TERA Online forum archive
Posts by robertthebard
ElinUsagi wrote: »
ElinUsagi wrote: »
Man, I'd sure like to know what category in the store gives me that end game gear, and guaranteed enchants that would make me consider this game pay 2 win.

That said, I've managed to get my innerwear squared away w/out spending a dime of actual cash. I did lay out some gold to the broker though. It did mean that I did have to actually play the game to get the gold, but that's what the whole idea of a game is, isn't it? Hell, it's so easy to get that on my first 65 on AV, a guild mate gave me a set of the right innerwear for my archer. So maybe pay attention to the broker, and get that gold together instead? In the meantime, keep working on the GF tokens, maybe you'll get it for that effort instead.

Effort =/= Luck.

GF tokens are more about Luck than Effort. I got BiS inners in first try last patch and in this one again. However most people I know haven't in many months doing GG every day.

Asking to get it for cash doesn't do much either. They're in the way they are because it generates more income, because as much as people complain all over the internet about loot boxes, it would seem people buy the hell out of them. I don't remember if it was ESO or GW 2 where they did a leveling event that gave away loot boxes at certain milestones, and people were complaining that they couldn't get 'em for free. It was GW 2, however, where the complaint was that they couldn't P2W on the CS... So let's just leave it like it is, it's really better this way.

Regarding GG, I haven't even gotten to 80 tokens yet, with 5 characters running it twice a day. The RNG gods have always hated me, for about 25 years now, and I still don't think it's a great idea to remove that. The idea of an MMO is to keep people working towards a goal. Putting it all in the CS doesn't do a lot for longevity. The ones with the disposable income will dispose of the income, then have nothing to play for, and leave, seen it happen. You'd be surprised how many people that complain about P2W will actually P2W if they have the chance.

I really think Inner stats should be able to be enchanted/upgraded as gear is and cash shop should only provide with diferent skins for inners but this thing got in-game so much time ago that now it is a core system to make money also.

I'd be for allowing us to enchant them.

ElinUsagi wrote: »
Man, I'd sure like to know what category in the store gives me that end game gear, and guaranteed enchants that would make me consider this game pay 2 win.

That said, I've managed to get my innerwear squared away w/out spending a dime of actual cash. I did lay out some gold to the broker though. It did mean that I did have to actually play the game to get the gold, but that's what the whole idea of a game is, isn't it? Hell, it's so easy to get that on my first 65 on AV, a guild mate gave me a set of the right innerwear for my archer. So maybe pay attention to the broker, and get that gold together instead? In the meantime, keep working on the GF tokens, maybe you'll get it for that effort instead.

Effort =/= Luck.

GF tokens are more about Luck than Effort. I got BiS inners in first try last patch and in this one again. However most people I know haven't in many months doing GG every day.

Asking to get it for cash doesn't do much either. They're in the way they are because it generates more income, because as much as people complain all over the internet about loot boxes, it would seem people buy the hell out of them. I don't remember if it was ESO or GW 2 where they did a leveling event that gave away loot boxes at certain milestones, and people were complaining that they couldn't get 'em for free. It was GW 2, however, where the complaint was that they couldn't P2W on the CS... So let's just leave it like it is, it's really better this way.

Regarding GG, I haven't even gotten to 80 tokens yet, with 5 characters running it twice a day. The RNG gods have always hated me, for about 25 years now, and I still don't think it's a great idea to remove that. The idea of an MMO is to keep people working towards a goal. Putting it all in the CS doesn't do a lot for longevity. The ones with the disposable income will dispose of the income, then have nothing to play for, and leave, seen it happen. You'd be surprised how many people that complain about P2W will actually P2W if they have the chance.
Man, I'd sure like to know what category in the store gives me that end game gear, and guaranteed enchants that would make me consider this game pay 2 win.

That said, I've managed to get my innerwear squared away w/out spending a dime of actual cash. I did lay out some gold to the broker though. It did mean that I did have to actually play the game to get the gold, but that's what the whole idea of a game is, isn't it? Hell, it's so easy to get that on my first 65 on AV, a guild mate gave me a set of the right innerwear for my archer. So maybe pay attention to the broker, and get that gold together instead? In the meantime, keep working on the GF tokens, maybe you'll get it for that effort instead.
Equitas wrote: »
Christin wrote: »
I thought that was gonna be, "Too Bad So Sad!"

I think this merge will be exciting. From what the supporters said, this will solve Tera's problems for sure. I can't wait to hear you all rejoice after it's completed.

Literally nobody has said that this will solve this TERA's problems. Once again, you don't know what you're talking about. I'm not entirely sure why you continue talking anyway. You don't play this game.

Have we been reading the same threads? Is this a "fall back" post, so you can point to it later and say "see, I said nobody said it would fix anything, so nyah"? Meanwhile, every thread starter has made that exact claim, that it would fix their problems with the game. Everyone that's posted in support of a merge has also supported said claim, directly or indirectly. "But my queues/LFG will fill faster", a fairly common misconception, is an argument used quite often, and would seem to be a position that claims that it would indeed fix the game.

A question, however: If it's not going to "fix the game", why do it?
Hell, why not make it easier to obtain essence, and veilthroch aside from the hardest dungeon in game on hard mode. 30 battleground coins for 1 essence which equals about on average 20 games depending whether you get 1,2 or 3 coins which most the time is 1 coin. Each game lasts about 20-30 mins which is about the same time frame it takes someone to run a PVE dungeon. The only difference is the PVP player has to run the equivalent of 15-20 battlegrounds to get ONE essence when a PVE player gets to run 1 dungeon and has a good chance at getting 1-3 essence. I'd rather see a huge reduction in the costs of buying essence with dungeon coins rather than some dumb XP boost which only proves the point being made here that this game is starting to become a pay to win. You're basically slapping current players in the face that have spent a huge amount of time obtaining the xp they have by giving people a free pass to skip that entire process if they pay for it. THAT is the definition of PAY TO WIN!

Except it's really not? What part of ixp is going to guarantee success on an enchant attempt? I currently have about 40 xp boosters sitting in my bank, I've been collecting them since I started rolling characters, and have maybe used 2 total getting 5 toons to 65, and one sitting at 63 this morning. Nope, not a lot of characters, but that doesn't account for the 7 I deleted that were 45+ when they confirmed that they're doing a server merge, no point in getting invested in toons I may have to delete anyway. I digress however: Increasing the amount of ixp you get doesn't solve the main issue I'm seeing both in this thread, and in game; failing enchants. Unless you think failing sooner is somehow a win?
xoBarb wrote: »

I don't like, or dislike it, I really don't care about it. I just wanted to point out the irony of coming to the forums insulting the publishers, who decide what rules to enforce, and who handle support tickets, all while demanding they take care of a problem you're having getting a reward. Calling me uninformed does not cover up the inherent stupidity of that action.

I don't see where he was insulting in his OP. I'd call him a bit aggressive in dealing with inept people posting actual nonsense in his thread
i.e "this is fake! old pit of petrax run!" / "wow you refreshed your willpower! this is on-par with proxy and the exploit that caused EVERYONE to be shafted!"
Arnetra wrote: »
In reference to https://forums.enmasse.com/tera/discussion/28311/pit-of-petrax-leaderboards-rewards.

I recorded my current rank 1 run, so you're free to verify that it was done legitimately. There is no reason whatsoever I shouldn't be given the reward I was promised and earned. I'll be filing a ticket and waiting for a mask token in the mail of my gunner if I'm still rank 1 at the postponed end of the season.

EME is a company. Maintaining TERA is apart of their job.

This was poorly handled and the removal of rewards screwed honest players out of rewards.

They're embracing how lazy & incompetent they are when they'd rather blanket ban EVERYONE instead of singling out those who used the "exploit"

These people make an actual income off running this game lmao

I didn't reply to his initial post, I did, however, address the post I did quote, both times.
Arnetra wrote: »
Arnetra wrote: »
iljd wrote: »
gj you still abused a willpower bug in game, grats on ur mask!!

lol what a joke

Not sure why this would be abusing a bug, it's a mechanic in the game anyone can utilize; casting bombardment and BV always resets your willpower timer, it's clearly not an accident they included that behavior on those skills, use them in any context and your willpower buff timer resets, so why would it be abuse to make use of that behavior? I even spelled out exactly how to use it in the video desciption, and told another guy it was explained there. Just because you're too dumb to use a game mechanic doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be used.

I'd really rather not put in the effort to argue against such clearly uniformed viewpoints, but I have no faith in the community or EME team to be able to realize how stupid some of the crap that gets said here is. The only "jokes" here are people like you and that other dude who post their opinions without bothering to look into even the slightest details of what they're talking about.

Yeah, and the people that make the rules, you know, the ones you just called dumb, can decide that your technique is not working as intended, which then makes that common mechanic that anyone can use an exploit. If they were to decide that, you have just provided them with video evidence of you using said exploit. Somebody's dumb, but I'm not sure who that would be. You see, the nature of an exploit is a game mechanic that anyone can use, that may not be working as intended, and people use it anyway. You may well be right, and it may well be on the "that's fine" list, I'd just hope, if I were you, that throwing insults at them while defending the use doesn't push their decision making the other way, after all, you did provide them all the evidence they'd need if they were to decide it's exploitive.

Hope it works out for you, one way or the other, but really, even if they decided "It's working as intended", calling them dumb probably isn't a good way to get them to give you any prizes. Again, someone's dumb, but I'm still not quite sure who.

More uninformed people chiming in, I feel like you people are just looking to get a rise out of me at this point. EME doesn't make the game, BHS does. Why don't you guys all call them up and ask them whether this is supposed to be in the game, I get the feeling it'll go something like this:



Already explained this is something that can be done by anyone in the base game, just because you don't like it doesn't mean it isn't a part of the game. Not going to continue this avenue of discussion, since I'll just be repeating myself, and these comments are so inane it makes me wonder whether you people aren't serious and are just trolling me.

I don't like, or dislike it, I really don't care about it. I just wanted to point out the irony of coming to the forums insulting the publishers, who decide what rules to enforce, and who handle support tickets, all while demanding they take care of a problem you're having getting a reward. Calling me uninformed does not cover up the inherent stupidity of that action.
Arnetra wrote: »
iljd wrote: »
gj you still abused a willpower bug in game, grats on ur mask!!

lol what a joke

Not sure why this would be abusing a bug, it's a mechanic in the game anyone can utilize; casting bombardment and BV always resets your willpower timer, it's clearly not an accident they included that behavior on those skills, use them in any context and your willpower buff timer resets, so why would it be abuse to make use of that behavior? I even spelled out exactly how to use it in the video desciption, and told another guy it was explained there. Just because you're too dumb to use a game mechanic doesn't mean it can't or shouldn't be used.

I'd really rather not put in the effort to argue against such clearly uniformed viewpoints, but I have no faith in the community or EME team to be able to realize how stupid some of the crap that gets said here is. The only "jokes" here are people like you and that other dude who post their opinions without bothering to look into even the slightest details of what they're talking about.

Yeah, and the people that make the rules, you know, the ones you just called dumb, can decide that your technique is not working as intended, which then makes that common mechanic that anyone can use an exploit. If they were to decide that, you have just provided them with video evidence of you using said exploit. Somebody's dumb, but I'm not sure who that would be. You see, the nature of an exploit is a game mechanic that anyone can use, that may not be working as intended, and people use it anyway. You may well be right, and it may well be on the "that's fine" list, I'd just hope, if I were you, that throwing insults at them while defending the use doesn't push their decision making the other way, after all, you did provide them all the evidence they'd need if they were to decide it's exploitive.

Hope it works out for you, one way or the other, but really, even if they decided "It's working as intended", calling them dumb probably isn't a good way to get them to give you any prizes. Again, someone's dumb, but I'm still not quite sure who.

Games like any other Fiction are better the more firmly Grounded in reality they are where they can be, Vs making nonsense up out of whole cloth; What made Tolkien's work a Classic is he understood intimately the Ancient world he was extrapolating from to create his own.

As far as playing for fun, why else would I, have an occupation. I play games just to smash a few Ugiles on my time off; but Good Consistent art is definitely a must. And Lancer's Aside I think Tera's art team does an above average job. But As too your Question about the Lancer Wielding his weapon in a Arcing motion, That looks real good now doesn't it? but of course thats a personal view.

I was in Highwatch today, I saw other gunners, some Warriors, some sort of Mage; not a single Lance, now maybe in town you just cant tell; but it occurs to me I dont think I have ever seen a Lancer in town; and people are daily begging for Tanks in LFG. Perhaps I am wrong about Why; but it seems to me that aspect of the game is pretty obviously broken; I only hope the intended audience the Devs will consider the original post and suggestion solution.

Well, that's certainly a subjective opinion. WoW is pretty popular, and it's not firmly grounded in anything like reality, is it? As to applying that philosophy to fiction in general, I'm guessing that that's not only subjective, but also pretty narrowly held as a belief. The whole point of fiction is to break away from reality, so I'd say that that would be closer to a fallacy than a fact.

I was in Highwatch yesterday, and didn't see a single gunner. I'm not sure why nobody's playing them... Another fallacy presented as fact, even though I really didn't see any gunners in Highwatch yesterday, that doesn't mean that nobody's playing them. It could mean that there were some there, and you didn't see them, or, it could mean that they don't hang out in Highwatch to avoid constantly being whispered to join groups because they need a tank. Then there's the "Leroy Jenkins" aspect I mentioned before, that keeps tanks, and healers, from hitting random pugs. I'll also note that "people are begging daily for tanks in LFG" isn't only a reflection on Lancers, but the other tanking classes as well. If they were the only mitigation tank in game, you'd be able to use that as a legit argument, but they're not. So unless the argument is that there's a complete lack of tanks in the game, you're going to miss the mark trying to lay that on a lack of one tanking class.
CornishRex wrote: »
@Blackbirdx61
The heck you talking about, people love lancers in tera ..

I think We will have to agree to Disagree on this one, People may Love other people playing the Lancer, but they do not Gravitate to the Class themselves. I dont believe this is the case in other games, certainly I've never seen another game that has a shortage of Armored Heavies, whether their role be Tank or DPS; and will stand by my suggestion to the Devs, that at least part of this stems from the Visuals of the Class.

My experience of Gamer's in General has been is there is no shortage of folks willing to take on a challenging class if it otherwise appeals to them.


Interesting, because my experience tells me that people tend to gravitate away from "publicly played tanks" more than from tanks in general. I know plenty of people that play tanks scattered across a multitude of MMOs, but if you're a DPS in a queue, waiting for them to hit it, you'll be waiting a very long time, because they don't hit the queues. It's not the aesthetics, it's "Leeroy Jenkins". The same can be said for healers in queues, but that's another topic for another thread.

I tried Lancer, and I didn't like it, but it wasn't aesthetics, it was resource management, which may be better late and end game, but for what I played, that was my issue. Of note here, on another point, a 10 foot long, about 3 meters spear would be impractical for a tanking type weapon, but the Spartan spear could indeed be used in sweeping arcs, albeit with the goal of tripping enemies, as opposed to slashing, although the tip would slash. These lances seem somewhere in the middle of those, and with a few design tweaks on the latter, it would be fine to say it could also be used for slashing. That said, a classic "sword and board", even if that sword is a mace/hammer type weapon, would be a nice addition.
How many people are going to be, or have been scammed, by a practice that has no controls, and no way for the devs/publishers to stop it? The potential for abuse is, in essence, the only reason needed to forbid it.

Well, two points briefly:

1) If there's "no way for the devs/publishers to stop it" anyway, is there any point in forbidding it? (It just pushes the whole thing deeper underground...)

and

2) Just to be clear, (not that they will, but for the sake of the argument) if the devs provided an in-game function that allowed the trades to occur safely with appropriate safeguards to prevent abuse, would people then be okay with it? I'm supposing not. So, although "the potential for abuse" maybe the only reason you think is needed to justify forbidding it, I don't think it's the real reason people want it forbidden.

Officially speaking, the "side" that EME has come down on so far is that name trades for gold = okay. Name trades for cash = not okay. Advertising name selling on the forum = not okay.

Anyway, main reason I'm keeping this going is that I'm legitimately interested in finding more convincing arguments. I'd like a rematch for my lost debate. :p

You had that in my first post in this exchange: Free market isn't a valid point. There's a market for people, and people are sold every day, so that means that we should just turn a blind eye to it? By ceding this point in your debate, you're saying "Yes" to that question. All the arguments you've used apply, across the board. "Well, if they try to enforce the law, they'll just go further underground" fits every bit as well with human trafficking as it does with name selling. "Well, people are going to buy them", seems like it fits pretty well, if people weren't buying them, there'd be no market, right?

The actual argument is: Just because something can be sold, doesn't mean it should be, for all of the reasons I've listed both here and in other posts. Driving them further underground would still be a good thing, it would "keep the honest people honest". If they're not readily available, they'll lose their market, and they'll lose it pretty fast. The "but google it" argument falls flat, because EME could google it too. One can rationalize anything, if they so choose, and frankly, you lost a debate to a rationalization: Others are doing it, so it must be ok, or, more accurately "others will buy them, so it must be ok", and it's not ok, a rational look at what that can apply to demonstrates that. People buy in game currency through RMT all the time, so it must be ok, how long until you lose that argument, based on the same logic that lost you this debate?
You could use that argument, yes. However, if it hasn't been legalized, then it's still illegal. Now, illegal is a stretch for this conversation, but it is still not within the rules for our region. Since it's not within the rules for our region, saying "but it's ok over there" should be met with one answer: Go play over there. If they're doing RMTs for names, they should be permanently banned. They can come to the forums and try to rationalize it if they want to, but if you were buying currency through RMT, you'd get a vacation, and the seller accounts do get permanently banned, so the punishment for RMT should be consistent. It doesn't matter if it's a name, or currency, if you're selling for real money, you are violating the tos, and need to be removed.

You're right that selling names (or any in-game items, services, accounts, whatever) for real-world currency is against the rules and a bannable offense. Where things get a lot more grey, though, is selling names for in-game gold. Technically that is not forbidden by any rule right now. Advertising said sales is not allowed on the forum (currently allowed on Discord), but the trade itself is allowed. Maybe it should be forbidden, but you're back at the earlier point: why is it wrong? And then I think you're back at the three arguments I made originally. Maybe you can add a fourth argument that, given that you're forbidding name-selling for cash, and given that there's no in-game mechanic for selling names for gold, there's no real way to allow name-selling but forbid only the RMT aspect (you can't stop how people do the trade once it's outside the game), so unless you add the option to the game itself it's better to ban it all. But then that's countered by the original opponent's argument that this would also block legitimate trades between friends or alt accounts that are not at all opportunistic, so isn't worth the loss.

I guess one way would be if there were a fair survey/poll/study that demonstrated conclusively that a large majority of players just don't like name-trading. That's not actually a good argument (since public opinion is not objective), but it's at least a pretty good rationalization for policy. What I can at least conclude after seeing all the threads about this over the years is that: 1) a vocal part of the community really hates name-selling, but 2) some people are definitely still buying.

Friends are trading names? The first step is for the devs/publisher to come down on a side. Once that side is established, rules for that need to be enforced. If it's on third party sites, or discord, whatever, they would need to step up and enforce them. At that point "why is it bad" comes down to "because you don't own it, and you can't sell what you don't own", which is the same thing that's supposed to apply to account selling, for example. How many people are going to be, or have been scammed, by a practice that has no controls, and no way for the devs/publishers to stop it? The potential for abuse is, in essence, the only reason needed to forbid it. I think it's GW 2 that doesn't allow any in game trading for just this reason, it lets their support team work on real issues instead of "but he scammed me out of x".
ElinLove wrote: »
Let's also not forget how even the most capitalist and free-market known countries still have many ways to deal against monopoly and eliminating any system that is either fraud-prone or literally made for this intent.

Well, the problem is that if you really push that front, there are lots of ways of solving this problem. For example, J-TERA is having a name-release at the end of August. But after the name-release, there's a period of about one month where none of the released names can be claimed except if you use a name change voucher. That way, basically, the main way to buy names is from them by paying a tax. Of course, someone *could* use a name change voucher, get the name, and then another person use a voucher to buy it from them... but this is basically a double-tax.

In other words, if you use the analogy that it's like drugs, the reaction isn't necessarily to forbid it. You could do like Canada with marijuana and just legalize it (and tax the hell out of it). I'm not sure if that's really better in this particular case... but it would definitely curb name selling somewhat if it weren't free to the would-be seller...

You could use that argument, yes. However, if it hasn't been legalized, then it's still illegal. Now, illegal is a stretch for this conversation, but it is still not within the rules for our region. Since it's not within the rules for our region, saying "but it's ok over there" should be met with one answer: Go play over there. If they're doing RMTs for names, they should be permanently banned. They can come to the forums and try to rationalize it if they want to, but if you were buying currency through RMT, you'd get a vacation, and the seller accounts do get permanently banned, so the punishment for RMT should be consistent. It doesn't matter if it's a name, or currency, if you're selling for real money, you are violating the tos, and need to be removed.
Zoknahal wrote: »
All i really want for the server merge, is for EME to be extremely strict on the name hoarding and selling. This shady business has to stop, and they have the power and authority to make it stop.

I got into a debate with someone about this issue once. I was making your general argument (name selling is bad for customers and should be firmly forbidden), and the other party took the free market position.

They argued basically this:

1) Given that names are a limited commodity, "first-come, first-serve" is the most fair way to make names available. All other methods create their own added inconveniences for those who legitimately want the names.

2) Like any limited commodity, it makes sense that people will ascribe a value to this commodity. Why shouldn't this limited commodity be traded based on fair market value like anything else?

3) Any measures you put in place to prevent name selling will also prevent people from legitimately trying to give a name to their friend or re-use it on another account. Is the problem of name-selling worth this added inconvenience to legitimate customers who want to trade names?


My arguments were basically:

1) Name-selling creates an artificial pressure on name supply that encourages people to hoard them in order to sell them, and this prevents legitimate customers (particularly new players) from claiming them organically.

2) Name-selling transactions are outside of the game so are open to various forms of fraud (unlike the trades that are facilitated in the game proper).

3) Given that things like account-trading and advertising of RMT are forbidden in official channels (along with advertisements to sell names), isn't it logically inconsistent to have functionality that supports these sorts of outside transactions when you have the ability to prevent it?


I still mostly believe in my arguments, but I had to concede that they won the debate in the end. It's basically "capitalism" (names are a rare valuable quantity, and those that have them should be able to capitalize on their free-market value) vs. "socialism" (or maybe Marxism?) (names are a rare resource that should be distributed fairly to those who need and will use them without an ulterior motive).

(You could also add K-TERA's "commercialism" to the mix too, I guess. Allow name-selling, but only if they buy a name change voucher on the store, so we tax it! lol )

You took the wrong tack: Substitute "drugs" or "children" for names, and see if the argument still holds up. Drug and human trafficking are very real things, so there must be a market for them, and yet, they are both illegal. In short, just because one can sell a thing doesn't mean one should be selling that thing.
KXRC9JMW74 wrote: »
1st come 1st serve or gets the name others can go cry when you lose your name

Can I use this as a sig, so that if it's you, and you come here to complain about losing a name, I can just point to the sig?
they could merge all the servers into 1 server, and it would still fail if they don't fix why people are leaving the game in the first place. it also didn't help that they didn't block new characters being made in the more popular servers so that the lesser populated ones could grow, and this goes back before the lot merges. they should have paid attention to their game and done something about it years ago, but they didn't. merging 3 dead servers into 1 only made a big dead server with name and character limit problems. im hoping they will learn from their past mistakes, but their history shows that they never do.
they claim that they listened to the players and decided to merge the servers for them, so hopefully they will listen to us and do right with the mergers or they will need to just go ahead and make that 1 big mega server cause so many will leave again and take their money with them.

Because that doesn't work. If I'm joining a game to play with friends, and they're on a locked server, I'll just let 'em know I can't play, and go back to what I was playing before, or find the next new one, to me, anyway. I've been on both sides of this, with friends that couldn't roll on my server, and where I couldn't roll on a server. The end result was the same, no new player(s), and the loss of one, where my friends couldn't join me, we went to another game, and played there.
Luniack wrote: »
play time
item level
wipe if was inactive and give priority for the player who still plays.
nice ideas!

New player rolls an alt, gets a "good" name, logs in after merge to find that other player desires said name, and new player is forced to change it. New player leaves, and the whole purpose of a server merge is defeated. There is no "nice idea" for active players. There are only self serving ideas, that don't do much to help the health of the overall game, but to assuage someone's ego.

If there is a target server: Active players on said server keep their names, regardless of who's coming in insisting they have more "right" to it than someone else.

If it's a "new" server: First come, first serve. If you snooze, you lose, just like it works now if a name isn't available. This doesn't do anything for retention of my above example, but it's infinitely more "fair" than "I wanted that name, and now I'm going to take it because gear". In so far as inactive players are concerned, meh, not really an issue, especially if it's a year or more inactive.
6PLYMD55EL wrote: »
ElinUsagi wrote: »
6PLYMD55EL wrote: »
@KitTeaCup PLEASE DON T LISTEN TO SERAPHINUSH,AV NEEDS A MERGE SO MUCH,in my opinion,it s better to merge all pves(ch,tr and av) and all pvps(ff and mt),it s just my suggestion :)

I am not worried about MT and FF being merged, if anything that will make MT CU more lively because even FF has more guilds trying to get ranks (the [filtered] even AV has more guild trying than any other server) and I am not talking about feeder guilds.

However, merging 3 servers may get more issues because a lot of similar character names from diferent players and also the other issue at had, from players having more character on those 3 servers than the limit amount of characters the game allows you to have.

about the names,it s ok,a lot of inative chars will lost their names,and about char slots,we will probably get the server we have the max char slots available,and i can t belive there is a lot of people that play with a lot of chars in 3 servers x-x,still aggre with 3 pves becoming 1,+people +runs +lfg +people learning and getting opportunity to run end game content,leaving av or ch alone will just make more players transfer to tr and killing av and ch more and more until there are only static parties :(

The majority of your LFG woes can already be traced to static parties. Dungeon run today, random queue, trying to do a quest, 3/5 wanted to just skip it for their zerg. I'm not mad, 2/5 did the quest, and still had to go help the zergers with the boss they were so worried about getting to, so the 3 minutes of guard duty wouldn't have been anything of an inconvenience, but if my guild had 5 players in that range, I'd have built a static from there, and run with that. I already run endgame stuff in guild groups, no LFG, no queues, I run with the guild, or I don't run. Why put myself through the aggravation, if I don't have to?
voidy wrote: »
voidy wrote: »
Pages wrote: »
ElinLove wrote: »
News this fall eh? As long as the issues are solved, then I'm fine with it. AS LONG AS.

They won't be. Server merges solve 0 issues and create infinite.

Not even just talking about "muh names" but rather the fact that it doesn't increase player retention (as evidenced by Fey Forest) and just makes the game look even more dead when there's 3 servers that struggle to fill as opposed to 5.

There were a lot of possible solutions and this was the worst one. You can't indefinitely merge servers. Eventually you only have 1 server left, and if that one dies, the game is in maintenance mode.

I do agree that Tera has a lot of things that stop people from playing, but the whole Fey Forest merge only failed because it was EME merging multiple dead servers after people bled out when the steam release hype died down. Merge multiple dead servers and you get one megadeadserver.

As for player retention, I'd say in this case a server merge would help quite a bit. People leave a multiplayer game when it feels dead. Some server transfer, but most leave. They stay when it feels alive and has people for them to play with. Merging everyone into one or two servers would cover all of the population complaints discussed in this thread and would drive people to play more because they finally feel like their feedback is heard and it's been addressed in a way that covers their concerns. Hell, I know some people who would come back because of something like this. For actual examples of it working in other games, just look at games like BDO, where the megaserver setup makes the game feel super packed, even as the game empties out because of its own separate management issues.

>Eventually you only have 1 server left, and if that one dies, the game is in maintenance mode
Game's already in decline except for one (maybe two) thriving server, so I don't see your point here. There's really no point in having a bunch of dead "backup" worlds. If the game dies when everyone's merged into one server, you can bet it would've happened even faster if people were spread out among 5.

>There were a lot of possible solutions
Like what? A shared LFG? A shared brokerage? At that point, you might as well merge the servers anyway.

KitTeaCup wrote: »

Thank you for starting on this; it's something most people have wanted for a long time.

So, if we're talking dead servers, and they plan to merge the dead servers, we're just going to get mega dead servers, right? I mean, you said it yourself, so all this will do is cost some/a lot of players a lot of money for no net gain. Guess it'll be a done deal soon enough, so it's a good thing I put my wallet away before I got too heavily invested, and now I know there's no reason to get heavily invested.

We don't know what they're planning to merge yet, since they haven't released that information yet. I'd assume they'd condense everything down to 2 megaservers, 1 pve and 1 pvp, but again, I have no way of knowing. But yeah, obviously if all they do is merge FF/AV/CH, it'll be a disaster. My post obviously assumes that they aren't going to do something that stupid.

Reading through the two threads that have been "featured" on the first page since I've been here, we're talking 5 dead servers of 5 servers, so the only solution is to merge them all into one? Two if they hold on to PvP and PvE distinctions? We're still left with, according to these threads, dead servers all around, so any merge would be merging dead servers together, to create mega dead servers. In so far as LFG issues go, the end result is going to be another thread asking for a merge, if there's anything left to merge, likely within a month of the actual merge, maybe a bit longer. I've seen it happen in weeks, when the miracle cure-all of a merge didn't correct grouping queue type issues.
Yakusan wrote: »
There's way too many taken names by inactive members for the server merger to be a "success", i feel it's a more pressing issue as well. I'd like to see names get free'd up before we're stuck losing our ign's with the merges.

Wait, what? You're saying that the servers are dead enough to warrant a merge because Player Y couldn't get the name they wanted? Or, is this a fallback post for when a merge doesn't solve the issues that had players insisting it was needed?
voidy wrote: »
Pages wrote: »
ElinLove wrote: »
News this fall eh? As long as the issues are solved, then I'm fine with it. AS LONG AS.

They won't be. Server merges solve 0 issues and create infinite.

Not even just talking about "muh names" but rather the fact that it doesn't increase player retention (as evidenced by Fey Forest) and just makes the game look even more dead when there's 3 servers that struggle to fill as opposed to 5.

There were a lot of possible solutions and this was the worst one. You can't indefinitely merge servers. Eventually you only have 1 server left, and if that one dies, the game is in maintenance mode.

I do agree that Tera has a lot of things that stop people from playing, but the whole Fey Forest merge only failed because it was EME merging multiple dead servers after people bled out when the steam release hype died down. Merge multiple dead servers and you get one megadeadserver.

As for player retention, I'd say in this case a server merge would help quite a bit. People leave a multiplayer game when it feels dead. Some server transfer, but most leave. They stay when it feels alive and has people for them to play with. Merging everyone into one or two servers would cover all of the population complaints discussed in this thread and would drive people to play more because they finally feel like their feedback is heard and it's been addressed in a way that covers their concerns. Hell, I know some people who would come back because of something like this. For actual examples of it working in other games, just look at games like BDO, where the megaserver setup makes the game feel super packed, even as the game empties out because of its own separate management issues.

>Eventually you only have 1 server left, and if that one dies, the game is in maintenance mode
Game's already in decline except for one (maybe two) thriving server, so I don't see your point here. There's really no point in having a bunch of dead "backup" worlds. If the game dies when everyone's merged into one server, you can bet it would've happened even faster if people were spread out among 5.

>There were a lot of possible solutions
Like what? A shared LFG? A shared brokerage? At that point, you might as well merge the servers anyway.

KitTeaCup wrote: »

Thank you for starting on this; it's something most people have wanted for a long time.

So, if we're talking dead servers, and they plan to merge the dead servers, we're just going to get mega dead servers, right? I mean, you said it yourself, so all this will do is cost some/a lot of players a lot of money for no net gain. Guess it'll be a done deal soon enough, so it's a good thing I put my wallet away before I got too heavily invested, and now I know there's no reason to get heavily invested.
Equitas wrote: »
The validity of argument directly depends on the reasoning behind it. "But muh ad hominem" isn't a valid defense here. I'm not saying I believe people should lose character slots and other things. EME needs to do this thing right if they do it at all. What I'm saying is that people who don't play anymore, or don't do anything while they're on, need to stop being put on the same level of merit as those who do.

Honestly, too much Forum PvP for me. You're not actually disagreeing with his actual argument, then. You could have just said: yes, we need a merger, but yes, we need a solution to this problem at the same time so people aren't screwed during a merger. I don't think he was ever trying to claim that his concern was more important on the global scale, but it's obviously important to him and to others who would be hurt by it. We can have both, and should push for that.

In my personal order of preference (if anything were possible):

1. I would first start by implementing cross-server LFG to see to what degree that helps. (I'm pretty sure they hinted this was in the works, but I would want to know if/when.)
2. If that's not enough, I would also consider cross-server broker.
3. If a merger is determined to be necessary, ideally I would increase the maximum amount of character slots and bank/wardrobe slots to be the max total of the combined servers. (That might require some adjustment to the bank UI.) Amount received on the combined server should be the total of all combined servers, not the max.
4. If 3) isn't possible, then I would *at least* remove the feature that requires people to delete characters when the exceed the cap. Just let them keep using whatever characters they have even if they can't create more. (This alone wouldn't address the bank issue, which may require a different solution.)
5. If 4) isn't possible, then I would run a report on the amount of players who would be affected by character overflow and determine if a manual solution (such as item rebinding) is feasible for these cases or not. If it's not feasible to handle it manually, I would devise some sort of compensation program based on an inventory of characters/items bound before the announcement.

Maybe there are other ideas beyond these; those are just off the top of my head.

In the end, no matter what, there is some way to deal with it so that it at least acknowledges the problem and tries to come with as equitable a solution as possible.

Ordinarily, bank limits exist due to database concerns. Now maybe it wouldn't be as much of an issue since they load the bank one page at a time, but the limit isn't an arbitrarily arrived at number, usually. The easiest way to check this would be to empty page one, and then open the bank, then, fill it back up, and load it again, and note the time lag between empty and full. Then multiply that by x, with x being a number of players accessing that database at the same time, server wide, since it's all the same database. So while increasing the bank space may be feasible, it may not be practical. Too much strain can cause a crash, which can lead to lost items, and maybe even game downtime while the crash is reset.

I'm sure that, if it were as simple as adding another row of slots to the UI, it would have been done by now. Bank space is a marketable item, after all, and if they can sell it, they'll surely add it. I'm not even being negative when I say that, it's common sense business practice. So I'm betting that there's something on the backend that doesn't allow this.
Equitas wrote: »
kamizuma wrote: »
Ya I continually ask that question because I want to know what's going to happen to them? Not sure why you're unable to comprehend this simple question lol. And I still have yet to receive a proper answer besides "deal with it just get your [filtered] deleted". If I get a legitimate answer that addresses my concerns then sure I'd support a merge but until then nah. Also I didn't just "make them for the sake of having them", I actually use them all and have spent a decent amount of time on each and every one of them. If I wanted to literally just inflate my character count to show off then why do I not have max characters on TR? There's more to this game than just pvp/pve but then again I'm not surprised you have such a narrow viewpoint.

Again, there's more to this game than pvp/pve. Ok so they shouldn't have to pay to move but I should have to "pay" by potentially losing a lot of stuff in a merge? Dude if I didn't have an actual stake in this then I could care less what happens and I wouldn't even post in these threads. But the fact stands that if we were to have a merge, what happens to all my excess characters I have that all have 2x+ bank pets filled with items??? What happens to my excess bank tabs/wardrobes. Are my items going to be permanently stuck in some temp bank where once I take it out I can't put it back in? Am I going to have to DELETE my characters that are all filled with hundreds of items just so I can log in (like the last merge)????

You keep regurgitating this nonsense about "using" and "spending time on" your characters. You don't run any PvE or PvP content. You try to say "there's more to this game than pvp/pve." TERA, like most fantasy MMOs, centers around players fighting monsters and clearing dungeons. PvP aspects also exist for those people who are interested. It's not my "narrow viewpoint". That's just the reality. Again, you do neither of these things. I don't know why you don't have max characters on TR. I don't know why you do any of the things you do. The point is that you don't do anything, so it doesn't matter what happens to you or your characters. It doesn't matter if you support the move or not. I don't know why you think I can't comprehend the question when I've already answered it. En Masse can find a way to successfully put everything together, but nobody is worried about someone who doesn't play and who accumulated a bunch of items just for the sake of having them.
ElinLove wrote: »
ElinUsagi wrote: »
kamizuma wrote: »
And I still have yet to receive a proper answer besides "deal with it just get your [filtered] deleted". If I get a legitimate answer that addresses my concerns then sure I'd support a merge but until then nah.

That's the answer that we got 2 years ago with the server merge from 3 servers.

Correct me if I'm wrong since my memory for stuff I don't give a dime anymore may be quite bad, but wasn't it also such that, when the 3 merged, accounts from those servers were given character slot in Fey Forest equal in count to the highest character slot count server you have?
As in, you had 3 slots in Valley of Titans, 2 in Highwatch and 5 in Lake of Tears (were those the names? Heh memory might be better than I thought if so), in this scenario you would get 5 slots, instead of the sum of 10.

If that isn't a "Lol screw ya deal with it" then I don't know what is. They could very easily just do as Counterpoint said and make the slot count per account, regardless of server and you're set, but I don't see 'em doing it anytime soon, much less just because suddenly merge threads became weekly. "but people have been asking for merges since betaaa" whatever, it still ain't changing the problems with it.


Also, guys, please, just simply stop trying to force your point down other's throat as if others were selfish alone. EVERYONE is selfish here on their own ideas and everyone can pose their point as if it was a fact for the best of the community. None of us is "in the right" or wrong in this. They do need to deal with quite some issues on the server merge issue, and it's NOT a "fact" that the benefits will outweigh the disadvantages, it's just a matter of point of view.

Even saying that it's a temporary solution, might not be factual. It may even backfire as bad publicity of a dying game, fearmongering the current players and potential new ones. Again, none of this is fact, we have 0 data, it's just one of the many possibilities, that they do need to consider.
But I will for sure say that if I have to start deleting characters to fit on servers, I'll not be happy "buT YoURe nOT eVEn plAYIN anymOORE", yeah whatever, may as well just not come back after it, just like many other possible thousands out there.
The issues are there, the benefits are there too, the issues do have to be dealt with even before betting on the benefits.

Here's that acknowledgement you're looking for. Also, I don't know why you keep talking about nobody being "in the right", that there aren't any facts, continually referring to factual statements as "opinions", and so on. Even more so that you don't play anymore and you're just throwing fodder in for the sake of throwing fodder in.
Actually, I do have some data, as a new player, and an altaholic, I'm done spending money here. I don't have enough money to just throw it away on things like bank and characters that I may not be able to keep. I so wanted to max out slots, and build a tank, at least, but nope. Not so long as it's going to be "choose who you delete so we can do a merge" that, in my own experience, doesn't solve queue problems anyway. What is the ratio of tanks/healers to dps toons? Now the matching system will let you run w/out a tank, but I have yet to see it put a group together with no healer. This is a more common issue with queues than population. How many static groups are there, with healers that won't run in a queue, since healers are notoriously hammered in PuGs? How many dungeons are run per day that never see the matching system? There's so much more to slow queue times than population, and this isn't speculation on my part, this is decades of experience dealing with queues.

We're not talking about queues. We're talking about forming groups. Instance matching puts groups together from across all servers. Most people don't like using IM for more difficult dungeons, so they form their own groups on their own servers. Combining servers would enlarge the pool of players to form groups with.
Oh come on guys don't be so harsh on kamizuma he's pretty useful to the community and claims there's more than pve and pvp in tera like playing in the broker, increasing prices on broker, making everyone's life worse, manipulating the market. It's your fault guys for having such a narrow mind that you can't enjoy that wonderful broker content, but even if you can't enjoy broker, you can play pranks on people making a challenge where if someone can exchange 1 bronze with you, you will give them 100kk back but that will never happen because you can't exceed the maximum gold in your inventory, increasing your popularity as the coolest guy with the most important opinion about tera topics, that's why I think you guys are being too harsh on poor kamizuma, don't forget that he's part of the Player Council and why tera's such a good game with him in it.

Joined July 22, 2018 7:00pm

I have no respect for someone that has to hide behind an alternate account to make comments.
Dvsv wrote: »
Tbh for me (and prob the vast majority of players), unless we are talking from a RMTer POV, theres's no fkn point to play this game daily to just "play the broker" and earn millions on useless virtual currency with 0 liquidity.

Who got the "narrow mind here"? You're playing a action video game dude, I'm pretty sure the original dev put a lot of effort on this ~50GB game to be much more than a "broker simulator" lol.
Just ask yourself: If everyone quit this game cuz horrible "PVP/PVE" content, to whom will you sell your stuff?? lol
I'm srry, but I think that EME first should hear the complaints from people who actually still play this game .

There we go.
as a player council member, couldn't you find out for us from eme what would happen about all of our characters and items if a server merger were to happen and what they plan to do if they decided to do it? I know the p.c. members don't really have any say so or power, but it seems like eme staff could at least let you guys know something and in turn tell us.

If EME staff don't even know what's going on, you think they'd pass information along to the Player Council?
Ad hominem attacks are counterproductive. There are other examples in this thread beyond just this one case, and the validity of the argument doesn't depend on whether you agree on how one person plays the game (trying to discredit the argument by attacking the person saying it is a logical fallacy).

No matter what, people should not have to lose characters (for which they expanded their character slots) or bound items in a merger, nor should they have to buy even more character slots than what they already had to be able to keep using those characters. It doesn't matter if anyone thinks they don't "need" those characters; they used the character slots, and they shouldn't lose them. And it's not as though it's an inevitability to begin with -- EME could do a merger and find a way to deal with this problem at the same time.

The validity of argument directly depends on the reasoning behind it. "But muh ad hominem" isn't a valid defense here. I'm not saying I believe people should lose character slots and other things. EME needs to do this thing right if they do it at all. What I'm saying is that people who don't play anymore, or don't do anything while they're on, need to stop being put on the same level of merit as those who do.
kubitoid wrote: »
and youre holding candle?
jk B) <3

ps - tbh im against personal attacks on forums in any form but i upvote that equitas person every time they throw stuff and watnot at kamizuma pls keep it up

Here's that acknowledgement you and vkobe are looking for. Also, I'm not your personal army. If you've got something to say to or about him, grow a spine and say it yourself.

Last time I tried to edit out to get to just what I wanted, I broke the whole damn internet, so: It doesn't matter if it's IM or actually posting an LFG, static groups are static. If I want to run something, and I have a static group, I'm not going to hit a PUG. There is no difference there. You want, or need there to be one for some sort of validation, but it doesn't matter. If players aren't hitting the LFG posts on all servers, putting them together isn't going to change that. I've seen the aftermath of this scenario.

Three dungeon runs in two days where I didn't get my quests done inside, despite stating at the start that I wanted to do them. This is why I won't be overly concerned about queueing up for content. I'm in guilds on both servers I play on, if I need a group, I'll speak up in guild, put something together and run it. I'm not going to be mad at someone that's run the content 1,000 times wanting to zerg it and be done, I'd feel the same way, but since I'm still trying to get first runs on more than a few characters, zerging isn't going to get me what I need. A premade group, however, will. I'm a veteran MMO player, I can, if I have to, and have, in point of fact, come back later and solo it. My experience with grouping so far has taught me that I'm better off doing that, so that I know I'll get my quests done, than relying on Matching, or hitting an LFG.
SageWindu wrote: »
SageWindu wrote: »
So I see this working, for about a month. Then, everyone has everything, and we're parked at "There's no reason to run this, I have all I need". There's no market for it any more either, because everyone's getting it for free in the dungeons, why buy it, where it's something that can be sold? Over the last 30ish years, I've seen that scenario pop up more than people may like to admit or know. Once you have the items that drop from a dungeon, what's the impetus to run it any more? The whole idea behind the way loot drops in MMOs is to keep people striving for it, or for the upgrades, but once everyone has it, there is no impetus to run it, there is no reason to set foot in there again, unless you decide you want to help a friend/guild mate get something.

Never underestimate a person's laziness.

I'm going to reference 2 other games for this: Warframe and Path of Exile. Both games allow for a person to trade various items (Warframe goes the extra mile and lets you trade premium currency for items). Warframe features many high-tier items that are gated in some fashion: you have to run specific missions, with specific gear or loadouts, at specific times of the day, the list goes on. There are some people who'd rather just pay for the [filtered] than try to run the content themselves and the reasons why may be as numerous as the people who play the game in the first place (Primes and "corrupted mods" are a hot commodity).

Trading in Path of Exile can be seen as an integral part of the game as you may need specific items (or an "advanced" version of something you already have that does more or different things) or you may need to clear a specific dungeon in order to optimize your character. A common practice in reference to the latter is what's called "Uber Lab Carries," wherein a very confident player volunteers to take someone else through "The Lord's Labyrinth" with the usual stipulation being "your offering, my loot" (read: you open the dungeon, they clear it for you, but whatever drops is theirs). Again, the person agreeing to the carry may not want to go through the dungeons themselves for any number of reasons.

Which brings us back to your point. I would argue that even if you already have everything, the next person may not, and thus you (or someone else) have your incentive to run something. Then they run something for the next person, they run something for the next person, and so on and so on.

Except that, in your example, everyone's not getting the drop, hence "your offering, my loot". If everyone's getting the drops, that doesn't really work, does it? The way it's laid out, all you have to do is be in party, in the dungeon, to get the same chance as someone that's doing the carrying. The only way to balance that out would be to make the drops even rarer than they are now, and I'm guessing that that wouldn't go over very well.

Yeah, but that's not the point I was making, in reference to the point you made in the part I quoted.

You asked what incentive would people have to run dungeons if they already have everything from running dungeons, right? I answered - in somewhat laborious fashion, I'll admit - that profit would ultimately be that incentive. And favor with a "younger" member of the playerbase, if that person happens to care about such things ("I met this player in the game and they took me through blahblahblah! It was awesome!"). You find people, you get loot, you sell it, ???, and profit.

Sort of like the old days of TERA before crafting got gutted, really.

I wasn't here for the crafting gutting... Anyway, there's not going to be any profit to be made. After a few months, on the outside, the market is going to be flooded with those "rare" drops. In the early days of Neverwinter, you could fully end game equip your character for under 1K gold. You could get that gold just leveling up, no need to play the market, or trade runs for loot. Just run the story quests to end game, hit the AH, and presto. I geared up 4 characters in exactly that fashion, and then found that there was nothing to play for. That whole process took two weeks.
SageWindu wrote: »
So I see this working, for about a month. Then, everyone has everything, and we're parked at "There's no reason to run this, I have all I need". There's no market for it any more either, because everyone's getting it for free in the dungeons, why buy it, where it's something that can be sold? Over the last 30ish years, I've seen that scenario pop up more than people may like to admit or know. Once you have the items that drop from a dungeon, what's the impetus to run it any more? The whole idea behind the way loot drops in MMOs is to keep people striving for it, or for the upgrades, but once everyone has it, there is no impetus to run it, there is no reason to set foot in there again, unless you decide you want to help a friend/guild mate get something.

Never underestimate a person's laziness.

I'm going to reference 2 other games for this: Warframe and Path of Exile. Both games allow for a person to trade various items (Warframe goes the extra mile and lets you trade premium currency for items). Warframe features many high-tier items that are gated in some fashion: you have to run specific missions, with specific gear or loadouts, at specific times of the day, the list goes on. There are some people who'd rather just pay for the [filtered] than try to run the content themselves and the reasons why may be as numerous as the people who play the game in the first place (Primes and "corrupted mods" are a hot commodity).

Trading in Path of Exile can be seen as an integral part of the game as you may need specific items (or an "advanced" version of something you already have that does more or different things) or you may need to clear a specific dungeon in order to optimize your character. A common practice in reference to the latter is what's called "Uber Lab Carries," wherein a very confident player volunteers to take someone else through "The Lord's Labyrinth" with the usual stipulation being "your offering, my loot" (read: you open the dungeon, they clear it for you, but whatever drops is theirs). Again, the person agreeing to the carry may not want to go through the dungeons themselves for any number of reasons.

Which brings us back to your point. I would argue that even if you already have everything, the next person may not, and thus you (or someone else) have your incentive to run something. Then they run something for the next person, they run something for the next person, and so on and so on.

Except that, in your example, everyone's not getting the drop, hence "your offering, my loot". If everyone's getting the drops, that doesn't really work, does it? The way it's laid out, all you have to do is be in party, in the dungeon, to get the same chance as someone that's doing the carrying. The only way to balance that out would be to make the drops even rarer than they are now, and I'm guessing that that wouldn't go over very well.
SageWindu wrote: »
A dps/healer might work (no, that isn't what mystic is..)
something that heals passively based on it's own damage, e.g. reaper style play where each sundering is aoe heal, whipsaw is a bunch of tiny heals, etc. Would make healer more engaging to play, but the problem is that i don't think bhs could ever tune a class like that correctly, there would either be 4 in every party or 0 in the entire game

I don't know. The only MMO where I could successfully play a healer was swtor, and that was because they, for the most part, were closer to a dps with heals. This is what makes me suck at healer, btw, I prefer to knock stuff on the head than to stand around, dodging red, and throwing heals out. I'm not sure how it works here, as I haven't, and don't plan to look at a healer class, but if the healing were more "passive" than active, I might be able to play one. So your idea isn't as farfetched as you may think.

The closest thing you have to that is the mystic (they're the "red mage" of the mage trio, with priest being white and sorc being black) with how they're motes work. Sadly you're not gonna find any Oberon-style classes - where the class has an ability that grants passive health regeneration to themselves and nearby allies - in this game.

In swtor, playing on a sage/sorc healer, I could target the tank, drop an AoE heal, and still throw out dps, since I didn't have to swap targets for the dps. That's closer to what I meant by "passive" than say a chanter in Aion, which had an aura that put out HoTs.
A dps/healer might work (no, that isn't what mystic is..)
something that heals passively based on it's own damage, e.g. reaper style play where each sundering is aoe heal, whipsaw is a bunch of tiny heals, etc. Would make healer more engaging to play, but the problem is that i don't think bhs could ever tune a class like that correctly, there would either be 4 in every party or 0 in the entire game

I don't know. The only MMO where I could successfully play a healer was swtor, and that was because they, for the most part, were closer to a dps with heals. This is what makes me suck at healer, btw, I prefer to knock stuff on the head than to stand around, dodging red, and throwing heals out. I'm not sure how it works here, as I haven't, and don't plan to look at a healer class, but if the healing were more "passive" than active, I might be able to play one. So your idea isn't as farfetched as you may think.
ElinLove wrote: »
ElinUsagi wrote: »
kamizuma wrote: »
And I still have yet to receive a proper answer besides "deal with it just get your [filtered] deleted". If I get a legitimate answer that addresses my concerns then sure I'd support a merge but until then nah.

That's the answer that we got 2 years ago with the server merge from 3 servers.

Correct me if I'm wrong since my memory for stuff I don't give a dime anymore may be quite bad, but wasn't it also such that, when the 3 merged, accounts from those servers were given character slot in Fey Forest equal in count to the highest character slot count server you have?
As in, you had 3 slots in Valley of Titans, 2 in Highwatch and 5 in Lake of Tears (were those the names? Heh memory might be better than I thought if so), in this scenario you would get 5 slots, instead of the sum of 10.

If that isn't a "Lol screw ya deal with it" then I don't know what is. They could very easily just do as Counterpoint said and make the slot count per account, regardless of server and you're set, but I don't see 'em doing it anytime soon, much less just because suddenly merge threads became weekly. "but people have been asking for merges since betaaa" whatever, it still ain't changing the problems with it.


Also, guys, please, just simply stop trying to force your point down other's throat as if others were selfish alone. EVERYONE is selfish here on their own ideas and everyone can pose their point as if it was a fact for the best of the community. None of us is "in the right" or wrong in this. They do need to deal with quite some issues on the server merge issue, and it's NOT a "fact" that the benefits will outweigh the disadvantages, it's just a matter of point of view.

Even saying that it's a temporary solution, might not be factual. It may even backfire as bad publicity of a dying game, fearmongering the current players and potential new ones. Again, none of this is fact, we have 0 data, it's just one of the many possibilities, that they do need to consider.
But I will for sure say that if I have to start deleting characters to fit on servers, I'll not be happy "buT YoURe nOT eVEn plAYIN anymOORE", yeah whatever, may as well just not come back after it, just like many other possible thousands out there.
The issues are there, the benefits are there too, the issues do have to be dealt with even before betting on the benefits.

Actually, I do have some data, as a new player, and an altaholic, I'm done spending money here. I don't have enough money to just throw it away on things like bank and characters that I may not be able to keep. I so wanted to max out slots, and build a tank, at least, but nope. Not so long as it's going to be "choose who you delete so we can do a merge" that, in my own experience, doesn't solve queue problems anyway. What is the ratio of tanks/healers to dps toons? Now the matching system will let you run w/out a tank, but I have yet to see it put a group together with no healer. This is a more common issue with queues than population. How many static groups are there, with healers that won't run in a queue, since healers are notoriously hammered in PuGs? How many dungeons are run per day that never see the matching system? There's so much more to slow queue times than population, and this isn't speculation on my part, this is decades of experience dealing with queues.
So I see this working, for about a month. Then, everyone has everything, and we're parked at "There's no reason to run this, I have all I need". There's no market for it any more either, because everyone's getting it for free in the dungeons, why buy it, where it's something that can be sold? Over the last 30ish years, I've seen that scenario pop up more than people may like to admit or know. Once you have the items that drop from a dungeon, what's the impetus to run it any more? The whole idea behind the way loot drops in MMOs is to keep people striving for it, or for the upgrades, but once everyone has it, there is no impetus to run it, there is no reason to set foot in there again, unless you decide you want to help a friend/guild mate get something.

The latter situation should already exist. In fact, it's likely that it does exist, and that the reason people have such a hard time with the queues is that people are running in static groups, attempting to gear people they know, instead of gambling on the matching system. This happens a lot in MMOs with matching, because you can't control who you get, so they just form a static group, and run with them. So I don't see this as being a way to help the game, just to help specific gamers, and what happens once they get what they need?
SageWindu wrote: »
SageWindu wrote: »
Shinku89 wrote: »
Nobody is playing because there are tons of reasons for longer-term players to stop, e.g. maxed out xp on stormcry+9 on multiple alts, can't pvp because it's full of cheaters, fun content isn't rewarding at all if you're geared already (wtf do i need 300 elemental essence for lol?), rewarding content isn't fun at all if you're geared already (wow cool i can walk around iod one shotting bams and make thousands of gold but doing the hardest dungeon in the game is a profit of 1/10th of that!)

We don't need new content or server merges, we need a reason to play the game. Make end-game content that is rewarding to do, maybe a mode of HM dungeons that don't drop mats but drop fun stuff instead, i would rather have a loot box than another worthless veilthroch any day.

So true, top dungeons are not rewarding anymore, they should at least make it possible to sell runs like before (passing drops for the Oath gear for example, without the seller participating in the dungeon).

A quick and/or easy fix to that would be to remove both the bind-on-pickup and Round Robin/Dice Roll mechanics in regards to loot drops. Just let everyone get the item if it drops, with the only barrier being that someone needs to actually collect the item in question.

Yes, this means that a floormat would also get a rare drop without putting in much work, but this also means that the run doesn't end up being wasted because the aforementioned floormat won the dice roll on the rare drop and you didn't. Give and take and all that.

But I digress.

I'll tell you what a better fix would be, and I had this happen to me just today: Fix the mechanics where by if you stop to do a quest inside the dungeon, and the group zergs past it and kills the next boss, it kills your quest progression. This is the problem with random PUGs, such as what we get with matching. People will, after a few instances of this, either find a static group, or, what I've taken to doing, just come back later and solo it to get the story progression. Neither of these does anything for the randoms sitting in a queue, but, it does make it where you're pretty sure you're going to get what you're looking for quest wise in a dungeon. It's especially bad when you communicate to the group that you need it/want it, and nobody responds, and just zergs on by.

A server merge won't fix that either.

Leveling dungeons are a whole other can of peanut butter if you ask me. Having to do a dungeon to proceed with a quest: fine. Specifically having to do the 5-man version of that dungeon to proceed with a quest: wtf?

As you said, a server merge won't fix that, as it's once again an issue that exists outside of population density.

Agreed, although I don't mind it, in theory. I used to play an old Korean grinder called Rappelz, and the only way you leveled up, after 80, for the longest time was by forming up parties and running dungeons. They've since added quests post 80, but for a couple of years, that was it. So I'm used to the idea, but if they're going to do it, they need to make sure that you can get what you signed up for, no matter what the group's doing. Lock that door until the quest is done, or whatever, so that you don't spend an inordinate amount of time in a queue, only to not get the story part done. Make a story version, and remove the fancy drops, but this has me to the point where I don't really hit the queues any more, I just get to the dungeon, and then skip to the next story/part of the story and come back and solo it later. I'm not going to fault people that have done them 100s of times, or more, for wanting to zerg it. I'd want to as well, but it does put a crimp in the whole point of having the dungeons in the story if you can't get the story while you're in there.
Kirasaka wrote: »
DL7MMWLJ3W wrote: »
Kirasaka wrote: »
I remember when spacecats tried to do this and the guy they picked kept stating wrong information. EME just spent the entire time chat banning people from twitch. I dont think this kind of thing will work anymore.
Finally someone with a brain knows what's up.

People thought I was being negative and stirring up lies but no this actually happened.

Now that the playerbase is dying more, there's hardly any worthwhile ppl to find for this kind of thing.

Are there not any players worth consulting about specific classes? Or is it that your friends aren't here, and you feel like they're the only ones qualified to give these kinds of presentations? I know I've seen the latter claim actually made in other MMOs; "but my friends are the only ones that know how to play that/those class/classes, and they don't play any more". That really screams of a limited experience with the player base more than any kind of factual claim.

What I have observed, however, is a distinct lack of caring about showing a new player what they may be doing wrong. I started a thread in the player guide/help section, looking for what I may be doing wrong concerning getting quest credit in specific dungeons, and it got one reply, which was better than the results I got in game, when I asked around in Velika, and nobody replied. This comes back to a reason why there might be a declining player base, and it also speaks to why a server merge wouldn't fix it. It's not going to make people more willing to help someone out when they ask for it. So anything like this, that may actually try to help those people would be appreciated by the people that need it, especially if they know about it, which can be solved by posting it on the launcher, and assuming the information is accurate. The caveat to that also being that the people claiming it's not accurate aren't just thinking "that's not how I do it, so it's wrong", which happens a lot in MMOs where you do have some kind of build choice.

Problem with when spacecats did it was that the majority of the information given was actually incorrect. There is no point trying to teach new players if most of the information is incorrect, it will not help them it will just make them worse. If anyone actually listened to the 'advice' on that stream then they would have been awful in dungeons and labelled as a trap ingame. Im all for helping new players but it has to be done right, teaching them false information is not going to help them as a player or help them get invited to parties.

Which goes along with what I said: The information needs to be accurate, but the measure shouldn't be "but that's not how I do it". If it's genuinely wrong, it will do more harm than good. If it's some elitist making a claim based on "what I do", it could still be accurate. However, it can be misleading trying to sort "is it wrong" from "If you don't do what I say, you're doing it wrong".
SageWindu wrote: »
Shinku89 wrote: »
Nobody is playing because there are tons of reasons for longer-term players to stop, e.g. maxed out xp on stormcry+9 on multiple alts, can't pvp because it's full of cheaters, fun content isn't rewarding at all if you're geared already (wtf do i need 300 elemental essence for lol?), rewarding content isn't fun at all if you're geared already (wow cool i can walk around iod one shotting bams and make thousands of gold but doing the hardest dungeon in the game is a profit of 1/10th of that!)

We don't need new content or server merges, we need a reason to play the game. Make end-game content that is rewarding to do, maybe a mode of HM dungeons that don't drop mats but drop fun stuff instead, i would rather have a loot box than another worthless veilthroch any day.

So true, top dungeons are not rewarding anymore, they should at least make it possible to sell runs like before (passing drops for the Oath gear for example, without the seller participating in the dungeon).

A quick and/or easy fix to that would be to remove both the bind-on-pickup and Round Robin/Dice Roll mechanics in regards to loot drops. Just let everyone get the item if it drops, with the only barrier being that someone needs to actually collect the item in question.

Yes, this means that a floormat would also get a rare drop without putting in much work, but this also means that the run doesn't end up being wasted because the aforementioned floormat won the dice roll on the rare drop and you didn't. Give and take and all that.

But I digress.

I'll tell you what a better fix would be, and I had this happen to me just today: Fix the mechanics where by if you stop to do a quest inside the dungeon, and the group zergs past it and kills the next boss, it kills your quest progression. This is the problem with random PUGs, such as what we get with matching. People will, after a few instances of this, either find a static group, or, what I've taken to doing, just come back later and solo it to get the story progression. Neither of these does anything for the randoms sitting in a queue, but, it does make it where you're pretty sure you're going to get what you're looking for quest wise in a dungeon. It's especially bad when you communicate to the group that you need it/want it, and nobody responds, and just zergs on by.

A server merge won't fix that either.
Lapomko wrote: »
EME could do a scan of active accounts inside the database and see how many accounts would be affected by the merge to see if it's worth it. If you lose your accounts and items/gold just suck it up because you agreed to their ToS that you do not own anything in this game.

...and this logic right here is exactly why I put my wallet away. As much as I want some more character slots, and want to expand my bank, I'm not going to throw good money away. I'll preorder Assassin's Creed Odyssey with that money instead, and I'll skip next month's elite status, and any other money I'd planned to spend, until I know what's going on. I don't own items in game, and I don't own the gold, but I do own my credit card, and it's parked. I hope that there's enough income from "but we want merges" to carry them for a while, because if not, merges won't stop the closure when the money stops coming in.
DL7MMWLJ3W wrote: »
Kirasaka wrote: »
I remember when spacecats tried to do this and the guy they picked kept stating wrong information. EME just spent the entire time chat banning people from twitch. I dont think this kind of thing will work anymore.
Finally someone with a brain knows what's up.

People thought I was being negative and stirring up lies but no this actually happened.

Now that the playerbase is dying more, there's hardly any worthwhile ppl to find for this kind of thing.

Are there not any players worth consulting about specific classes? Or is it that your friends aren't here, and you feel like they're the only ones qualified to give these kinds of presentations? I know I've seen the latter claim actually made in other MMOs; "but my friends are the only ones that know how to play that/those class/classes, and they don't play any more". That really screams of a limited experience with the player base more than any kind of factual claim.

What I have observed, however, is a distinct lack of caring about showing a new player what they may be doing wrong. I started a thread in the player guide/help section, looking for what I may be doing wrong concerning getting quest credit in specific dungeons, and it got one reply, which was better than the results I got in game, when I asked around in Velika, and nobody replied. This comes back to a reason why there might be a declining player base, and it also speaks to why a server merge wouldn't fix it. It's not going to make people more willing to help someone out when they ask for it. So anything like this, that may actually try to help those people would be appreciated by the people that need it, especially if they know about it, which can be solved by posting it on the launcher, and assuming the information is accurate. The caveat to that also being that the people claiming it's not accurate aren't just thinking "that's not how I do it, so it's wrong", which happens a lot in MMOs where you do have some kind of build choice.
ZingoPingo wrote: »
kamizuma wrote: »
BOBBYYYY wrote: »
kamizuma wrote: »
what happens to my characters then

SVHhgT1.png

you're the only person that has 17 characters on every server though and i bet 90% of them are not even level 65. You played when there was a server merge and you expected it not to happen again? can we expand character slots? are you against server merge because its easier to control trade broker when server is dead?

doesn't matter if they aren't 65. I still play every single one of them and i put 2x bank pets on every single one of them. I also used 50+ additional character slots and 20+ bank slots. I'm just asking what's going to happen to my characters. Are they to be deleted ? Then what happens to all my banks/wardrobes? I have 8 bank tabs/4 wardrobes full on every server. Do those get deleted too??? (yes i know about the temporary bank but what i mean is now i have to deal with 80+ excess bank/pet tabs/wardrobe tabs being stuffed on a single server now when I effectively already have minimal space to begin with?)

Seriously so SICK of seeing your "I have 80 characters lmao" posts. Can't you just delete your characters & their banks for the sake of the playerbase??? You player council people are so selfish it's insane.
/s

Really, because this seems like a pretty selfish post right here. "Sacrifice your time and money for my benefit" is exactly how this post reads to me. Ultimately, if they decide they do need to merge them, people are going to wind up out money they spent. It won't be as bad in my case, since I haven't been around very long, but these people you insist need to sacrifice for your benefit? They're some of the ones that have kept the lights on at all, by spending that money to maintain those characters you want sacrificed. Who's being selfish?

I'm pretty sure the "/s" at the end was to denote sarcasm. But, that is indeed what some people say/imply when we have this debate.

The issue of character overflow does need some sort of answer. It alone shouldn't necessarily hold up the merger if the metrics say it's needed, but it's just something they need to think through. When the game's monetization strategy is all about pushing people to buy more character slots and character-bound items, you'd want to make sure those people don't suffer the most in a merger.

I always use /sarcasm, intent is hard to relay in text, and that leaves no doubt.

It's hard to address, even in this environment. They can expand slots, give out free name changes, etc, but what happens when you have maxed out bank on two servers, and they merge them? What I'm left wondering is how many of the people asking for this, on an apparently regular basis, are based on PvP-centric servers. Because in my own experience with MMOs, those are the hardest hit by low populations. In a vast majority of those cases the "wounds" are self inflicted. "But farming lowbies is fun", etc. Reading around the forums I gather that that's no longer possible here, but that doesn't change the nature of the community, in general.

To be fair, the PvP community has as many elitists as the end game PvE community, maybe more, and they can create an unfun environment for any that don't fit into their parameters of acceptable play. For myself, it's not a big deal, I played Asmodian on Elyos dominated servers for 5+ years in Aion, and I didn't mind it one bit. PvP was a lot easier to find, or more accurately, harder to avoid, as an Asmodian, because once one found you, 100 more were coming to pick the bones. In those situations, you killed as many as you could before they got you, and then you either went back to get some more, if you could, or you went somewhere else. There were a lot more that simply bailed though. That last line is the problem on OW PvP servers, people that want to play roll somewhere else, so they can, and you start getting regular forum posts looking for server merges.

For the PvE servers, a lot of the groups that I've wound up in through Matching haven't had a tank. My first two runs of Sinestral Manor, for example, were three man teams that we built at the portal, and completed running short 2 players. Time of day is a factor, age of the game is another, but ultimately, unless someone knows a server where tanks and healers are sitting in a queue for hours, a common situation for dps characters in swtor, off the top of my head, merges aren't going to fix that imbalance. A new healer class might help that, putting more healers in the low level content, but I have to wonder, since I'm new here, how many groups run the content as premades? That's not going to stop in a merge, and if one doesn't have the friends, or a guild of like leveled players, the situation is going to be exactly the same, and the last round of server merges in swtor is the best evidence I have for that. The queue times didn't change, at all, for dps characters. My guild leader and I spent 45 minutes waiting in the queue for a pop, I switched to my tank, and he to a healer, and we popped almost instantly, for the exact same content. There are so many more factors to a queue time than simply population that it's hard for me to get on board with "but a merge will fix all that".
ZingoPingo wrote: »
kamizuma wrote: »
BOBBYYYY wrote: »
kamizuma wrote: »
what happens to my characters then

SVHhgT1.png

you're the only person that has 17 characters on every server though and i bet 90% of them are not even level 65. You played when there was a server merge and you expected it not to happen again? can we expand character slots? are you against server merge because its easier to control trade broker when server is dead?

doesn't matter if they aren't 65. I still play every single one of them and i put 2x bank pets on every single one of them. I also used 50+ additional character slots and 20+ bank slots. I'm just asking what's going to happen to my characters. Are they to be deleted ? Then what happens to all my banks/wardrobes? I have 8 bank tabs/4 wardrobes full on every server. Do those get deleted too??? (yes i know about the temporary bank but what i mean is now i have to deal with 80+ excess bank/pet tabs/wardrobe tabs being stuffed on a single server now when I effectively already have minimal space to begin with?)

Seriously so SICK of seeing your "I have 80 characters lmao" posts. Can't you just delete your characters & their banks for the sake of the playerbase??? You player council people are so selfish it's insane.
/s

Really, because this seems like a pretty selfish post right here. "Sacrifice your time and money for my benefit" is exactly how this post reads to me. Ultimately, if they decide they do need to merge them, people are going to wind up out money they spent. It won't be as bad in my case, since I haven't been around very long, but these people you insist need to sacrifice for your benefit? They're some of the ones that have kept the lights on at all, by spending that money to maintain those characters you want sacrificed. Who's being selfish?
BOBBYYYY wrote: »
I play in the mornings and its so hard for me to run stuff. instead of it being completely dead in the mornings with a server merge it would likely be somewhat active right?

No. I have characters on both PvE servers, and I have an equally hard time getting groups on either one. So hard for some in fact that I had to just wait to outlevel it and come back and solo it, and we're talking entire chains worth of dungeons, on two servers.
The things that I'd find useful would include things like primary and secondary rotations, glyph builds, and why, and steering away from "this is the only way to do xxx". The latter gets featured far too prominently in guides, and is the primary cause for me turning them off, or causes me to stop reading them, along with anything else by whomever posted it.

Videos/streams that break that kind of stuff down would be worth watching, for all the classes I've elected to play, and for some that I've started out to play, and had to give up, like Slayer, which I found too cumbersome. I'm considering a tanking class, so streams about that, and the ins and outs of general tanking would be great as well. The idea posted about dungeon mechanics in the OP would also be a solid addition, but not just boss fight mechanics, but things like "how to ensure you get credit for your story missions in dungeons", an area where I've been having issues.

A schedule that can be checked, and adhered to would be great as well. So say if it's a Priest or Mystic stream, I'd know not to worry overmuch about catching it, since as a general rule I suck at healers in MMOs, and so won't be playing them. It makes the whole idea more useful to me, and I'm sure I'm not the only one that would benefit, if they know when to tune in for a stream.
I love the typo at the bottom of the update page though, the keys are on sale until June 31st. Since June only has 30 days...
Nope, no screenshots required, I know the guy you're talking about. So the only things I need worry about are getting the bomb, and blowing up the pillars, and I should be ok. I too suffer from "glaring at the queue timer", and that makes finally getting in and getting on it and then not getting the completion so frustrating.
I should note that they were both on Normal, and what I'm having trouble figuring out is if it's just a matter of zerging it, and skipping, or if everyone in the party has to interact with everything, or if one person doing it completes it for all, which I'm not sure is likely, if anyone else in either group were doing the quest.
So I ran Necromancer's Tomb twice, on two different characters, and didn't get credit for the quest on either one, what am I missing?
Equitas wrote: »
At the end of the day, TERA is a game. Games are meant to be played for fun. The day it stops being fun for you is the day it's time to stop.

Besides that, it's not a marriage. You don't have be bound in holy matrimony to one and only one (1) video game to completely consume all your free time. If you do that, I dare say you're going to miss out on a crapload of other fun games (whether within this genre or in countless other genres). Sometimes taking a break and trying other things refreshes the mind and reminds you of what it was you loved about the game in the first place. The good thing about an MMO is that they always make it possible to catch-up.

And also, it's summer (at least in the northern hemisphere). Tons of people take a break from this game every summer anyway so they can enjoy something different as a vacation. The sky will not fall while you're gone, and if by some wild chance it does, there was nothing you could have done about it anyway.

Hope everyone enjoys their summer and takes it easy.
Polygamy is illegal in the states .. !

That's why I only date video games...
I agree, but I'm not the one that gets to pull the trigger. The ones that do get to pull that trigger are gun shy, and use logic similar to what I've laid out as a justification for being so.
Equitas wrote: »
Welcome to an MMO with BG style PvP? If you think this is the only game where win trading is an issue, you need to browse more MMO forums. It's a thing, and it's a thing anywhere there's BGs for PvP. As a whole, PvP in these environments is a hot mess anyway. You will always have that crowd that would camp the lowbie zones, when allowed, and laugh as they mow through the lowbies. Something that, apparently, used to happen here? It's easy to sit back and blame devs, or publishers for the woes of PvP, but the root cause lies a bit closer to home. I'm not adverse, or allergic to PvP. I played Asmodian in Aion, for years, while we were outnumbered 10 to 1, and getting 200 people for a siege seemed like a major accomplishment, until you realized that that's how many Elyos were guarding an Abyss Teleporter.

Hacking in PvP isn't novel for this game either. It happens everywhere, and the funny thing, funny strange, not "ha ha" is that you could sub out the dev/publisher names in any given thread discussing it, and wouldn't feel out of place. There were more than a few discussions about it in the swtor forums, along with the win trading and people being afk, etc. It's not a publisher/dev problem, it's a player problem, and the only fix is to judicially hand out bans, which then cuts an already starving, in some games, community even more.

On topic:

It's hard to draw players from places like PubG or Fortnite. The people playing there were more likely to be playing CoD or Battlefield, along those lines, than something like this. Sure there's crossover, but for retention, those are the wrong games to be targeting. I'm fixing to talk to my guildmates from DDO, to see if they want to come over, and at least try it out. I'm not sure how successful that will be, it's a pretty international crowd, but it's worth a shot. I know that I've been having a good time with it, and getting a community of players that one enjoys playing with can only help retention.

I've had a couple of bugs come up, but CS was right on top of it, and resolved them pretty fast, considering my past experiences with MMOs. Other than that, and some player error issues, I'm not having a hard time running the game from the central US.

I don't think that shady tactics or use of scripts are exclusive to TERA. I didn't even make the implication. Just because it happens in other games, however, doesn't mean it's okay here. It's not okay anywhere. I realize that the blame lies largely with the players for employing illegitimate methods, but that doesn't absolve the developers and publishers of their responsibility.

It's not ok anywhere. However, the only way the devs can address is covered in the post you quoted here. They can judicially hand out bans, which then reduces the PvP-centric population further, which makes the situation even worse for the dedicated PvP crowd, including those that aren't cheating. I'd prefer the ban route, myself, as PvP is a take it or leave it item for me. That doesn't change the impact it can have on the population, however.
Equitas wrote: »
How is TERA "fixed"? The lore is a garbled mess to begin with, further complicated by the swapping out of dungeons central to the main story. Much of the old content has been rendered obsolete, broken, or outright removed. PvP is a mess because people don't know how to stop using 3rd-party programs, or at the least having people "feed" them. Optimization is still an issue and has actually gotten worse. I am genuinely curious to know what you think was fixed.

Welcome to an MMO with BG style PvP? If you think this is the only game where win trading is an issue, you need to browse more MMO forums. It's a thing, and it's a thing anywhere there's BGs for PvP. As a whole, PvP in these environments is a hot mess anyway. You will always have that crowd that would camp the lowbie zones, when allowed, and laugh as they mow through the lowbies. Something that, apparently, used to happen here? It's easy to sit back and blame devs, or publishers for the woes of PvP, but the root cause lies a bit closer to home. I'm not adverse, or allergic to PvP. I played Asmodian in Aion, for years, while we were outnumbered 10 to 1, and getting 200 people for a siege seemed like a major accomplishment, until you realized that that's how many Elyos were guarding an Abyss Teleporter.

Hacking in PvP isn't novel for this game either. It happens everywhere, and the funny thing, funny strange, not "ha ha" is that you could sub out the dev/publisher names in any given thread discussing it, and wouldn't feel out of place. There were more than a few discussions about it in the swtor forums, along with the win trading and people being afk, etc. It's not a publisher/dev problem, it's a player problem, and the only fix is to judicially hand out bans, which then cuts an already starving, in some games, community even more.

On topic:

It's hard to draw players from places like PubG or Fortnite. The people playing there were more likely to be playing CoD or Battlefield, along those lines, than something like this. Sure there's crossover, but for retention, those are the wrong games to be targeting. I'm fixing to talk to my guildmates from DDO, to see if they want to come over, and at least try it out. I'm not sure how successful that will be, it's a pretty international crowd, but it's worth a shot. I know that I've been having a good time with it, and getting a community of players that one enjoys playing with can only help retention.

I've had a couple of bugs come up, but CS was right on top of it, and resolved them pretty fast, considering my past experiences with MMOs. Other than that, and some player error issues, I'm not having a hard time running the game from the central US.
Xristosx wrote: »
Good, all the toxic pvpers will leave and contaminate another game. The fact your calling something "pussification" makes me believe your one of those said toxic pvpers.
Besides pvp bg's current are actually the most rewarding money wise content in the game atm if they could change that and give that rewards to pve while their at it Ell Oh ell.

I'm guessing you are one of those ppl who enter fwc in equalized gear and pve crystals, goes 0/8 and complains pvp is toxic?

On a side note wish they would just remove pve from the game and focus on pvp
[/quote]

Yep, because that's worked out so well in other MMOs... Oh wait, it really hasn't. Let's look at one example: Where's the OW PvP? This thread would indicate that PvP is closer to being phased out, than featured, and there's a reason for that. Now I haven't really read through the PvP forum, as a rule, I avoid them, even in games where I would actively PvP, such as Aion, back in the day, because they really can be a cesspool of toxicity. When I read the announcement that they planned to shut down the PvP section, I wondered if that was really a good idea. Is it really what we might want new players to see first, if they come to the forums at all, because, frankly, most MMO forums have that reputation, PvP notwithstanding.

For an example, I point to this very post, where you answer an accusation of toxicity with toxicity, thus proving the poster's point. So let's say you get your wish, and they phased out the PvE in favor of PvP. The first thing to happen is that they will close 3 servers, and they may actually have to close 4, of the 5 that are listed for NA, because there won't be enough players to support that many servers. If those players really wanted to be on a PvP server, they'd roll up on one, it's not like they're not clearly designated on the server screen. The immediate after effect of this is a loss in sales. You can bet that all of those "whales", to use a term common in other MMO forums for people that spend tons of money in the CS, aren't rolled up on one of the PvP servers. Most of them are likely on the RP server, which would be closed. I'm thinking that it wouldn't be very long before the game is shut down for NA, if this were done.
In Rappelz, the cooldown was a week, it kept people from guild hopping to do sieges. Inconvenient if you're leaving a dead guild, for example, but it did keep those that wanted to exploit guild profits from the dungeons a bit closer to "in check". I don't know, yet, how important the GvG stuff is here, but it could be that they feel like it's somehow being abused, and want to curb it in as minimally invasive a means as possible?
Since the last big update where BHS / EME said they were going to make changes to the dungeons so it wouldn't pay to run lowers if you had higher gear, or something to that effect.

As a DPS toon I went from waiting 15+ minutes in que for the so called trash dungeons, aka SF, KC, RG, to almost instant que pops, and almost always a higher toon often more doing them.

So if their intentions are to make the DS Super Elitest only, don't seem to be many taking it up as they all coming into the trash dungeons.

The biggest problem with Tera IMHO, and not just Tera really but most modern MMO's, they make too much stuff non tradeable.

Now, if they made everything tradeable, even if it was by trade broker only, we wouldn't even be having this discussion about elitests and lowers, as those who have the skill and gear would farm the highest dungeons, sell the gear to those who can't, win win for all.

I remember the old days of PWI (Perfect World International) the guild I was in did that all the time, there were some I just couldn't do, so I would farm mats and other things and they would run the dungeons to get the high level mats, and what we got excess of we sold on, and it actually paid us to find new players to teach them and get them to their max ability to increase stocks and they got goodies from it too.

Ahh well, is what it is, guess we just put up with it or all go learn korean and play Ktera, cries in my elin snacks on that thought lol.

This was done in Neverwinter, when it first came out, and the problem is that, after a very short while, there was no reason to run the dungeons at all, because everyone already had all the gear from the trade broker equivalent, and it was cheap enough that just about anyone could afford it too.
dmaxcustom wrote: »
dmaxcustom wrote: »
No. You need to have variety and content behind skill on MMOs. There are content for low skilled people and content for high skilled ones, and you get to it by you and your friends merits and effort. What is wrong with that?

Implementation is a thing though, and we will see how it plays out.

You mean "geared" instead of skilled, right? As a veteran of tons of MMOs, some with similar gear requirements for content, having gear =/= having skill. One skilled tank/healer combo, with a couple of competent DPS can carry one player to all the gear in the game, but that doesn't mean that the player in question gains any skill. My favorite example of this was a DPS class crying for 30 minutes because neither of the healers had "appropriate" gear, and then, when the boss did it's special, this same DPS, in all the right gear, died because they didn't move out of the attack. All the gear, none of the skill, not even the basic skill required to know that "red == bad".

I'm all for separating the wheat from the chaff, I just wish that games supported a "Who was carried to their gear, and who actually earned it" setting, so that when one looks at the gear, one knows how the player got it.

...
Jesus. Things are so bad here that people have the need to make these absurd clarifications?

Alright.
Fine.

I do fully understand that gear does not equal skill.
However I have no idea how a game can filter people via skill. How do you measure in a matchmaking situation "skill or experience?" Therefore it stand to reason that the game will filter via "gear" or some other quantifiable method. Admittedly I am not a developer, but common sense says that is not doable.

What I meant with my statement is that I do not see any sort of issue with players that are skilled and/or experienced, and that also have the best available gear to be picky about who they want to accompany them to go to the advertised "hardest content in the game".

I think that it stand to reason that there is and should be content in games designed for those types players and they should be rewarded for those efforts. And if me or anyone else wants to be there, well, do what you need to do to improve yourself and gain the merits for that. What is the problem with that?

That's kind of the point. Gear scores are great and all, but in the end, unless you actually know who you're dealing with, they're also largely meaningless. Ironically, I agree with you about the content. As I said, I don't have an issue with separating the "wheat from the chaff". I know that I've been in the upper echelon of players in some MMOs, and in others, I'd be high tier, but not quite high enough for some stuff, usually through lack of motivation to get there. In DDO, for example, I could easily run in the high tier stuff, but most of my guild there can't, and so, I don't. I enjoy hanging out, and doing whatever, even trying to do the harder content, knowing we're likely not going to be able to. That doesn't mean I don't think it has a place in games, it just means that I'm not all that fussed about it if I can't get in.
dmaxcustom wrote: »
No. You need to have variety and content behind skill on MMOs. There are content for low skilled people and content for high skilled ones, and you get to it by you and your friends merits and effort. What is wrong with that?

Implementation is a thing though, and we will see how it plays out.

You mean "geared" instead of skilled, right? As a veteran of tons of MMOs, some with similar gear requirements for content, having gear =/= having skill. One skilled tank/healer combo, with a couple of competent DPS can carry one player to all the gear in the game, but that doesn't mean that the player in question gains any skill. My favorite example of this was a DPS class crying for 30 minutes because neither of the healers had "appropriate" gear, and then, when the boss did it's special, this same DPS, in all the right gear, died because they didn't move out of the attack. All the gear, none of the skill, not even the basic skill required to know that "red == bad".

I'm all for separating the wheat from the chaff, I just wish that games supported a "Who was carried to their gear, and who actually earned it" setting, so that when one looks at the gear, one knows how the player got it.
You can contact Tera Online dev tracker at contact@teradevtracker.com - Privacy policy - Tera Online dev tracker is not affiliated with Tera Online or En Masse entertainment.