Character Name Policy -- Thirty Day Notice!
By
0zymandous,
Posted on: 2007-07-31 15:59 in News, Events and Announcement Discussion
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, I don't doubt it for a second. There are people who will do ANYTHING to be a pain.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well there is nothing stopping them from getting a name and levelling to 6. So this won't effect that at all. If someone is such a malcontent that they camp names to be jerks (which in my opinion would be pretty useless since you never know if anyone even cares or gets upset by your griefing) then they will take the time to get their name holders to lvl 6
[/ QUOTE ]
True. As I say, fixing that kind of thing (which I expect is rare) is possibly unfeasable.
[ QUOTE ]
<qr>
Ex is correct. We datamined how many names would get freed up by doing the purge at every level. After level 5, the amount of names freed up drops noticably on every server. There are a LOT of names being "camped" by inactive accounts on characters under level 5.
Sure, it doesn't take a lot of effort to get past level 5. But in the case of name campers, it looks like they didn't even put in that amount of effort on those characters. They simply made a level 1 character with the name and called it a day, or played a tad and got a level or 2.
[/ QUOTE ]
and thats part of the problem going forward...lots of active players who camped names...all they need to do now is get those camped to level 6....I'd really really really like to see a level 20.....
Just because someone thought of the name first is reason for screwing them I guess.
After 21 pages of this thread, has anyone gone back to reread the part that says that this will only be applied to 'inactive' accounts (where 'inactive' means 'not paid for for 90 days')?
If someone has a level 1 character with a name that they're camping, they have to keep -paying- for the right to use that name.
What's the problem?
[ QUOTE ]
Just because someone thought of the name first is reason for screwing them I guess.
[/ QUOTE ]
Uhhh.... No. There's no screwing of anyone going on with this. Only inactive accounts are affected. If the account is inactive, they're not playing, so they lose nothing (unless they come back, but this pointhas been belaboured ad nauseam). It has nothing to do with who thought of what, when.
[ QUOTE ]
After 21 pages of this thread, has anyone gone back to reread the part that says that this will only be applied to 'inactive' accounts (where 'inactive' means 'not paid for for 90 days')?
If someone has a level 1 character with a name that they're camping, they have to keep -paying- for the right to use that name.
What's the problem?
[/ QUOTE ]
Thank you for bringing the point back home! 
[ QUOTE ]
Uhhh.... No. There's no screwing of anyone going on with this. Only inactive accounts are affected. If the account is inactive, they're not playing, so they lose nothing (unless they come back, but this pointhas been belaboured ad nauseam). It has nothing to do with who thought of what, when.
[/ QUOTE ]
There is no guarantee that the ubername of enlightenment will become available, And people demanding that the lvl be changed when the devs said explicitly that there would be diminishing returns above lvl 6 are just being doom seeders over a very non doom issue.
I am not pointing fingers at any individuals here, I am simply stating that a lot of these posts are raving for stricter policies that would indeed effect me, as I am new, have many low level alts, and am prone to deactivating my accounts for several months at a time due to rl concerns or simple boredom.
So yeah, if I thought of the name first, I would be getting punished by having it stripped from me if these heavy handed policies were enforced.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Uhhh.... No. There's no screwing of anyone going on with this. Only inactive accounts are affected. If the account is inactive, they're not playing, so they lose nothing (unless they come back, but this pointhas been belaboured ad nauseam). It has nothing to do with who thought of what, when.
[/ QUOTE ]
There is no guarantee that the ubername of enlightenment will become available, And people demanding that the lvl be changed when the devs said explicitly that there would be diminishing returns above lvl 6 are just being doom seeders over a very non doom issue.
I am not pointing fingers at any individuals here, I am simply stating that a lot of these posts are raving for stricter policies that would indeed effect me, as I am new, have many low level alts, and am prone to deactivating my accounts for several months at a time due to rl concerns or simple boredom.
So yeah, if I thought of the name first, I would be getting punished by having it stripped from me if these heavy handed policies were enforced.
[/ QUOTE ]
"Punished," eh? Well, to use your term, if you're being punished, it's not because you thought of a name first, it's becasue your account was inactive for 3 months or more.
It's not heavy handed at all, it's reasonable. The simple solution for you would be to activate your account every three months and preserve your name rights.
[ QUOTE ]
Ex is correct. We datamined how many names would get freed up by doing the purge at every level. After level 5, the amount of names freed up drops noticably on every server. There are a LOT of names being "camped" by inactive accounts on characters under level 5.
[/ QUOTE ]
I can totally understand that the highest number of characters that are inactive are under level 5, but the question is are those characters inactive because the player just didn't get "into" the character Wicker Chair Guy or Mushroom Maven? Freeing up the most number of names is good, but freeing up the good names is certainly better.
Last time they freed up the names, I was lucky to recover a good name I lost by bad luck during the time it took to make a reroll. I'm doubting I would even find one "good" name if you restrict it to level 5 and under. Then again I already have 12 characters I love on my server of choice, so I won't be deleting anyone to see if I can get any of the names I wanted last time, but didn't get.
[ QUOTE ]
"Punished," eh? Well, to use your term, if you're being punished, it's not because you thought of a name first, it's becasue your account was inactive for 3 months or more.
It's not heavy handed at all, it's reasonable. The simple solution for you would be to activate your account every three months and preserve your name rights.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think the current policy is fine, under level 6. No sweat. But there are people saying that lvl 35 or under some even say 50s and under. I don't think I am overreacting when I say that is heavy handed (some people are even demanding names be stripped from active accounts!?!?!), especially with red names stating specifically that the most names regained would be from chars 5 and under.
As I stated before the ONLY people that can make an informed decision on what level range would net the most names are the people with the data. IE not a bunch of forum dwellers.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"Punished," eh? Well, to use your term, if you're being punished, it's not because you thought of a name first, it's becasue your account was inactive for 3 months or more.
It's not heavy handed at all, it's reasonable. The simple solution for you would be to activate your account every three months and preserve your name rights.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think the current policy is fine, under level 6. No sweat. But there are people saying that lvl 35 or under some even say 50s and under. I don't think I am overreacting when I say that is heavy handed (some people are even demanding names be stripped from active accounts!?!?!), especially with red names stating specifically that the most names regained would be from chars 5 and under.
As I stated before the ONLY people that can make an informed decision on what level range would net the most names are the people with the data. IE not a bunch of forum dwellers.
[/ QUOTE ]
Ah, I see. Yes, I agree 90 days would be too short a time to subject a higher level character to this. That's why I like the scaling idea. The higher the level, the longer the grace period.
[ QUOTE ]
Last time they freed up the names, I was lucky to recover a good name I lost by bad luck during the time it took to make a reroll. I'm doubting I would even find one "good" name if you restrict it to level 5 and under.
[/ QUOTE ]
Names on my account sitting at lvl 1-6 that I think are pretty good:
(off the top of my head)
the Whatsit
Goldfish Girl
Drifting Blossom
Mutant Bunny Foo Foo
Lemur Lad (on several other servers for visiting purposes)
I have quite a few others too. Even if your not one of those "name campers" people in this thread are trying to cast as the next great Evil, almost everyone ends up with lowbies they're not ever going to get the chance to play.
You can't judge the quality of a name by the level number.
"Null is as much an argument "for removing the cottage rule" as the moon being round is for buying tennis shoes." -Memphis Bill
sounds good, thanks for the info.
Names I got yesterday:
Wavelength
WarHunt
Streetfight
Yup, no good names left...
[ QUOTE ]
Names I got yesterday:
Wavelength
WarHunt
Streetfight
Yup, no good names left...
[/ QUOTE ]
Proves nothing. I got "Catburglar" not so long ago. Getting a "good" name at this point is a matter of luck.
I've been stuck with "Ultimo." since I first started playing because somewhere there's an "Ultimo". If that character is on an inactive account (which seems to be the case), it would sure be nice to have the chance to get rid of that period. Of course, if he's L7+ I won't have that chance anyway, but one never knows.
First, mea culpa that I haven't read this entire thread. But here's my two inf. Ex Libris said:
[ QUOTE ]
The number of names that will be freed up will be substantial, if we need to adjust this policy we can do so as long as we grant 30 days notice. So if it is deemed at a later date that more names need to be made available we can do that.
[/ QUOTE ]
This new policy is a step in the right direction. That said, I'd like you to consider adjusting it: in addition to the new 90 day policy, if an account has been inactive over 2 years then ALL its character names regardless of level should be switched to unreserved. While it's common for people to return to the game after an absence of up to a year or so, I think it's perfectly reasonable to unreserve names at the 2 year mark. If you've been gone 2 years, it's highly likely you're not coming back, and if you do you have no right to complain that a name has been unreserved in your prolonged absence, even if it was an uber lvl 50. Just 'cause you got a character to 50 doesn't give you a right to take that name off the table for all eternity if you don't remain a paying customer.
The reason I think this is an important policy is that I'd bet that there were many people that played in the first year after launch that chose classic names, but they've been gone for over 2 years and will never return. Over time, this pool of folks will inevitably grow larger just through natural attrition.
Freedom: Blazing Larb, Fiery Fulcrum, Sardan Reborn, Arctic-Frenzy, Wasabi Sam, Mr Smashtastic.
[ QUOTE ]
Below level 6? How many names is that expected to free up? 
[/ QUOTE ]
All the names that were being camped by level 1 placeholders.
[ QUOTE ]
I've been stuck with "Ultimo." since I first started playing because somewhere there's an "Ultimo". If that character is on an inactive account (which seems to be the case), it would sure be nice to have the chance to get rid of that period. Of course, if he's L7+ I won't have that chance anyway, but one never knows.
[/ QUOTE ]
You may find the actual problem to be that there is a Marvel Comics supervillain named Ultimo.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've been stuck with "Ultimo." since I first started playing because somewhere there's an "Ultimo". If that character is on an inactive account (which seems to be the case), it would sure be nice to have the chance to get rid of that period. Of course, if he's L7+ I won't have that chance anyway, but one never knows.
[/ QUOTE ]
You may find the actual problem to be that there is a Marvel Comics supervillain named Ultimo.
[/ QUOTE ]
That could be too, though "Ultimo" shows up when I add it to my friends list, which suggests to me there's a character out there with the name.
I'll point out, as I have before, that Marvel's Ultimo is a less well known character, and there is some uncertainty whether their version or mine came first. I used to make comics, and Ultimo was my flagship character (hence my forum name and my Blaster). From what I hear, Marvel's came into being around the same time mine did. In any case, I've had no trouble, likely in large part due to the fact that my character is completely unlike Marvel's.
Ultimo's first appearance was over forty years ago
Well, the powers that be have given their reasoning behind their decision. We are going to have to live with level 6 until such time as they determine it is necessary to change it.
You can rest assured that these arguments have been seen before in our suggestion threads, and I am pretty sure that all of these points were considered when they came to their decision. They also have the advantage of actual data to support their decisions.
Ultimately this is a business decision, and they have to weigh both sides to come to an equitable solution. Making extreme suggestions (I'm looking at you crazies suggesting active customers be affected) at this point is fruitless. Let's look at some of the alternate suggestions so far.
The scaling inactivity with level suggestion. Right now I suspect they are working with a code that only checks time inactive and level. I doubt that field can be varied as it is. It would require that the code for this be rewritten. It may sound good that the longer they are inactive the higher the level that will be affected, but that may not be as easy to do.
I don't recall any other suggestions where people were being entirely reasonable other than raise the level. That gets into the gray area. I don't think there are many people that would be upset with less than 6. Start raising it, and the tune could change. Personally I'd say 10. But they said that won't free up very many names....so....why change it then?
What I'd like to see, and I don't find it entirely unreasonable is for there to be a name reservation fee. If you cancel your account, you can pay a small fee to reserve your character names for your eventual return. This isn't so much to generate revenue as it is to give hard data on who actually intends to return. I think with such a fee available, the level could be raised without fear of upsetting potential return customers as those who plan on returning most likely would opt to reserve their names.
I also never got an answer on those trial accounts. Ex said they can wipe those names, but WILL they?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I would agree with this. At some point, people are just not going to come back. Their names should be freed up eventually. While a poster above said 15 months should be the cutoff for your name going back to the pool regardless of level, I think that is a bit too soon. I would support sometime over 2 years inactive losing you the right to squat on your level 50's name, and possibly even their space in the database. It may sound harsh, but how many really come back after a 2 year hiatus?
[/ QUOTE ]
You'd be surprised. I know I've gone back on "nostalgia trips" to my other MMO's on occasion. A great many people aren't long-term community members, but they like to come back when enough changes have made the game fresh again.
Any game that puts barriers to the returning player cuts off a revenue source. You decide how much you're willing to alienate and weigh it againt the benefits of such a system.
In this case, 6 levels is the balance they came up with... and it appears to have been researched and discussed with considerably more forethought, planning, and access to information, than any of the suggestions offered here.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's fine. I'll qualify the position above a little further. If you haven't logged in in 2 years, the chances are very low that you will ever come back. This game gives at least a couple of free pass periods per year to inactive former players to come back and check it out. If you didn't come back during several chances for free just to have a look around at the old stomping grounds, what is the likelihood that you will come back at all? At some point, shouldn't the developers stop acting like the jilted lover and stop carrying the torch?
My defense of the idea of adjusting this policy is not for personal use, at least not right now, since I am approaching half full on my account and have sworn off making alts for the time being to concentrate on the characters that I have. I just tend to see those unused character names as wasteful. I know that not everyone feels that way, but I'd like to clarify my position on this matter. I've only had problems getting names that were fairly obvious, but I would think that a fairly obvious name on an account that hasn't even been touched for free in 2 years should be returned to the pool for others to use, regardless of the level of that character.
I know that there are people like this. Pretty much the entirety of my original SG was like this. They left early in 2005 and have not been back at all for the past 2 years. I still play the character that was in that SG regularly, and haven't heard a peep from any of them. If they were still at all interested in this game and their characters, one would think they would have taken the opportunity to log them on at no cost to themselves at least once.
"I wish my life was a non-stop Hollywood movie show,
A fantasy world of celluloid villains and heroes."
While NCSoft and Cryptic would rather have players come back and stay, I think this step is only a half-step of what is needed.
All toons, under 50 (1-49), should be under this same rule. The current method protects players who have left the game, no longer pay fees, after scooping up the best character names for themselves.
To my perspective, those who build multiple alts as paying CoH/CoV clients, deserve greater consideration.
And toons that have not had their fees paid for in an entire year, regardless of level, should have names reset. This would free up names that players simply have no real interest in pursuing but continue to stake a claim to... and in cases where players have taken the time to get their toons to 50 but no longer pay monthly fees, it would guarantee that once a year, they pay for a month's service.
And if that's too much for players, the turnover of names will make it easier for those of us still active to bring new friends in!
Post removed by me... not worth it.
Storm
Serenity is not freedom from the storm, but peace amid the storm ...
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, I don't doubt it for a second. There are people who will do ANYTHING to be a pain.
[/ QUOTE ]
Well there is nothing stopping them from getting a name and levelling to 6. So this won't effect that at all. If someone is such a malcontent that they camp names to be jerks (which in my opinion would be pretty useless since you never know if anyone even cares or gets upset by your griefing) then they will take the time to get their name holders to lvl 6