So are all Aussie players being forced to play on US servers like back in vanilla and have to suffer 400ms hi latency?
There needs to be more information on where the servers will be that should accommodate everyone. I don’t want to feel like a 2nd class wow player again.
1 Like
I do not think its wise to throw a hand grenade into your servers like this at this point in the season. Anyone still playing SoD is playing it because they have friends and teams they have grown/nurtured for almost a year. Other players dabble but this change would force every single guild to uproot and move to your new servers. I don’t understand why? It’s going to be used an offramp for players to just call it good on this season and unsub more than breathing new life into it. You’re going to see a net-loss and that number could be large.
Force the smaller servers onto two servers. Do not force your entire player base to move. It wont end the way you think. I’m merely the GM of a large raiding guild. Personally I might take the off ramp if you ask me to literally kill all of the work I’ve done with this guild since week 1. I came BACK for SoD, I do not care about retail. ALL WCL would reset, rebuilding guilds would be so tedious, just ranks and invites alone would be annoying and time consuming. I work for my players but I don’t work for Blizzard. Forcing everyone to move servers is actually insane.
14 Likes
It’s very simple…because the less servers they run the more money they make. Sadly this is 100% the reason regardless of whatever lies they may throw at us.
2 Likes
Giving someone the option to switch is not the right way to do it, you have to force them to switch servers, and switch from pvp to pvp realms, and not PVP to PVE.
There hasnt been a single instance in this game where giving someone the option to do something thats incredibly important ever worked out.
The best option would be to Connect all the realms together pvp/pvp and pve/pve then add the realm names after the character names as they do in retail, and era…
2 Likes
I think it’s a great idea for the long term health of the game
To make it less disruptive would you guys considering turning existing realms into the mega servers? For US Realms Wild Growth PvE and Crusader Strike PvP seem like the obvious choices
Another round of PvP → PvE transfers would be appreciated as well from a large portion of the player base
1 Like
Then you aren’t very bright.
2 Likes
Why’s that? With the numbers dwindling it would be a good thing to have larger player bases on each realm. There’s still a lot of content to be released and numbers will continue to drop, especially with TWW releasing soon
I’m struggling to see a downside if it’s an easy process
1 Like
Hopefully the part that says 2 servers per region where applicable means literally nothing changes for us OCE players 'cause we only have 2 servers to begin with. Would like some clarification though, because I’m not entirely sure if we’re considered an independent region from America in this case.
So, you didn’t learn from disturbing server pops in the 1st place, the 1st time around and now are doubling down on poor decision making.
2 Likes
retaining players has more to do with quality of content than it does realm size. Although realm size contributes somewhat it is far in the minority. If the idea was to retain players then the focus should have been on quality content.
This process will only solve the issue for a few weeks by creating the illusion of a vibrant server, but without the content to retain players it won’t matter…and in the meantime they have alienated and frustrated Guild leaders, people with unique names, people who have built communities on their servers etc etc. The ratio of problems solved to problems created is in favor of problems created…which is typical of blizzard these days.
5 Likes
See it was all about your name. I told you!
for me it is 100% about my name and the community/friends i play with.
1 Like
I don’t disagree with the content comment. I think both are important factors
either way if they aren’t planning to do new raids, they should still try to do what they can to make more vibrant server communities, and if new content is coming both things simultaneously will only be beneficial.
I think the name portion is a small price to pay for the long term health of guilds / servers. This is coming from someone who has ran a guild since 2019. Every phase it gets harder to recruit on a lot of these realms as numbers dwindle, an infusion of people would be really helpful
that’d be so sick lmao
According to Blizzard, RP and RPPVP isn’t important. ;-;
2 Likes
a temporary infusion of people at the long term cost of retained players is what will happen…SOM already showed that.
1 Like
Not seeing how the long term cost of retained players would be effected by having largers servers. I think the number of players who would stick around and play due to being able to find a guild / keep their raid team afloat would outweigh the number of people who quit because they can’t keep the same name. The content point is separate and I don’t disagree with that part of your argument. I don’t think merging servers takes away from their ability to add new things to the game, that was already decided and it’s either coming or it isn’t, this doesn’t change any of those plans
I’m glad I just leveled a fresh 60 toon over the past 2 weeks… FFS
The Name issues aside, which is a top concern to me and everyone I’ve talked too:
-
What if you play on 2 PVP servers now, one with alliance and one with horde. Are you going to be able to have toons on both factions on a single server?
-
How much of this is to gear up the player base for 40man raids? (i.e. if 90%+ of all the players are on a single server then getting every raid to 40 people will be easier than it would be otherwise).
-
Will the layers sizes remain the same?
-
Is there going to be a limit to how many toons people can transfer?
-
Is there going to be a minimum level for toons to transfer?
2 Likes
How does this work for bank alts?
Pretty sure there used to be a min level to transfer along with other restrictions and caps.