Producer's Letter: August 2015 Updates

no- it is like butcherblock, and antonica and commonlands and all of the little dungeons off them. i was talking about low content- below 30.

Post original de Longdale disponible en français sur http://www.guerrier-celeste.fr/lettre-du-producteur-aout-2015.html

bad copy / paste when I replied to Seefar. Sorry I updated my answer which origanlly was designed about this one :
“[...]
for getting high level players into helping low level players. I suggests a reward program for high level players helping a low level players through a quest or dungeon. you could earn special tokens you could trade in for rewards.”

this seems to me to be the agnostic dungeons definition ...
YES! brilliant idea!”

kk but it would be great if they could take it a bit farther to expand to the mentoring in lower level zones. there should be an option to mentoring so that you can choose not to be overpowered when you mentor and there should also be an option for some level appropriate rewards for the higher player. the very fact that you are overpowered takes the idea of a "group" to a definition of "powerlevel". if that is the intent, to powerlevel, then that should be an option of choice. but if the intent is to provide a group experience, there should be a way to turn the overpowerment off.

it is the policy of our guild to discourage powerleveling. when all of your playing toons are too high for the zones, it makes no sense to go back through them.

Hi Daybreak. Let me tell you a quick story: I once used to play this lovely game called Warhammer Online. It was awesome. I carefully selected names for each character and lovingly created backstories for them as well. The game began to become less crowded and one day the company that owned it decided to merge servers. I believed them when they said that it should be easy for an active player to keep the name they already had. But that turned out not to work as well as promised. I logged in the second the merge was completed and so did many other people who wanted those names. Only one of my characters got the name it originally had. And I stopped playing. Because the character just didn't feel the same anymore.

I named one of my current toons on Butcherblock after my deceased Grandfather. If I lose the name, I will not want to play him. And I am really worried to hear that the Marketplace homes and other Marketplace items I bought for each character might be deleted. I hope that isn't true.

I'm concerned both about the guild situation and the character naming. I was dreading this announcement and here it is. I'm mostly a solo player, unless I'm grouping with my husband, population issues are not that bad for me. I know a lot of people love to group and raid and have been pushing for this merge. After many years of playing EQ and other games and being on raiding guilds, I've realized that I'm better off on my own, and so our guild is just my husband and I, we created with 3 accounts each and it took us a year to get it to level 30 at our pace. We got our guild house and decorated it, it was a lot of work. I would hate to lose this work. Our guild is only level 45 now, but we've worked on it a lot, if we lose it on the merger, we'll probably just leave the game.

We started EQII back when it was released but only played for a few months due to me being so invested on EQ at the time, after being in a horrible raiding guild with horrible people I quit EQ and played other games, during a LOTRO downtime, I found out EQII had gone free to play, I decided to give it another try and have been enjoying it ever since, probably 3 years ago or so. I was very happy to be able to recover my old account and all my characters were there waiting for me just the way I had left them, which I really liked.

I completely hate the idea of losing our guild, and possibly our characters names, not counting having to redecorate 17 houses. I hope these things get resolved so that losses are not going to happen. I know losing anything will make me very dissatisfied to the point of like people say "rage quitting" and closing my paying accounts.

Anyway, sorry for the long winded post. I usually read the forums, but never post, had to log in and create a posting name to post this.

There is a difference between "losing" your name vs. "Odin loosing thunderstorms over Norgaard." They are not used the same way nor are they interchangeable. Your excellent message gets lost in the grammar malfunction.

I know there are not as many people on Landmark but when the servers got all wiped the names where attached to the accounts and you had the choice to reclaim them or pick a new name
I really hope it would be possible to do something like that for this
and we all get the server name we came from as title that should fix the problem
And yes they do listen it will probably will take them a lot of extra work but they will make it work for us

ok about higher level players helping lower level players with the reward program maybe there could be a new system
that alowes those high level people to get really down to a lower level so its more like them being a low level
So 2 ways to mentore down to be able to group with low levels to make it fun or to do the regular mentoring

Looks like this still hasn't been answered. Ry, this is frightening for those of us dearly attached to our character names for years upon years. Could we please get a very detailed clarification on this? (I thought the only thing being renamed was the server itself, not all players having their names wiped!?!) Is there a reason the 2010 server merge naming conventions will not work this time around?

My first thought was ... OMG we are going to have to start completely over. I hope this is not the solution he is meaning.
I also hope that the free for all approach is not the solution either. I would prefer that we have the naming rules that we had before. Also since I have been thru 2 previous mergers, I would like those 2 titles entered on my title list.

What I really hope will happen, is they decide that my server doesn't need to be consolidated.

As, for the Time Locked servers, and the surprise of the Isle; that was great. However I think you missed a BIG marketing and advertising opportunity to bring in new and old players. A TV blitz would have done wonders for this game we love.

I'm not so much concerned with character names as I am concerned with guilds. We have a level 100 guild that is very active and worked a long time to get it to where it is. I do hope guilds will be moved in their entirety to the new server and not made to start over. Even losing a guild name doesn't bother me as much as losing the guild itself. Heck, this guild is why I am still playing this game. To lose it would be a serious game changer and I mean that literally. I would love some clarification on the moving of guilds to the new server. Please consider the work guilds have put into them to get them where they are today. These are in itself families and communities that do not want to be split apart. I am the sole leader of Solstice and have been at it for 5 years. I'd hate to think all the time involved to build such a nice guild will be torn apart by little thought to everyone involved.

After re-reading Roshen's post several times I can only conclude he just did not clarify what he meant very well. However what I did gather from it is players log in is going to trump played time in this transition. This is going to create quite a stir!


I offer up to the devs for consideration the following suggestion:

1) Allow each player on the affected server to do one "character transfer" to the new server approximately a week before you open the server. This choice becomes their one "guaranteed" name. If there is a conflict between multiple players, then the one with the highest playtime retains the name and the other gets to either accept a rename of that toon or pick another to transfer and keep the name of.

My reason for this suggestion is as follows:

1) Play time does not determine name choice. People will not have to "camp" the log in trying to be first in to score names.

2) Player's usually identify with ONE name more than another. This emotional attachment is real. This would allow the majority of players to retain their main "identity". Alts..while nice.. should never displace a main IMO.

3) By doing a server "transfer" it should reduce the load strain on the log in server on merger day because players will not be trying to spamm the server to be first in to get a name.

so basically he signed in, dropped the **** bomb, and left......wow.....

I am very fond of this idea to merge all of the dead servers into 1 dead server. I suppose it's like going around and finding bones, then piling them up into a pile. Visionary

Server Name: Megadeath? maybe Mothballs?

Y'all... calm down. I'm sure Roshen and company will better explain their plan. I seriously doubt there's going to be a "free for all" for names. The only "free for all" for the names will be between the people with the same name. So the first SUKA online will get SUKA, the rest will get SUKAX (that sounds funny), etc. I seriously doubt a FORETOLD will be able to log in and claim SUKA for their name.

Although, I'm tempted to try *runs to avoid the arrow that Suka is most assuredly pointing at me right now*

At any rate, save all the ZOMG its Armageddon, tinfoil hat hysterics for when we find out EXACTLY what they intend to do.

Also, can the 7 of us on Nagafen get put on this new server too?

I have a very strong feeling that Nagafen is going to get merged into a blue server, and Deathtoll will be the sole PvP server.

I think a great solution to this Name issue is to create a Marketplace item for 5k Daybreak Cash to insure your name.

What will happen to house items, or or the items in bank? I am flexible with the naming, but I would like a way to keep my book collection.