Cross server naming to allow teaming
By
Aett_Thorn,
Posted on: 2011-04-01 10:00 in Suggestions and Ideas
Quote:
Naming is about the smallest issue involved in cross-server teaming. This does more or less nothing to facilitate it.|
Originally Posted by Snow Globe
Pros:
Allows cross-server teaming! This is a huge plus. Allows up to 15 players to have the "same" name for their character. Doesn't immediately expose global name. Characters don't need to permanently transfer to other servers. |
You can already have the same name on multiple servers. You're solving a problem which does not exist.
Point three is essentially an irrelevent space filler.
Having a server-tagged name does not solve the issue of non-permanent server transfers. It barely even touches on the issues involved in doing that.
Quote:
|
Cons: People will misunderstand the suggestion and rant about completely unrelated things. |
if you want cross-server teams, the investment in code development is far more significant than just tagging the name to uniquely identify all characters. In fact, that's pretty much the simplest aspect.
ETA - It does occur that this could be an attempt at an April Fools joke. It is is, I preferred Google's one.
Disclaimer: The above may be humerous, or at least may be an attempt at humour. Try reading it that way.
Posts are OOC unless noted to be IC, or in an IC thread.
Excellent idea Snow Globe and very well timed with the fiasco going on atm, this would be a very good solution.
From what I see there is no identity loss and even can make you a bit more prouder of your home server.
Big Thumbs UP 
/Signed
Ps. I think I will be using this way if I have to rename my char, and I think it times nicely to 15 seconds to type, so no more e-mail waiting for me
Too many 50's to list here's a few you may know.
Slazenger, Area51, Area53, Area54, Erruption, Mind Plague, Thresher, Sheath, Broadside, Debt
Quote:
It is a necessary first step. Without the ability for the game to see the difference between say "Snow Globe@Triumph" and "Snow Globe@Freedom" cross server teaming is impossible. No matter what, conflicting names is a hurdle to cross server teaming.|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
Naming is about the smallest issue involved in cross-server teaming. This does more or less nothing to facilitate it.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
You can already have the same name on multiple servers. You're solving a problem which does not exist.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
Point three is essentially an irrelevent space filler.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
Having a server-tagged name does not solve the issue of non-permanent server transfers. It barely even touches on the issues involved in doing that.
|
Other things needed for cross server play:
- The servers need to "talk" to each other to allow characters to move between servers.
- Transfer points need to be established.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
I assume I fall foul of this since I'm saying your suggestion doesn't actually solve anything. This means you will ignore my comments, which is the intended purpose of this 'con.'
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
if you want cross-server teams, the investment in code development is far more significant than just tagging the name to uniquely identify all characters. In fact, that's pretty much the simplest aspect.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
ETA - It does occur that this could be an attempt at an April Fools joke. It is is, I preferred Google's one.
|
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
The solution to naming conflicts cross server should be invisible to the end user.
A bigger roadblock would be hunt missions as cross server teams would only see each other in instanced missions.
Quote:
This. I'm not going to pretend to know what all is necessary for making cross-server teaming a reality, but if it involves @Anything at the end of my character's name when playing, I'm not for it. Now, if it only shows up while not on my home server, I think I could live with that.|
Originally Posted by LISAR
The solution to naming conflicts cross server should be invisible to the end user.
|
Also, I think the OP would do better not to get so snooty. It's only going to derail your own thread. And anything that gets the ball rolling on cross-server play doesn't need road bumps in the way.
Quote:
|
Other things needed for cross server play: * The servers need to "talk" to each other to allow characters to move between servers. * Transfer points need to be established. |
@Rylas
Kill 'em all. Let XP sort 'em out.
I like the idea and intent of the OP. Thats one hurdle down at least!
Quote:
My suggestion addresses that already:|
Originally Posted by LISAR
The solution to naming conflicts cross server should be invisible to the end user.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Snow Globe
The <home server> could be hidden for those that don't want to see it most of the time, but could be accessed at any time like the current setting to show player name on target or mouseover.
|
There is only a few ways that characters could have unique identifier:
- <character name>@<home server>
- <character name>@<global name>
- <character name>@<account name>
- A character "Social ID number".
The last has more problems than any of the other three. How to petition a character? How to friend a character? How to send tells to a character? These after just 2 seconds of thought about it. The list of problems goes on from there.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by LISAR
A bigger roadblock would be hunt missions as cross server teams would only see each other in instanced missions.
|
So before putting the cart (consequences of cross server teaming) ahead of the horse (providing an unique character identifier), the developers should examine how to make character names unique.
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
Quote:
As I've said, I've already put that in the suggestion that the @<home server> should be hidden if enabled in the options. Most of the time you can play without seeing the "@<home server>". You might see two characters with the name "Snow Globe", but if you have the home server hidden you'll not see it. Likewise if you look at your character name and have the option hidden, you'll just see your name. This doesn't affect your play at all.|
Originally Posted by Rylas
This. I'm not going to pretend to know what all is necessary for making cross-server teaming a reality, but if it involves @Anything at the end of my character's name when playing, I'm not for it. Now, if it only shows up while not on my home server, I think I could live with that.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rylas
Also, I think the OP would do better not to get so snooty. It's only going to derail your own thread. And anything that gets the ball rolling on cross-server play doesn't need road bumps in the way.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
ETA - It does occur that this could be an attempt at an April Fools joke. It is is, I preferred Google's one.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rylas
I don't think Ravenswing is saying your suggestion isn't needed at all. Only that it's just scratching the surface. I would imagine the highlighted part of the above quote to be the rest of the ice burg under the water. A really big ice burg. I mean, like, really really really big. But again, I'm just guesstimating.
|
I'm saying this with nearly 30 years of programming experience, and 12 years of database programming experience. Without an unique identifier, you will not be able to have cross server play at all. I'm not deluding myself, this will be the first step of many that is needed for cross server play. However without this step, nothing else can be done.
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
I would definitely prefer Local@Server over Global@Local, particularly if it was only visible in cross server content of any kind.
My first choice is universally unique names with an algorithm to resolve pre-existing collisions (like Local@Server for example) but Local@Server is a reasonable compromise when inter-server names must be unique for some reason, of which cross-server teaming is just one possibility.
[Guide to Defense] [Scrapper Secondaries Comparison] [Archetype Popularity Analysis]
In one little corner of the universe, there's nothing more irritating than a misfile...
(Please support the best webcomic about a cosmic universal realignment by impaired angelic interference resulting in identity crisis angst. Or I release the pigmy water thieves.)
Quote:
Yes, a universally unique name would be best. However in the case of "Snow Globe" I have characters with that name on two servers. That means there are up to nine other players with characters named "Snow Globe" with up to four on the EU servers. |
Originally Posted by Arcanaville
I would definitely prefer Local@Server over Global@Local, particularly if it was only visible in cross server content of any kind.
My first choice is universally unique names with an algorithm to resolve pre-existing collisions (like Local@Server for example) but Local@Server is a reasonable compromise when inter-server names must be unique for some reason, of which cross-server teaming is just one possibility. |
I figured the least intrusive way to go about it, other than going by the ID that the game database assigns each character is this way. Besides if it were based on the game database ID, then people would be up in arms that there could be a few dozen of "their" character's name on the same server, not to mention other servers. We've already seen the posts about that.
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
Quote:
Agreed, but I really wasn't sure.|
Originally Posted by Snow Globe
That isn't even getting close to being a constructive post.
|
Your post addresses the least important and easiest to solve aspect of cross-server teaming. It is, essentially, irrelevent itself.
To iterate the factors involved which would require work that I know of:
Each server has its own database. Transferring characters from one server to another is an offline process involving collecting all the data for a character (note that that data involves mission progression, contacts available, all aspects of the game world affecting your character), marking the character deleted, and applying the data to a different server. Overcoming this for a 'temporary' transfer would need:
*Additional hardware to coordinate transfers.
*Additional database columns to indicate a temporary transfer.
*Much additional programming to perform the transfers.
There would need to be vast amounts of additional programming to allow cross-server LFT.
Design issue: Which server is the team formed on? The leader's team? What happens when the leader changes?
The only version of this kind of thing I know anything about is WoW's Battleground mechanism, which works for instanced battlefields and operates in groups coordinated by specialy designed hardware and software. To my knowledge, they don't bother with messing about with the names. The chances of two being the same are slim. Our equivalent would be cross-server teaming for the new Incarnate Trials.
Even if there was much chance of name conflicts in a team, it's hardly a show-stopper and not really worth much consideration in the grand scheme of thing.
I'm not saying this is a bad idea, or a good one. It's just not really worth the column-inches.
Disclaimer: The above may be humerous, or at least may be an attempt at humour. Try reading it that way.
Posts are OOC unless noted to be IC, or in an IC thread.
Given that Snow Global mentioned transfer points I'm not sure the suggestion is for a cross server lft system per say, but the ability to jump your character from one server to another without worrying about the name, via in game portals or something.
That'd be the stage one of how I'd go about it anyway, first get in game temporary server jumps going, then once that's bedded down implement a global lft system running, based around the i20 turnstile system.
The server to server transfer is usually pretty quick, I wonder how much load it can take though.
The issue with names on a team is minimal, the problem arises more with Tells. If someone is sending a tell to the "native" Carnifax they don't want it go go to one that's visiting the server. You could solve that by assuming that the @server is generally hidden unless you specify it, and if you omit it the system automatically appends that of the server you're on
An aside:
Quote:
I am a tad confused... are you saying that somehow this suggestion would make that possible? Cuz I am pretty sure that was always the case.
|
Originally Posted by Snow Globe
|
Quote:
Having never tried this, what do you mean by "very quick?"|
Originally Posted by Carnifax_NA
The server to server transfer is usually pretty quick, I wonder how much load it can take though.
|
(When it's working) The Test Server copy, which is a relatively equivalent system, takes several minutes to work and they only guarantee about 30 minutes. So you go to this 'transfer point' and your character is unplayable for 30 minutes? Is that going to be acceptable?
There are other things to be considered, mostly around SGs. When you transfer, you lose your SG. I assume that the idea is you would miraculously return to your SG when the character returns to its home server. Now, I'm sure that isn't supported currently.
Of course, we can get around that one by not supporting it. If you use the system, you suffer the consequences, whatever loss that might entail.
The other thing, of course, is that NCSoft currently charge money for server transfers. Aside from the technical aspects, this process would either mean the loss of a source of income for the company, or the addition of a micro-transaction system to the game, which does not currently exist.
Disclaimer: The above may be humerous, or at least may be an attempt at humour. Try reading it that way.
Posts are OOC unless noted to be IC, or in an IC thread.
Personally, if they make cross server teaming possible, I'd actually rather they make content specifically for it, maybe even with specific zones accessible by characters of any server. Since a lot of content has 'stuff' attached to it, needing to update that information and constantly keep transferring it for every instance you need to 'jump' to a new server sounds like a lot of work.
But that's just me imagining the whole cross-server match-ups as multi-dimension stuff. It just makes sense that, if you're yanking superpowered beings from other dimensions for help, then it'd have something to actually *do* with the multiverse...not stopping Flambeaux and her doubles again.
A bunch of replies in one post follows.
Quote:
But it is the one with the most player hang-up. It is also essential for the process to start. |
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
Agreed, but I really wasn't sure.
Your post addresses the least important and easiest to solve aspect of cross-server teaming. It is, essentially, irrelevent itself. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
To iterate the factors involved which would require work that I know of:
Each server has its own database. Transferring characters from one server to another is an offline process involving collecting all the data for a character (note that that data involves mission progression, contacts available, all aspects of the game world affecting your character), marking the character deleted, and applying the data to a different server. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
Overcoming this for a 'temporary' transfer would need:
*Additional hardware to coordinate transfers. *Additional database columns to indicate a temporary transfer. *Much additional programming to perform the transfers. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
There would need to be vast amounts of additional programming to allow cross-server LFT.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
Design issue: Which server is the team formed on? The leader's team? What happens when the leader changes?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
The only version of this kind of thing I know anything about is WoW's Battleground mechanism, which works for instanced battlefields and operates in groups coordinated by specialy designed hardware and software. To my knowledge, they don't bother with messing about with the names. The chances of two being the same are slim. Our equivalent would be cross-server teaming for the new Incarnate Trials.
|
In that game you are on a fleet of spaceships. Each server is a different ship. If you want to team with someone else you transfer to the other ship, then while you are online you are playing as if you were based on that ship. When you log out, you're back to your home ship.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
Even if there was much chance of name conflicts in a team, it's hardly a show-stopper and not really worth much consideration in the grand scheme of thing.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Carnifax_NA
Given that Snow Globe mentioned transfer points I'm not sure the suggestion is for a cross server lft system per say, but the ability to jump your character from one server to another without worrying about the name, via in game portals or something.
That'd be the stage one of how I'd go about it anyway, first get in game temporary server jumps going, then once that's bedded down implement a global lft system running, based around the i20 turnstile system. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Carnifax_NA
The issue with names on a team is minimal, the problem arises more with Tells. If someone is sending a tell to the "native" Carnifax they don't want it go go to one that's visiting the server. You could solve that by assuming that the @server is generally hidden unless you specify it, and if you omit it the system automatically appends that of the server you're on
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Thirty-Seven
An aside:
I am a tad confused... are you saying that somehow this suggestion would make that possible? Cuz I am pretty sure that was always the case. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Carnifax_NA
The server to server transfer is usually pretty quick, I wonder how much load it can take though.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
Having never tried this, what do you mean by "very quick?"
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
(When it's working) The Test Server copy, which is a relatively equivalent system, takes several minutes to work and they only guarantee about 30 minutes. So you go to this 'transfer point' and your character is unplayable for 30 minutes? Is that going to be acceptable?
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
There are other things to be considered, mostly around SGs. When you transfer, you lose your SG. I assume that the idea is you would miraculously return to your SG when the character returns to its home server. Now, I'm sure that isn't supported currently.
|
That is NOT what I'm suggesting.
I've used the server transfers, I know what they do. What they do is exactly what you are saying: delete the character from Server A and put it on Server B. Again that is NOT what I'm suggesting, so you might want to quit thinking along those lines.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ravenswing
The other thing, of course, is that NCSoft currently charge money for server transfers. Aside from the technical aspects, this process would either mean the loss of a source of income for the company, or the addition of a micro-transaction system to the game, which does not currently exist.
|
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
Quote:
Are you sure you played PSO? Because that's completely wrong. And PSO wasn't an MMO anyways - having a lobby that could only hold 100 people who formed teams of up to 4 and ran instanced missions with no persistent world to interact in really isn't a model which can be applied to a real MMO.|
Originally Posted by Snow Globe
I've never played WoW. However I have played Phantasy Star Online. In that game there is a similar mechanism which is superbly suited to a science fiction setting.
In that game you are on a fleet of spaceships. Each server is a different ship. If you want to team with someone else you transfer to the other ship, then while you are online you are playing as if you were based on that ship. When you log out, you're back to your home ship. |
Perhaps you were thinking of one of the sequels to PSO (which I never played), or PSU (which I never played online)?
Either way, while I don't oppose it, I don't support any suggestion that merges the servers in any way - and that is what you're attempting to do. You're merging the playerbase, even if you leave the servers unmerged.
I play on Victory because it's a small server. I've played on Freedom before, and I hate it. Your suggestion would have the potential to turn every server into Freedom, which I personally would not enjoy.
Consider it a small-town mentality. I'd rather stick to the small server, where I know a large number of people, and can still find a team when I want one, rather than a large one where I can either isolate myself from everyone (/hide) or be surrounded by strangers invading my personal space (constant unsolicited /tells and blind invites).
@Roderick
I'm pretty sure the use of globals has already solved this anyways.
Firstly, anything that makes teaming easier I consider a win.
Secondly, don't the servers already talk to each other due to permanent character transfer? Or is that a different animal with regards to communication?
I forsee two problems with the idea of cross-server teaming:
1) The Devs lose most of the funds generated by permanent transfers. Why pay to play when you can cross-server team?
2) Everyone rushes to Virtue or Freedom during some big event and crashes the server.
However the idea of cross-server teaming opens up huge new vistas for people to play which is always a good thing.
If the Devs want to think long-term they may want to do this for their own benefit to simplify possible features down the line.
"Comics, you're not a Mastermind...you're an Overlord!"
Quote:
Yes, PSO 1&2 for the Gamecube. |
Originally Posted by Roderick
Are you sure you played PSO? Because that's completely wrong.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Roderick
And PSO wasn't an MMO anyways - having a lobby that could only hold 100 people who formed teams of up to 4 and ran instanced missions with no persistent world to interact in really isn't a model which can be applied to a real MMO.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Roderick
Either way, while I don't oppose it, I don't support any suggestion that merges the servers in any way - and that is what you're attempting to do. You're merging the playerbase, even if you leave the servers unmerged.
|
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?p=467547
Quote:
|
Q: Any number of questions regarding a server-less game configuration and possible speculation about how that will work. A: We don't have anything to add about a "server-less" system, other than to reiterate what was stated in the original announcement. To quote: Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Roderick
I play on Victory because it's a small server. I've played on Freedom before, and I hate it. Your suggestion would have the potential to turn every server into Freedom, which I personally would not enjoy.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Roderick
Consider it a small-town mentality. I'd rather stick to the small server, where I know a large number of people, and can still find a team when I want one, rather than a large one where I can either isolate myself from everyone (/hide) or be surrounded by strangers invading my personal space (constant unsolicited /tells and blind invites).
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by LISAR
I'm pretty sure the use of globals has already solved this anyways.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Comicsluvr
Firstly, anything that makes teaming easier I consider a win.
Secondly, don't the servers already talk to each other due to permanent character transfer? Or is that a different animal with regards to communication? |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Comicsluvr
I forsee two problems with the idea of cross-server teaming:
1) The Devs lose most of the funds generated by permanent transfers. Why pay to play when you can cross-server team? 2) Everyone rushes to Virtue or Freedom during some big event and crashes the server. |
The second point could be handled by the access points themselves, telling players that they can't transfer to a full server.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Comicsluvr
However the idea of cross-server teaming opens up huge new vistas for people to play which is always a good thing.
If the Devs want to think long-term they may want to do this for their own benefit to simplify possible features down the line. |
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
Quote:
Ah, I never played any of the ports, just the original on the Dreamcast.|
Originally Posted by Snow Globe
Yes, PSO 1&2 for the Gamecube.
While this is all true (except the lobby limit to my knowledge), the idea that it used to facilitate teaming is something that can be translated to this game. |
Quote:
| You could always swap instances or use other tools players have already to minimize your interaction with others. I'm sorry that you feel the need to limit your interaction with others. |
I suffer from a minor form of social anxiety. When I play, I want to limit my exposure to strangers, because being surrounded by strangers causes me a great deal of stress. When I log into Freedom, I am literally getting tells and blind invites every few minutes. This causes me as much stress as if random people were walking up to me on the street and trying to initiate conversation, ie: a lot. When I play on Victory, I rarely get tells from people outside my friends list, and almost never get blind invites. When I chat on global channels, it's mostly people I know rather than total strangers, even if they're not people I know well.
Quote:
| You want a smaller game, I'd rather have a larger one. |
I want a mix of small and large servers, so that people like me (of which there are a significant number - see the solo vs. teamed Incarnate content debate) can have their small, comfortable servers, while people like you can have their large, find a team any time of day servers. Guess what? That's what we already have.
Short version: While I wouldn't actively oppose it if the devs decided to implement it, I will state my disapproval of the suggestion, because I feel that it would be an unnecessary expenditure of resources. The very quote you posted showed that the devs themselves had not decided that it was worth it. Like they say: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"; look how well that worked for PVP.
@Roderick
Quote:
And people will likely mostly stick to their "home" servers. Going pure serverless would render this suggestion moot and would have greater difficulties. On the other hand not expecting to meet other players in an MMO isn't realistic.|
Originally Posted by Roderick
You're misinterpreting what I'm saying.
I suffer from a minor form of social anxiety. When I play, I want to limit my exposure to strangers, because being surrounded by strangers causes me a great deal of stress. When I log into Freedom, I am literally getting tells and blind invites every few minutes. This causes me as much stress as if random people were walking up to me on the street and trying to initiate conversation, ie: a lot. When I play on Victory, I rarely get tells from people outside my friends list, and almost never get blind invites. When I chat on global channels, it's mostly people I know rather than total strangers, even if they're not people I know well. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Roderick
I don't want a smaller game. I never said or implied that I wanted one. In fact, that wording makes it sound like you're vilifying my opinion to make yours sound more desirable, which isn't a very fair tactic in a debate; my opinion is just as valid as yours.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Roderick
I want a mix of small and large servers, so that people like me (of which there are a significant number - see the solo vs. teamed Incarnate content debate) can have their small, comfortable servers, while people like you can have their large, find a team any time of day servers. Guess what? That's what we already have.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Roderick
Short version: While I wouldn't actively oppose it if the devs decided to implement it, I will state my disapproval of the suggestion, because I feel that it would be an unnecessary expenditure of resources. The very quote you posted showed that the devs themselves had not decided that it was worth it. Like they say: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it"; look how well that worked for PVP.
|
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters
Quote:
How is a redname saying they won't commit to a server-less config also saying the devs will implement this full cross-server conversion?|
Originally Posted by Snow Globe
The developers are still likely to do it, as it is an often requested feature. It is also the one feature that gets most people excited because it allows for greater teaming possibilities.
http://boards.cityofheroes.com/showthread.php?p=467547 Yes, my suggestion would be a foundation for a type of "server-less" game configuration. |
Quote:
| I agree with your first point. Some players will likely still buy permanent transfers though, just like some players buy respecs. |
Just to reiterate, I'm all for 'cross-server content', but just plain 'cross-server LFT' I don't support. If you're having problems finding a team, I'm sure the devs will offer free server transfers when they merge the server lists. Just be sure to stick with Freedom/Virtue/Union.
Quote:
No, cross-server play would dilute communities, by intermingling the existing ones, and then spreading them thin.|
Originally Posted by Snow Globe
My primary server is Triumph. It is one of the least populated NA servers. I know players on Freedom, Virtue, Pinnacle, and most of the rest of the NA servers. Cross server play presents a chance to build communities. Isolating servers does the opposite.
|
Quote:
| The quote I posted wasn't about resources, it was a standard reply to something they couldn't do at the time. The same type of reply was made for side switching. |
Ultimately, when it comes to programming though, it's all about resources.
@Roderick
Suggestion:
Change all character names to <character name>@<home server> to allow for cross-server play.
Reasoning:
This suggestion would be treating each server as its own dimension, and allowing players to temporarily move to other servers (dimensions) for greater teaming opportunities.
Having <character name>@<home server> would allow cross-server teaming. If the character is permanently moved to another server, their home server would change. It would allow up to 15 players to have <character name>.
<character name>@Freedom
<character name>@Justice
<character name>@Pinnacle
<character name>@Virtue
<character name>@Liberty
<character name>@Guardian
<character name>@Infinity
<character name>@Protector
<character name>@Victory
<character name>@Champion
<character name>@Triumph
<character name>@Defiant
<character name>@Zukunft
<character name>@Vigilance
<character name>@Union
Initially, it could allow the Team Up Teleporter to act independently of the server so that you could always find a team for Incarnate Trials, and later expand to general cross-server teaming. The developers could make dimensional teleportation centers (Pocket D, Grandville Portal, Nerva Portal, Peregrine Island Portals) to allow for temporary transfers to other servers. When you log out, you get transferred back to your home server.
The <home server> could be hidden for those that don't want to see it most of the time, but could be accessed at any time like the current setting to show player name on target or mouseover.
By using <home server> instead of <global name>, it protects player's need for anonymity and allows players to have multiple copies of their character.
Summary:
Pros:
Cons:
Triumph: White Succubus: 50 Ill/Emp/PF Snow Globe: 50 Ice/FF/Ice Strobe: 50 PB Shi Otomi: 50 Ninja/Ninjistu/GW Stalker My other characters