Zentetsuken wrote:Granger wrote:I can understand that some dislike this idea as it could reduce the amount of 'NPC' waiting to be slain.
Nice strawman.
I admit that it's partly made from straw, but the core is quite solid.
The main argument that had been brought forward against multiple servers is that this would reduce the per-server concurrent user numbers (as of the simple math of users/servers) with the loudest the ones neing the ones who also argue for more interaction (which, according to them, seems to be more PvP and more permadeath).
So you want
I
entertain the thought of private servers to explore the possibilites and consequences, which is quite different to
want.
While you seem to fear the population on the main (currently: only) server reducing... I brave the perspective of tapping into the potential market of the several hundred million farmville/havest moon/$casualgame players for whom Haven in the existing multiplayer incarnation is a no-no. A no-no which these current casuals might reconcider should they get hooked hard enough by a pleasant single player (or private server with a group of friends) experience, so these could as well lead to the main server seeing way more users.
But that can only happen in case they start to play the game at all, which they currently don't (as the number prove) since the triangle of
permadeath, open PvP and long character progression isn't compatible with the average gamer. Which having private servers could somewhat fix by removing the open PvP, but not through
removing it as a game mechanic but through
it simply not happening as they would play with their friends (instead of being exposed to a horde of faceless bored unknown guys who get off from making others suffer for the lulz).
loftar to spend time researching and learning new tools to create the ability for other people to play on private servers,
My educated guess is that learning how to use eg.
mussh (in case he dosn't know this exists by now, which would surprise me a little) would take him about 15 minutes, tops, and he would have what he needs to deploy from git (which they do, AFAIK) onto an arbirary number of servers in parallel.
therefore opening up a whole new endless stream of support issues, balance concerns and content suggestions
Former and latter scale with the amount of active users, the only way to avoid this is by
not attracting new users. Nothing we should strive for.
Balance issues are there anyway as all servers would run the same build, so that part is moot.
that impede his ability to focus on the main server.
You seem to have missed that the code on all servers would be identical, the only difference would be that additional private ones would only allow a subset of all accounts to login - which is a simple database lookup that loftar is able to write, test and deploy in under one hour. While the interface for the private server owner to modify the list of allowed accounts would take a moment longer... using a web framework would make short work out of this (or, for a shitty but quick interface, he could tap into the forums friends and foe lists).
I don't see this impeding his ability to focus on the main server. While it might take a bit of effort to set it up the long run would be quite the opposite: private servers would have a price tag, leading to (possibly
plenty) more revenue, leading to being able to offload the boring parts that have to be done (like maintenance of the underlying server software platform,
testing and customer service) to hired underlings - also possibly removing things like jorb working another job (as he stated a short time ago), which he likely wouldn't do if all bills would be paid with excess to burn on coke and hookers (or bibles, or whatever racks his boat).
So no, I think your perspective on private servers isn't wide enough.
