Pirates of the Burning Sea

Ouch! Let this be a lesson to other developers...don't encourage griefers and alienate your players.

http://www.burningsea.com/forums/showthread.php?t=24760

Well, it is the right move, especially considering empty servers was the number one complaint among active players.  (Players who cancelled had a LOT of other complaints, mind you).

I am surprised, though, at how drastic the cutdown is.  I thought they'd maybe cut to 7 or 6, but 4?  That's a lot of characters to move, and a lot of server pops to upset.  (I bet Bonny folks are gonna be the most vocal dissenters).

It'll be interesting to see if they can pull this off without technical difficulties.  After all, you're talking about a group that had trouble coding bonus xp books just a few weeks ago.  I also wonder what will happen when all those societies (you know, the things you HAVE to be in to enjoy the game) break up and try to reform.  If its not smooth, they may loose a chunk of folks from frustration.

I'm intrigued.  Still not subbing though.

Sort of a misrepresentation IMO.

FLS badly over-estimated the needed number of servers at launch based on pre-order data.  Chalk it up to their total lack of experience with MMOs.

Compounding the problem is that the game systems as designed required a high player density to work.

Frankly it's not at all correct to attribute PotBS' current condition to the prevalence of ganking - it's more the result of some really poor estimations and understanding of their own systems.

Still, awful timing.

After all, there is something else, besides servers, that went down on the night of April 15th, with only one-third left after it....

Originally posted by jakin

Sort of a misrepresentation IMO.

FLS badly over-estimated the needed number of servers at launch based on pre-order data.  Chalk it up to their total lack of experience with MMOs.

Compounding the problem is that the game systems as designed required a high player density to work.

Frankly it's not at all correct to attribute PotBS' current condition to the prevalence of ganking - it's more the result of some really poor estimations and understanding of their own systems.

What one COULD argue is that the ganking effected the number of servers they're cutting (or cutting down to).  Had the ganking rep not been established, they may have lost fewer subs, or even gained more over the last month, allowing them to merge from 11 to say 7 or 6, instead of to a measly 4.   Of course, there's no way to determine or prove that type of statement, but I certainly see how it could be possible.

I do want to add that I think it was smart of them to keep the closed servers.  It suggests to the playerbase that they are still confident that they will get back subs, enought to eventually need new servers.  Its a positive message...and the first one they've sent the potbs players in a while.

Originally posted by Bountytaker

I do want to add that I think it was smart of them to keep the closed servers.  It suggests to the playerbase that they are still confident that they will get back subs, enought to eventually need new servers.  Its a positive message...and the first one they've sent the potbs players in a while.

They aren't keeping the old servers. They are giving people a month to move and then shutting them down.

Compressing the game population into just four servers should improve matters for the PvP side of the game. It will also make the usual problems for PvE'ers and economy players needing to cross red zones much worse.

I've seen numerous posts from people claiming to be able to cross red circles with impunity. This is completely contrary to my experience but then I realised it's because I played on Roberts, the most populated server. If a port had a red circle it was very likely to have six man groups in it.

The people coming from the low population servers are going to be in for a shock if they think they will be able to travel unmolested by ganking groups on a full server.

Originally posted by smg77

Originally posted by Bountytaker

I do want to add that I think it was smart of them to keep the closed servers.  It suggests to the playerbase that they are still confident that they will get back subs, enought to eventually need new servers.  Its a positive message...and the first one they've sent the potbs players in a while.

They aren't keeping the old servers. They are giving people a month to move and then shutting them down.

People won't  be able to play on them any more after the month but returning players WILL still be able to transfer their characters after that time. The servers will  effectively be mothballed and kept in reserve in case the population increases.

Oh dear.

I have just skim read the original link (FLS Forum) but these two quotes stood out for me:

From this post:
http://www.burningsea.com/forums/showpost.php?p=283790&postcount=1
[quote] How many transfers do I get?

You can transfer as many characters as you have but each character can only be moved once. We highly recommend you discuss your plans with your society and group mates before moving your characters. You do not have to transfer all of your characters to the same server; however you will still be limited to characters of one nation per server. You can transfer characters to Roberts, Blackbeard, Rackham, or Antigua. You are also welcome to transfer characters between Roberts, Blackbeard Rackham or Antigua, if you like. [/quote]

Then this:
http://www.burningsea.com/forums/showpost.php?p=285954&postcount=284
[quote] We have caps in place to limit how many people of each nation can go to each server. When a bit more than 25% of the characters of a nation transfer to a server we turn off transfers for that nation to that server. When we are approaching the cap a warning begins to appear to let people know they're getting close to the cap and that they should consider another server if they have a large guild to transfer.

And in addition to all of that we stay in constant communication with the community so everyone knows what server/nation combinations are still open, which ones need more people, and which ones are getting full. If societies end up split or a main get split from his alts we help people out. We aren't throwing this out there and making you fend for yourselves, we're going to be here the whole way through the process, helping in any way we can. [/quote]

So FLS is also attempting to use this merge to balance populations?

This could go very badly.

Originally posted by Gyrus

Oh dear.

I have just skim read the original link (FLS Forum) but these two quotes stood out for me:

From this post:
http://www.burningsea.com/forums/showpost.php?p=283790&postcount=1
[quote] How many transfers do I get?

You can transfer as many characters as you have but each character can only be moved once. We highly recommend you discuss your plans with your society and group mates before moving your characters. You do not have to transfer all of your characters to the same server; however you will still be limited to characters of one nation per server. You can transfer characters to Roberts, Blackbeard, Rackham, or Antigua. You are also welcome to transfer characters between Roberts, Blackbeard Rackham or Antigua, if you like. [/quote]

 

Then this:
http://www.burningsea.com/forums/showpost.php?p=285954&postcount=284
[quote] We have caps in place to limit how many people of each nation can go to each server. When a bit more than 25% of the characters of a nation transfer to a server we turn off transfers for that nation to that server. When we are approaching the cap a warning begins to appear to let people know they're getting close to the cap and that they should consider another server if they have a large guild to transfer.

And in addition to all of that we stay in constant communication with the community so everyone knows what server/nation combinations are still open, which ones need more people, and which ones are getting full. If societies end up split or a main get split from his alts we help people out. We aren't throwing this out there and making you fend for yourselves, we're going to be here the whole way through the process, helping in any way we can. [/quote]

So FLS is also attempting to use this merge to balance populations?

This could go very badly.

Havign in mind the string of FLS' past bad calls, poor judgements, mediocre decisions and general luckluster performance I think things going badly are quite a likely outcome.