[MUD-Dev] Star Wars Galaxies: 1 character per server

[Rayzam]

From: "Madrona Tree" <madronatree at hotmail.com>
> From: rayzam <rayzam at travellingbard.com>

>> But their friends can be experimenting with them on those other
>> servers, no?

> Sure, but the issue then becomes one of logistics.

> Do we all have our "Mains" on the same server?  Or do some of us
> have our Tradeskillers on A and our Mains on B, and the others of
> us have the opposite?

> What if i'm playing my Tradeskiller on B, and you guys are doing
> something fun over on A?  How in the world will i know that is
> happening, so i can join in on the fun?

> What if we're Partners, and you want to play your SwordGuy, but I
> want to play my Sword Guy over on B?  (yah yah, no swords in
> space, but you get my point)

> Factions, too.  Are we all going to be Imperials on A, and Rebels
> on B?  But i sort of wanted my SwordGuy to be a Rebel... but that
> doesn't really match with what you guys want to do on B.  You
> really need me to be an Architect there.

> Serverwide Chat fixes many of these issues, especially if Guilds
> are allowed Unique Serverwide Names.

Two other ways it gets fixed are the fact that you can shift your
character abilities, thus playing a new type of character without
starting over entirely. And having enough instantiations/servers
that we could be Rebels on 2, Imperials on 2, and neutral on 2. Your
point is valid in that there may be combinations of what you want to
play and what I want to play on a given evening that won't match
up. I expect the same could be said of MCS, in which case all we'd
need is serverwide chats to make it the same.

>>>  It will be interesting to me, to see if SCS produces a very few
>>>  tradeskillers.

>>  And if a smaller population of primary tradeskillers compares to
>>  a larger population of secondary tradeskillers.

> I predict that there will be a very small percentage of players
> who are pure tradeskillers, or even Mostly Tradeskillers with a
> little bit of Combat (enough to kill bunnies and chickens).  I
> predict many players will have exactly enough Blaster Repair skill
> that they can repair their own blasters, and no more.  I predict
> that you and I will split up blaster repair and clothes repair,
> and I'll sew up the holes in your knees and you'll de-gunk my
> blaster, but neither one of us will use any of our points for
> anything we don't absolutely have to.

Sounds like a plan! I hate having worn out pants.

>>  Would that one feature solve the friends issue for you?

> Personally, for me, it's not even an issue.  I prefer to play with
> 1-3 other people.  As long as I can figure out where they are, I'm
> okay.  However, i can see the angst this will cause/is causing for
> my EQ guild, and i understand their concerns.

> DAOC absolutely fractured them, due to the different realms, and
> different classes on each realm.  It was interesting (in a
> detatched sort of way) to see them grapple with issues like: "Is
> it more important for me to play with you, or do what I like to
> do?" and "Do I play this new game with these new experiences and
> new graphics, but with nobody I know, or do i go back to the old
> game with people I do know?"

> No serverwide chat in DAOC meant that nobody knew where anybody
> else was playing for the night.  People would log in, see that
> there was nobody (or very few) there, and log out, just missing a
> guildmate who would log in 2 minutes later, who probably would've
> been happy to play with the first guy.

> No alt-tab means no ICQ to find people, either.

> End result: 99% of them are back on EQ, happily leveling-up and
> playing with Planes of Power.

Somewhat surprising. Since some guilds made the jump whole, I
suppose it was because there wasn't enough of a consensus for a
realm in DAoC?

    rayzam
    www.travellingbard.com



_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev