual game content, initial phase of it could be a simple ctrl-c+ctrl-v. Latter being bit of a simplification, I'm well aware. I wonder if this has been considered by the devs. I wonder if it is possible, technically. In this version of reality, I can kinda imagine person doing hunting and housing in old home server and PvP, banksitting, vendors, LFG and shopping on new server. It isn't an ugly picture.
Way I see it, there are only two merges that are even remotely realistic:
* Next expansion ( haha
) introducing a new land mass that is cross shard and shaered by every single player, no matter which shard he originates from.* ' Soft Merge ' Devs start handing out free X-fer tokens and start applying some "passive pressure" for ppl to move. ie " Here is a list for Shards you might wanna migrate to!" etc. Obviously latter has number of severe issues. Former would be very cool though. And quite doable, I'd imagine. Likely? Naah.
Hmmm....Perhaps a new old world? 1:1 copies of Tram and Fel (or Malas and Fel rather) released that are x-shard in nature. This would enable devs to focus on technical side of it all. Dungeons, monsters, lands are already there, so when it comes to actual game content, initial phase of it could be a simple ctrl-c+ctrl-v. Latter being bit of a simplification, I'm well aware. I wonder if this has been considered by the devs. I wonder if it is possible, technically. In this version of reality, I can kinda imagine person doing hunting and housing in old home server and PvP, banksitting, vendors, LFG and shopping on new server. It isn't an ugly picture.
Last edited:
You don't MERGE shards, you PAIR them. You take the highest populated server and link it to the lowest. Second highest to second lowest and so on. You allow free transfers (or movement with gates) between server pairs. You allow 1 house per server pair per account. This would spread out the population while at the same time keeping them together. You would still need xfer tokens to go between different server pairs (for those arguing they wouldn't do it because of the bottom line it would probably effect it less than shard shields). No one loses their house, and people get a chance at better housing.
Last edited:
That'd be cool. Why would you settle with'pairs' tho? If you have the tech to do that between 2 shards.. you can do it with 4, 6,all I recon. (With some amount of sanity having to be there.. Language barrier between Japan and rest etc.)
You want the biggest turn off in this game and ALT is by far the worse. Listen to all the so-called ADULTS in Chat Chan. Why the hell would any new player stay around after hearing that all day, every day. Tell the children to grow up. Why would anybody want to listen to that on the most populated shards. Next you will say dont listen, BS, tell the little kiddies to have some respect for other people. Make your own chan, guess what, thier need for others to hear is so great that they follow where the most people can hear all thier BS.
To keep it simple, not dilute it too much, and preserve the income from xfer tokens. If you link more or all then it defeats the purpose and would be akin to just saying free xfers for all!
I fail to see how having a house on every shard will repopulate the other shards. You can only play one shard at a time right? Population means people, not housing.
I'm not saying its a bad idea, id love to have a house on each shard. I just prefer being a shard with more people rather than lots of houses.
I'm not saying its a bad idea, id love to have a house on each shard. I just prefer being a shard with more people rather than lots of houses.
Last edited:
What practical purpose does closing shards serve? People can already move to a busier shard any time they want. And how does closing a shard boost the overall population? All you are doing is moving players around, probably losing something during the whole mess. All it seems to do is annoy one group of players simply to artificially inflate the population of other shards.
And then there's the whole logistics of the thing. I don't mean housing and belongings and all that. I mean for the actual players involved. Anyone with a reasonable sized guild may have quite a few active people and possibly a player town. First everyone has to decide what shard they want to move to - and they may not all agree - and then you have to inform everyone, move them, found a new guild and find a place to put some housing. If you had a player town then that is gone with no chance of getting that back (because land is quickly disappearing due to the influx of other refugees) and you probably also have to deal with other players price gouging the newcomers for housing spots (do you seriously think that certain elements of the community won't seek to capitalise on the closure of another shard which will be announced well in advance and give them time to prepare?).
The solution requires more players, not shuffling existing ones around.
And then there's the whole logistics of the thing. I don't mean housing and belongings and all that. I mean for the actual players involved. Anyone with a reasonable sized guild may have quite a few active people and possibly a player town. First everyone has to decide what shard they want to move to - and they may not all agree - and then you have to inform everyone, move them, found a new guild and find a place to put some housing. If you had a player town then that is gone with no chance of getting that back (because land is quickly disappearing due to the influx of other refugees) and you probably also have to deal with other players price gouging the newcomers for housing spots (do you seriously think that certain elements of the community won't seek to capitalise on the closure of another shard which will be announced well in advance and give them time to prepare?).
The solution requires more players, not shuffling existing ones around.
- Status