LOGIN
Register
Reply
-
-
- Registered: 2017-07-24
- Topics: 13
- Posts: 310
1＃ Go ToHi everyone ,
You problably know me for my rants about merging servers already but here is another rant but with a bit more juice added to it.
I've seen lately that a lot of people from older servers are complaining that oasis prioritises mid age servers and not their server . Well why is oasis prioritising those servers over yours have you ever thought of that ? One of the persons complaining (won't name him) said his server has "only" active groups ( i checked the server out seems of the groups even has 1500 activity ...) and "only" 40 people take part in sage world , now with such numbers do you really expect your server needing a merge? i mean c'mon there are servers like mine who never get sage world more than 1 time per week and even when we do it's because of alt accounts not because the server is very active on that particular day ( yes more active than the use of 5-6 alt accounts gets us into sage but that doesn't seem like an accomplishment) . You know how many people plunder on my server? a total of 2 people sometimes 3 because there aren't enough people to plunder and those who plunder sometimes risk to end up with only 2 SS plunders because the number of people on the server is a joke. Not to mention matsuri where only the top 3 players get to finish 5 wins and that because of alt accounts .Anyway i shouldn't be talking about my own server here but i went and did it again because i'm so salty for missing another sage world.
Ok now to explain why a dead server needs merge much more than an active older server . By missing sage world , plunders , matsuri the dead server falls behind in resources compared to the servers near them ( for exemple my server and the server who started 2 day before mine , my top 10 player has 20k power and their top 10 player has 28k power which is the power of the top 2 on my server and no their top 10 isn't a casher while my top 2 is ) and when the eventual merge( yes it will happen sooner or later) happens with the servers near them ( we saw recently how servers get merged only with server who started close in date of release not actual power compatibility ) they would fall from being a top 2-3 on their server top 15-20 which means all the money they put it to maintain a top spot on the server would go to waste just because they were unlucky to start on a server who died prematurely.
To list what players from my server for exemple lose per week because they can't attempt certain events and why it gets us more behind every week.
- the top 3 in sage world lose 30 advanced refines and seal scroll because 2 sage worlds don't take place per week ( not sure what the others get who aren't top of their sage world team ) as well as a bunch of points for the shop
- the winning team in sage world loses low refines , 2 summon scrolls per sage world missed , points for summon shop not sure what else because i haven't seen sage world in a while.
- 120 coupons per day because no plunders
- seal scrolls and shop points because no matsuri
and the list goes on
Now taking all of this into account you will see that a gap that gets wider every week happens btw the dead server and the normal servers near them and the more the merge gets delayed the weaker the people on the dead server get compared to their peers on a normal server and the eventual merge would just make them quit because they won't be relevant by the time the merge happens.
I suggest merge should be based on power and how dead a server currently is and not on how old and how near each others the server are. I know i'm sounding selfish because i care more about my situation than the situations of older server but let's face it when your server has more than 2 groups in GNW and gets sage world every day you shouldn't be complaining about merge because u have no competition on your server some servers can't take part in events and you are crying about competition.
This post was last edited by Haru no Owari at 2017-2-15 14:49 -
-
-
- Registered: 2017-07-24
- Topics: 13
- Posts: 310
- ShinjiIkari On 2017-02-15 15:08:17
-
I think they merge servers ba
sed on their assessment on the active level of the servers. Many old servers still have a lot of players active but they just all join into 1 or 2 groups only, which lessens the competition in that server. And those servers want a merge to get more players and more competitions. Because of that Oasis decides to prioritize merging those servers that are literally "dead", like there is literally 5 or 6 active players on those server, instead of focusing on the old servers that want more competition
seems to me like you didn't read what i wrote but it's ok
also they aren't prioritizing dead servers take the latest merge for exemple , non of the servers were truly dead they could still do sage world , gnw , plunder and matsuri. they seem to merge based on number of spenders instead of other criterias because they want the spenders to spend on the merge events , a complete joke -
-
-
- Registered: 2017-07-24
- Topics: 13
- Posts: 310
- AkashaMoka On 2017-02-15 15:55:08
- My server is S44 with S48 and S52. S44 being the biggest spender, but it is a high spender server between these 3, possibly why ours got merged over 80+ servers and such.
read my post please i mention there than they pick servers close in days to one another 2-4 days difference btw them . Was your server really that much in need for a merge ? or was it that server 44 wanted competition and are spending money so they get their desired merge. -
-
-
- Registered: 2017-07-24
- Topics: 13
- Posts: 310
- AkashaMoka On 2017-02-15 16:27:59
- My server was 3 weeks older than S52. Not sure about S48 but it was not few days. I mean our server was getting bad, wasn't like no sage world or anything bad, but I believe within 1-2 months without a merge we'd be there. Well we have 4 big p2w spenders, while only S52 only has 1 big spender. Could be cause we just had enough spenders and they looked into us. We probably aren't the only servers with plenty of big spenders, but no merges.
didn't know that they used to have a wider gap btw server releases than they do now where its 2 days btw servers like it was with my server 2 months ago 273 is 2 days older than my server but the difference is like night and day ...
Still you are saying you had sage world and all that so why do you think merge was more necessary for you than servers like 256 for example ( my server is 276 btw ) which doesnt even have enough activity rate to go to GNW with 1 single group .
I don't understand the merge priorities except the common line that merged servers have big spenders like the server kaizer was on for exemple it was nowhere near in need of merge and neither were the 2 servers his server got merged with . all were very popular servers so why did the merge happen ? because all had big spenders that's why.
Why not prioritize servers who need the merge more? also do it in a way its balanced not like the recent 163 166 169 merge fiasco. Tell me if you didn't have sage world for a few months and then got merged with a server who did and u go from top 1 to top 20+ would u still play?
the top 1 ( now top 3 on my server) quit 16 days ago because of the lack of sage world and not being able to plunder without losing 6 hours refreshing and he was a decent sized casher 900$+ . the now top 2 on my server if merged today would be top 10-15 in a merge with any of the close servers near us and he spent 1200$ ( he didn't spend them wisely as it was his first server though) . you think he would still play and spend if he got put into top 20 ( because the gap btw servers grows coz we can't do events other can) after a merge in a month or 2 ? he paid a lot of money to be top 2 and all of that would be wasted because a unreasonable timed merge. I'm top 1 on the server with just 80$ total but there is a big difference btw me and top players from other servers because f2p on servers near me have more power than me . Not to mention i can't finish the fateful encounter event until very late into the day and i'm basically always online simply because no one is on the server to do it with .
I know i'm ranting for nothing but me and the other people in top 5 ( 4 players coz 1 already quit ) will probably quit the game soon if nothings changes -
-
-
- Registered: 2017-07-24
- Topics: 13
- Posts: 310
- AkashaMoka On 2017-02-15 16:53:05
-
Yeah, it seems to be an unfortunate event where they look out for the spenders and not for the semi-spenders. The one issue I have with servers like yours, is they are very late into the gaming. I've looked at some 250+ servers and they are pretty dead and depressing. It's something you'd expect if you look in the forums, and if not, it is wise to make sure and check because you're thinking of spending and little do you know, could be a waste since you might lose out on events. My server was booming at the start for 1-2 months. During late October it has been pluming down, but like I mentioned, we have big spenders including myself.
To answer if I would quit if I was top 20, well not sure exactly. When I did play and spent maybe 200$ at the best I was like 11th best on my server at the time. I guess it didn't really bother me cause I played how I wanted to which was collecting ninjas and power up there and there. If I wanted to be top 1-2 for several months from now I should/could of avoided the tendo treasure and saved seals for Kage. Still cool to have tendo and hashirama as ninjas.
In the end, they most likely check all servers that are undergoing issues with inactivity and such, BUT they most likely look at who's their bigger spender. If this wasn't the case, they'd look at you guys first, not us. This post was last edited by AkashaMoka at 2017-2-15 16:55 This post was last edited by AkashaMoka at 2017-2-15 16:55
thanks for understanding my situation . yes it's really unfortunate that the gap btw dead servers and normal servers widen and when the eventual merge comes boom all people from the dead server quit because it was pointless but it was fun while it lasted.
Funny thing is you can't say servers from 250 are even that new servers when they opened 379 just recently.
I know my server is only 64 days old so it's not really an old server but if the gap between the players on my server and the servers near me widen more i won't bother playing anymore , i mean the top 10 on my server would be 60+ in a merged server . top 30 would be 203 ( if merge happened today btw 273 276 280 today) . My server is * but i don't want my players to suffer either merge us now so the gap doesn't widen or don't merge us ever and make sage be accessible even with 6-7 players online just make it less time the lower the number is -
-
-
- Registered: 2017-07-24
- Topics: 13
- Posts: 310
- Blackami974 On 2017-02-15 17:39:30
- Well what you need to reilise is if Oasis doesn't have a profit in merging the server you are on they will not probably do it in the near future even tho you think you deserve it or need it badly.Spenders are a big part of server atleast in the eyes of Oasis so if you are not lucky af complaining anymore wont probably do you any good.
the spenders on my server quit because they couldn't do sage world so of course there won't be spenders left if everyone quits because they are getting ignored and can't enjoy the game to it's fullest -
-
-
- Registered: 2017-07-24
- Topics: 13
- Posts: 310
- Blackami974 On 2017-02-15 18:15:25
- Ofc it is instead of putting out like 1 server per region per month so there will be actually hyped about it they put out tons bcs of profit but hey browser game what can you expect right :D
i expect fair treatment regardless how much i paid because i paid for the service or at least say it outright that the prefer servers who have bigger spenders over lower paying ones not act like they want the best interest for the community , all their care about is their pockets and nothing else .
Hell i even said in another thread that i would volunteer to check the power lvls of the servers to make merging as an enjoyable experience as possible for all servers involved but guess what the thread got locked (the 163 , 166 ,169 complain thread the first one not the current one) -
-
-
- Registered: 2017-07-24
- Topics: 13
- Posts: 310
- IamAscrub On 2017-02-16 00:54:32
-
I feel disheartened when I see a lot of complaints about server mergers. Personally, I'd be very happy to be in those servers.
I'm on a server with only 12 players at most during sage sign up time, clones included. I wish sage can even happen once a week.
Can't even get enough people to show up at GNW (which is just show up for free bags) to hand out hero gift packs...
Servers in far better conditions than mine get merged, yet they complain?:@
i know right? i mention your server if you read my post as being the one server who needs it the most and that people from decent sized servers complain because they dont have "competition". i couldn't care less about their competition i just want to be able to take part in all available events but it seems like that is asking too much if you aren't spending 3k $ per month -
-
-
- Registered: 2017-07-24
- Topics: 13
- Posts: 310
- IamAscrub On 2017-02-16 01:43:26
- I thought you were mentioning a different server since... sage doesn't happen any day at all for over 3 weeks now; with zero chance of it ever happening again without a merger.
no i mention my server 276 for the most part but in one of the paragraphs i mention your server as an exemple of a server with no GNW -
-
-
- Registered: 2017-07-24
- Topics: 13
- Posts: 310
- PraiseLuka On 2017-02-16 06:23:19
-
Here is how I think server merge and opening should be done.
For each region, a server is opened every 3-4 days, such that exactly 8 server are opened each month for each region, the first of which is on the 1st of the month.
After exactly one month since the 1st, 3rd, 5th and 7th of those server have opened, they are merged with the 2nd, 4th, 6th and 8th pairwise respectively, resulting in 4 servers.
After exactly two month of the opening of the 1st and 5th server, once again they are pairwise merged with their neighbor.
And finally, after three(or four) month of opening of the 1st of those server, they will all be together in one server.
So the end result is one server per month per region (in the long run)
Those merges will be automatic and in addition to existing merge framework (and not take up the "merge slots" so to speak)
Now, I'm sure someone want to ask me, why this complicated scheme when you COULD just have one server per month per region opening to begin with?
Well, from the player point of view, it's like this:
Not everyone is willing to wait a full month before joining the next "new" server. i mean some people might be willing to join the most recent one, learn about the game and THEN join the new server, but without a doubt there would be people who won't play the game unless they can get into a new server either right then and there or very very soon. And there are good reason for this, both in the form of being behind on progress than people who have already been in the server for potentially weeks AND server open events, which are often time limited and/or competitive, people would like to at least have a shot at those... probably.
Having a frequent open but auto merge structure will allow a player to play competitively in a "new server" for at least quite a bit of time before the server is potentially thrust into harsher weather--which they would have to be forced into if there was only one server a month anyway. Furthermore, if a player truly want to be competitive with minimal spending (or non at all), they could always wait for the start of next month for the new "batch" so he/she can have the time advantage on the rest of the batch, it's a known factor that can be planned for. The REAL potential problem of this structure is probably that #1 of each batch will be the most active while #8 might be a ghost town. Of course, #8 will also have less competition so ranking reward might help the players there to catch up with the majority of other server's population. Hopefully, there will be enough population to keep sage up until the auto merges.
From the "company" point of view, well like I said, there are more frequent server opening events which are competition, which makes people spend more money. Frankly, people joining a server after it's 2 weeks old and missing all the opening event are just unlikely to spend, compared to people who joined a new server. So this structure should encourage spending.
And now, for the merge of existing server.
First, I'd like to preclude servers that are less than a month old. Frankly, their population isn't stable nor is their power stable, so it could cause all sort of problems. Besides, a month is not exactly a huge amount of time to wait (chances are the server won't have that long to wait AFTER it become dead, because if a server is dead on week 1 or 2.... abandon ship would be a pretty darn sensible thing to do)
After that, the server with the lowest activity rating (however that is measured) will be selected as the merge "starter". With a "starter" selected, the top ftp power of all servers of that region will be used to find this "starter" a mate whose top ftp is closest in power to each other, and the activity rating of those two server will be added up. If this rating passes a certain threshold, then that's it, the two will merge and it will be finished. If not, they will find the next nearest mate, based on the average power of the top ftp of each server and add the activity rating of the three server together to see if they pass the threshold. This will repeat until the threshold is passed.
After this, this "set" of server is removed from the pool, and the next lowest activity server will be selected, and the process is repeated, up to however many groups of server they are willing to merge together in one batch.
Note that this does potentially have the possibility of merging one or more low activity server into one super highly active server, I think that's perfectly fine. because I don't believe we should exclude active servers from merge, as all that does is making matching servers of similar "strength" more difficult.
The entire process is also highly defined, because I really don't like it when server merge process have "human input". All that ever does is make people complain, because there will always people who feel they are getting the short end of the deal. Fairness can only be achieved by strict guidelines.
Of course, I'm sure there are factors that I haven't quite considered in this plan, so as it occurs, the guideline might be altered to prevent disasters. Still, a guideline should be maintained, infrequently altered(and at that only minorly to avoid disasters) and followed. This post was last edited by 117***@google at 2017-2-16 06:26
i love your idea on how they should merge the servers but i'm 100% sure they would never use such a system because they have spenders first and foremost in mind when they are deciding stuff and that is their biggest weakness as a game developer in my opinion . of course they are entitled to do whatever brings them more $ but it would be great if once in a while they have the f2p in mind like the current valentine event which i would say is an amazing event because it doesn't revolve around spending and it just a reward for being active in one special day of the year (this case week) -
-
-
- Registered: 2017-07-24
- Topics: 13
- Posts: 310
- ✪SalBoi On 2017-02-16 14:01:34
- Well we know that most online games are about spenders, and oasis wants the $ so making people quiting their current server because of lack of people will make some start over in a new server. And new servers are always popping because thats where cashers will go be able to get top 1 since its harder on a already existing server or a dead one. I think more than 60 servers were opened between the last 2 merges, which to be honest is ridiculous.
unless they will reply and confirm otherwise i think their model for merging is :
Does the server the server have 10+ hard cashers?
-> no -> oh well too bad doesn't matter what state your server is you don't deserve merge spend more and we think about it.
-> yes -> well , now that's what i wanted to hear , does your server need the merge because you can't do events ? - > no , hmm than why do you want merge? -> want more competition give me merge and i promise i drop a few thousand $ more -> oh if you put it that way , i can see how more competition is needed on your server. -
-
-
- Registered: 2017-07-24
- Topics: 13
- Posts: 310
- Gutsy Shinobi On 2017-02-16 20:38:32
-
well, you could merge with our s280 in the future (power and activity rate are similiar), but I dont see it happening any time soon, due to reason you mentioned, its not good for business... I noticed they started collecting data for the server merge purposes, but I dont think our servers will be merged in a month or two, although I'd appreciate it...
E.
out of all the servers near server 276 , your server 280 is the closest in terms of power lvl ,we are a bit weaker but it's because we lack sage world , only 280 and 269 would be good merges for my current server is they take the my server as middle ground which i wouldn't suggest as we are the weakest there . Other option would be server 287 but they are a bit younger , their top 1 is weaker than me , but everyone from top 2 onwards is stronger than my top 2 onwards . so the merge wouldnt damage them either.
Anyway asking for fair merge is a joke but i really wish they would consider it as all 3 servers wouldn't mind the merge after speaking with the group leaders from those servers -
Reply
Quicky Post
Reply
Log in in order to Post. LOGIN | Register