Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #21
    Epic! Pejo's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    C eh N eh D eh
    Posts
    1,555
    Quote Originally Posted by gee View Post
    You got no number to prove, neither do I.

    If that's so few people who would willingly transfer, why not allow them transfer off low pop realms for free?

    Blizzard won't do it because they are afraid it will be full-blown exodus gutting the already dead realms.
    Also, that is a temporary fix - connected realms is completely scalable and extendable, excellent engineering solution.

  2. #22
    Herald of the Titans Treeskee's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    ON, CA
    Posts
    2,771
    Quote Originally Posted by gee View Post
    You got no number to prove, neither do I.

    If that's so few people who would willingly transfer, why not allow them transfer off low pop realms for free?

    Blizzard won't do it because they are afraid it will be full-blown exodus gutting the already dead realms.
    Or because it would just make already overcrowded realms even worse. Connected realms is the easiest solution, I just wish they'd hurry up and get my realm connected so I could start raiding .

    Looks like 2 people beat me to it while I was tabbing around. D:

  3. #23
    The only problem with connected realms, is that we continue to have people like the OP spreading misinformation about it. No matter how much PR Blizzard puts out, some people just refuse to read, and thus misinformation will be spread.

    Connected realms is a realm merger, without the negative impacts of merging realms. It's a brilliant solution, that only someone who either can't read, or just likes to be negative would have a problem with it.
    Last edited by ablib; 2013-10-28 at 12:43 AM.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Pejo View Post
    Also, that is a temporary fix - connected realms is completely scalable and extendable, excellent engineering solution.
    How is connecting realms is better solution than keeping open transfer and let the players regulate server pop and locate to servers whose population is suitable to them?

    Free transfers is an "off-hands" approach. With connecting realms, they will have to do it themselves as server populations keep shrinking. It will cost them time and manpower to monitor populations, make decisions, and carry out the mergers. If they allow automatic transfers, they do not ever have to worry about anything.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by ablib View Post
    The only problem with connected realms, is that we continue to have people like the OP spreading misinformation about it. No matter how much PR Blizzard puts out, some people just refuse to read, and thus misinformation will be spread.

    Connected realms is a realm merger, without the negative impacts of merging realms. It's a brilliant solution, that only someone who either can't read, or just likes to be negative would have a problem with it.
    Not everybody has time to read Blizzard posts. He told what he understood and he asked a question. You don't have to go around blaming and insulting.

  5. #25
    Brewmaster Travio's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canuckistan
    Posts
    1,323
    Quote Originally Posted by gee View Post
    How is connecting realms is better solution than keeping open transfer and let the players regulate server pop and locate to servers whose population is suitable to them?

    Free transfers is an "off-hands" approach. With connecting realms, they will have to do it themselves as server populations keep shrinking. It will cost them time and manpower to monitor populations, make decisions, and carry out the mergers. If they allow automatic transfers, they do not ever have to worry about anything.
    Except the concept that some players would flock to one small group of servers, over inflating the population on them to the point of queues - which Blizzard would rather they didn't. Other players would refuse to leave their servers. This gets a best of both world's approach - you get more people to play with and don't have to leave your server. The man power necessary is rather limited; a handful of people can, once a week, make the decisions with the assistance of a computer program that flags realms with troubled populations. The connection is almost seamless; the only issue that I know was ever reported was an issue with mail during one recent connection that they fixed within two hours (and this is why they don't just connect everyone together quickly, so they can watch for problems and fix them).

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodasafa View Post
    I'm confused why Blizzard is connecting realms instead of condensing realms. Sure if they start removing realms then the appearance of a decline in players is more obvious, but anyone with half a brain can read between the lines here, connecting them shows the same thing.

    My point is while connecting realms helps with a population issue overall, it does not help individual realms feel like they are more populated. From my understanding Main Cities are not connected so the only connection is with Que's for dungeons/LFR/BG's/Arenas and the auction house market.

    Wouldn't a better solution be to fold lower pop realms into medium size ones to make them high pop?

    Also to avoid a realm getting too large and forcing que times, shouldn't a realms maximum population be around 75% to allow for alt creation and recruit a friend invites?

    Finally there needs to be a way to balance faction sizes to make for a healthy ratio. Perhaps by folding realms with a high Alliance pop into a realm with a high Horde pop?

    Don't get me wrong connecting realms is a good first step, but it needs to go farther and in a slightly different way to be really effective.

    Thoughts?
    My thoughts? You are clueless and started a thread crying about something you didn´t even spending 5 minutes reading about. Realms are COMPLETELY connected during the process. Main cities, dungeons, guilds.. all of it acts like a single server. The only difference between this and a server merger is that you don´t have to rename your character and guilds aren´t torn apart. Now tell me, why would they do a server merger if there are no benefits AT ALL to doing it that way.. NOT ONE.. and yet guilds would have to be destroyed and a lot of people would have to rename their characters.

    Again, please spend 5 minutes reading before starting threads.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Tya View Post
    Because merging realms has a horrific reputation and if they chose that path (despite realm coalescing being basically the same thing anyway), it would be heralded as the end of WoW across the gaming media scene.
    There are 3 main benefits to doing it this way. And these have been HUGE issues in games like Warhammer
    1. Character names
    2. Guilds broken up
    3. Returning players not knowing what happened to their characters.

    There is absolutely no benefit to doing mergers when it has those three problems and no bonuses.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Travio View Post
    Except the concept that some players would flock to one small group of servers, over inflating the population on them to the point of queues - which Blizzard would rather they didn't. Other players would refuse to leave their servers. This gets a best of both world's approach - you get more people to play with and don't have to leave your server. The man power necessary is rather limited; a handful of people can, once a week, make the decisions with the assistance of a computer program that flags realms with troubled populations. The connection is almost seamless; the only issue that I know was ever reported was an issue with mail during one recent connection that they fixed within two hours (and this is why they don't just connect everyone together quickly, so they can watch for problems and fix them).
    If there were free transfers, then some of those people who do not like overpopulated server would transfer off until population is low enough that people can login without queue. I believe we would end up with multiple near-full servers and some medium pop servers. Most importantly everybody would be in a server they are comfortable at.

    Free market imo.

  8. #28
    I am not playing WoW right now..not even bought Pandas..however.. Connecting realms is ..maybe even perfect solution? It has sooo many benefits ..even for the future..it's very nice way to merge servers at and the same time..it is allowing them to scale it as much as they want and is technically possible..maybe in two or three years we can have one or two huge realms? (for every continent of course)... that would be fantastic if you ask me..

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by gee View Post
    You got no number to prove, neither do I.

    If that's so few people who would willingly transfer, why not allow them transfer off low pop realms for free?

    Blizzard won't do it because they are afraid it will be full-blown exodus gutting the already dead realms.
    The proof is from Warhammer Online. Another game already failed at doing it, why would Blizzard do it the same way. Warhammer lost a huge number of players when they merged servers and guilds were destroyed, hijaked, along with players names etc. It was a huge nightmare on their forums for about a month. After seeing that, why would Blizzard repeat it.

    A wise man learns from his mistakes, a genius learns from the mistakes of others.

  10. #30
    Brewmaster Travio's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canuckistan
    Posts
    1,323
    Quote Originally Posted by gee View Post
    If there were free transfers, then some of those people who do not like overpopulated server would transfer off until population is low enough that people can login without queue. I believe we would end up with multiple near-full servers and some medium pop servers. Most importantly everybody would be in a server they are comfortable at.

    Free market imo.
    Overpopulated servers have had free transfers being offered to them since 5.4 came out. The queues continue to grow daily. People don't want to leave the servers, but more people want on those awesome servers. So the problem grows.

    So your belief has already proven to be false.

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Tya View Post
    Because merging realms has a horrific reputation and if they chose that path (despite realm coalescing being basically the same thing anyway), it would be heralded as the end of WoW across the gaming media scene.
    Well, the truth will come out eventually. They can't claim WoW is going strong when they have only 7.7M left, or in few years 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, KABOOM.

  12. #32
    Brewmaster Travio's Avatar
    15+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canuckistan
    Posts
    1,323
    Quote Originally Posted by gee View Post
    Well, the truth will come out eventually. They can't claim WoW is going strong when they have only 7.7M left, or in few years 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, KABOOM.
    7.7 million subscribers is still going strong when you compare it to other MMOs.

  13. #33
    Spam Assassin! MoanaLisa's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Tralfamadore
    Posts
    32,405
    Quote Originally Posted by gee View Post
    Blizzard won't do it because they are afraid it will be full-blown exodus gutting the already dead realms.
    More likely Blizzard is minimally protecting realms that are already full and have queues now.
    Last edited by MoanaLisa; 2013-10-28 at 01:14 AM.
    "...money's most powerful ability is to allow bad people to continue doing bad things at the expense of those who don't have it."

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Bodasafa View Post
    From my understanding Main Cities are not connected so the only connection is with Que's for dungeons/LFR/BG's/Arenas and the auction house market.
    I said from my understanding. If I was mistaken I would have gladly accepted someone letting me know I was wrong (without being a douche bag about it).

    I was posing a question, offering an idea or two. Nothing hostile on my end. I just wanted to have some discussion on it.

    So those of you coming at me can chill out.

    Anyway I appear to be wrong, fault admitted.

    I'm glad connecting realms merges the main cities and the rest, doing so does indeed sound like a good way to go, removing the name change/guild change issue.

    So I guess the CM's can delete this thread before anyone else gets all worked up because someone misunderstood something and must be a total waste of space that can't read exactly the right thing before posting.
    Last edited by Bodasafa; 2013-10-28 at 01:24 AM.

  15. #35
    i'm excited for connecting realms

  16. #36
    Merging realms causes problems with guilds and players that have the same names. Connecting realms does not have this issue.
    Grand Crusader Belloc <-- 6608 Endless Tank Proving Grounds score! (
    Dragonslayer Kooqu

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by gee View Post
    Well, the truth will come out eventually. They can't claim WoW is going strong when they have only 7.7M left, or in few years 5, 4, 3, 2, 1, KABOOM.
    LOL, You do realize that AOC, Warhammer SWTOR and a bunch of other games that came after WOW have already shutdown, or basically shutdown. AOC has 1 server in EU and 1 in USA. Warhammer is completely shutdown, SWTOR is free2play and closing servers anyway..

    Also, the truth is already out.. Blizzard releases their subscriber numbers every 3 months. It is absolutely stupid for people to claim that Blizzard is avoiding server mergers only because they want to keep sub losses a secret when they freakin announce the sub losses themselves.

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Azrile View Post
    The proof is from Warhammer Online. Another game already failed at doing it, why would Blizzard do it the same way. Warhammer lost a huge number of players when they merged servers and guilds were destroyed, hijaked, along with players names etc. It was a huge nightmare on their forums for about a month. After seeing that, why would Blizzard repeat it.

    A wise man learns from his mistakes, a genius learns from the mistakes of others.
    More likely from their own experience since Blizzard has been shutting down servers left and right in other regions. 25 Korean realms this year alone, there are only 9 left.

    http://www.wowprogress.com/realms/rank/kr
    Did you think we had forgotten? Did you think we had forgiven?

  19. #39
    High Overlord magicric's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by Azrile View Post
    LOL, You do realize that AOC, Warhammer SWTOR and a bunch of other games that came after WOW have already shutdown, or basically shutdown. AOC has 1 server in EU and 1 in USA. Warhammer is completely shutdown, SWTOR is free2play and closing servers anyway..

    Also, the truth is already out.. Blizzard releases their subscriber numbers every 3 months. It is absolutely stupid for people to claim that Blizzard is avoiding server mergers only because they want to keep sub losses a secret when they freakin announce the sub losses themselves.
    WoW probably has a lot less than 7.7M subscribers by now, they will release their sub numbers soon.
    SWTOR is probably the most lively i've seen since when it first came out, so please stop sounding stupid saying it has 'basically shutdown'. They are constantly releasing great content with space combat(off rails) 12v12 pvp coming in dec.
    No one really knows the reason why Blizzard waited so long for server mergers, i'm guessing it had something to do with the amount of money they make from server transfers as well as having to allocate time and money(resources) to get them connected.

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by gee View Post

    Not everybody has time to read Blizzard posts. He told what he understood and he asked a question. You don't have to go around blaming and insulting.

    There was nothing insulting in my post. It appears the OP falls under the category of can't (didn't) read, rather than being the negative type.

    There is nothing more insulting to your readers than to discuss a topic before taking the time to first educate yourself on said topic.

Posting Permissions

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