Poll: Shards?

[Splorf22]

So Noselacri made a post that I really like where he makes two good points. First, the problem with P1999 is too many damn players. The players cannot manage the server ala Sirken because the only thing they can do to fix the problem is try to grief other people off - which is exactly what has happened on numerous occasions. Second, he proposes a solution that I have not heard suggested before called shards which I think is the best solution I have heard yet.

The basic idea is to split the server into multiple servers and allow /movelog, but only the high-end zones. Each guild can only exist on one shard. If you are in a global zone (all the low/mid level zones like Qeynos or East Commonlands or Mistmoore) you could find players of all guilds leveling up together and wearing and trading gear obtained in any of the various shards. However, whenever you zone into one of the sharded zones (zones like Sebilis or Sky) the server checks your shard flag and moves you to the appropriate copy, exactly as if you were playing on a separate server.

The key point here is that this is not instances. They aren't created on demand. You'll share your high-level shard zones with several hundred other players and all of the usual negotiation and sharing and global world nature of EQ will apply. Let's say for argument's sake that we make three shards which I shall call A, B, and C, and after a month or two we end up with Shard A: TMO, Azure Guard, Europa, Shard B: FE, Taken, The A-Team, BDA, Shard C: Full Circle, IB, Divinity, Rapture. Well to me that looks a lot like a classic EQ server: each shard has 3-4 high-level guilds who can and will engage in the competition that the staff loves so much. The key difference is that the staff actually can just turn off variance and say "you handle it" because with a reasonable number of players per shard the players don't have to fight like dogs for one or two spawns.

Anyway I seriously doubt this system would ever be implemented because it would be quite a bit of work to do (certainly far more than the simulated patch days) but I like it because I think it cuts right to the heart of the problem.

[Fountree]

The more players the better in my eyes. Problem is not too many players, it's too much time between content releases, which leads to a glut of high end players and items. Another problem is the fact it's the 2nd time around and people know the game very well now as opposed to the classic trilogy on live. Interesting idea, but no I wouldn't support something like that.

I actually think the server is relatively chill and peaceful at the moment and thriving in most areas. Guess I'm in the minority?

[Splorf22]

Originally Posted by Fountree [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The more players the better in my eyes. Problem is not too many players, it's too much time between content releases, which leads to a glut of high end players and items. Another problem is the fact it's the 2nd time around and people know the game very well now as opposed to the classic trilogy on live. Interesting idea, but no I wouldn't support something like that.

Oh I don't think we have too many players in absolute terms. I believe the Live EQ servers had 2000 players per server when we have 1000. The problem is that our players are inordinately concentrated in a very small number of high-end zones, for exactly the reasons you mentioned: knowledge and time between content releases. So if we rebooted the server this kind of thing might not be necessary. But given where we are now, when Velious comes out there are going to be 1000 people with L60 accounts playing. You and TMO might not get all the goodies then [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[falkun]

I like the idea that the server can dynamically increase in size based on the relative population (low-mid levels are 1-server, but high level areas are split into shards).

Playing Devil's advocate, what happens to Sebilis when Velious releases? I'm assuming it'll be less crowded, does it then stay sharded and I can't group with my TMO friends in Sebilis because we're on different shards?

What about mid-level, overpopulated zones like Mistmoore? That zone really only supports about 3-4 groups, and everyone in their 20-30s loves it there. Why not add a shard for that zone?

Its a non-Classic mechanic, and while interesting, I cannot endorse.

[sanforce]

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

TMO might not get all the goodies then [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

TMO has never gotten all of the goodies. They get most of the goodies because they have put them self into a position to do so. Shards are not classic, the server staff would never support it, dumb idea all around.

[Splorf22]

Well I think shards actually are extremely classic. What is not classic is having 1000 60+ toons with epics on a Kunark server.

But it definitely seems most people don't agree with me on this one.

[Nocte]

Any time you add the "Bush knocked down the towers" as an option, your poll isn't going to be taken very seriously.

[pharmakos]

bad idea IMO. sharded sebilis? no thanks. i'm still doing EXP groups, would like to have more group options.

[Swish]

Again we'd be moving from Kunark era content to "custom server"...and "custom server" doesn't recruit new players very well in comparison. While it would be a solution for those of us who've levelled at least one character into the 50s, we'd find ourselves in that Pandora's box situation of "we allowed X, so can we have Y?"

I don't like the top guilds hoarding loot and locking smaller guilds out of CT/Inny/etc spawns but this idea (along with many more before it) seems to have a sub-text of "how can we stop big-time raiding guilds holding a monopoly on spawns?" In essence, those that want to get involved with that kind of raiding mentality are mostly in TMO/etc anyway. Casual guilds/players have to take what's left.

I still have visions of a P99 blue v2.0 when Velious reaches its last patch here, done accurately in terms of the timeline.

Certainties though include... you'll always have raiding guilds, you'll always have twinks, someone else will always have more shiny pixels than you.

[Gadwen]

I'm torn between option 1 and 3.