Link this. Because until I've seen it with my own eyes and it's straight skinny from Holly, I'm calling BS.
I have oldest name date and longest played on the 3 servers merging that affects me. There is only one Stormraven older than me (and he wouldn't be if I hadn't of rerolled Wizzy for Paladin). And he hasn't played since the level cap was 90. He also isn't on one of the other two servers that Crushbone is merging with. Same goes with my guild.
Here's a link to the post: https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq...tter-august-2015-updates.562368/#post-6236423
So that seals the deal, then. Roshen clearly stated on August 5th in a linkable reply that no one keeps their name. All names will be wiped and you must choose a name to play on a first come first serve basis. I am compiling a list of alternate names in case I can't get the ones I have currently.
He posted that and then Holly posted this... So I still don't know what to believe. All I know is if I lose my name, I'm done. Not a threat, just a fact.
Hey, how fair is it for Freeport residents that Freeport server opened in November of 2010, almost 5 years after Nagafen (February, 2006) did? And Permafrost launched with EQ2 in November of 2004. So Permafrost residents automatically win all their names because you want it to be this way? Not happening, sorry. EQ2 used creation date in its original mergers that happened in February 2006, but they haven't used that rule since. Back then, all servers had launched on the same day, with the game's launch, and every account was a subscriber, so all other things were equal. EQ2 has had multiple server mergers since then, and NONE of them have used creation date. ALL of them have prioritized: A.) Actively-paying subscribers over free players B.) and if two active subscribers have the same name, the one with the most /played time gets to keep the name. The end. And I know, I've been subbing since launch day and have been through them all.
I understand, but I think if a player doesn't log into an alt, at least annually they may need to let others have priority over them at least for names on a primary character. And in this case it's a one time thing. We know the merge event is coming up so if the names are valuable take 15 minutes to log into each alt. I really like the idea of being able to tag a main character name as one that is most important.
That's interesting. Thanks for the link. This works for me too. I understand people being very attached to names. I used to be very much attached to names, but now not so much. I can invent stories and reasons why names and personas have changed with the server change. I hope people get to keep the names they want though.
subs....cmon now. ive had some of my names for 10 yrs or more and put many many hrs on the toons AND paid multiple subs for most of those years. So I should get an x on my name because someone's new alt on a new subbed account just happens to pay the month I didn't? That makes zero sense. Clearly time played is the best as scrub a who played one day isn't nearly as viable a toon as scrub b who played for 600 days even tho the toon may have only been created a day later. Just my thought since im sitting here reading forums all damn day due to there being only 4 players on my server lol. Good luck sorting this mess out Team EQ. Might be the best of the worst is the aforementioned Mad Dash for names at launch of our respective "NEW" servers...
I think subscribers should get first shot. That's another reason to subscribe. But why should I be penalized for being ill or having to ::::gasp:::: work when I've been here since the first year? It's most fair that it be first come, first served. That's the way things usually are. Get over it. Subscribers first, then first come, first served.
Like I said I have oldest AND MOST ACTIVE. Which I find humorous that you decided to ignore when making your post.
1) Active gold membership including Krono (not recurring subscription, not having a credit card should not be penalized). then 2) Time actively played. then 2) Date created. in that order.
Reading the suggestions, and considering what I've seen in a past merger here (and a merger in EQ1), I wonder if this would be the "most fair" (not "makes everyone happy" as that I believe would be impossible so long as there's a single name collision). If course the first thing to consider is that there are only three servers per merge, so at most three people will collide. 1) Login - If one character has been logged in within the prior 12 months, and no others have, that character gets the name based on use. 1a) If all have, or none have, proceed; 2) Subscriber Status - As a benefit to people paying DBG money (or, at least, paying plat to people who pay DBG money), if one account has All Access, and the others do not, that character keeps the name. 2a) If no account has All Access, but one has Silver, and the others do not, then that Silver account retains the character name. 2b) If two accounts have All Access, and the third does not, the two with All Access proceed, while the third loses their name. If none have All Access and none have Silver, all three proceed; 3) Played Time - The characters are weighted based on time played, with the character with the most played time, rounded down to a full 24 hour day, retains the name. 3a) If DBG has this data, and I'm not sure they do, if the played time in the prior 12 months can be viewed separately, use that in preference to total played time. This gives a preference to characters who have been more heavily used in the prior year versus those that may have played heavily say 3 years ago but now only log in once a month, for a few minutes, to make some crafted item. 3b) If multiple characters have the same 24 hour day played time, those characters proceed to the final determination; 4) Time of character creation. As this is almost certainly not going to collide, it becomes the final arbiter. Oldest character of those reaching this step wins. While it may not be "what everyone wants", would this be a reasonable solution for the masses?
