Server Merger

Discuss anything about Galaxy At War Online.

Moderators: GAW Moderator, Forum Moderator

User avatar
HAWK
Posts: 14
Joined: Sat Aug 03, 2013 9:02 am

Server Merger

Postby HAWK » Sun Mar 02, 2014 7:12 pm

Hello,

I would like to suggest a few ideas for the server merger. I found this article on how they did the Ogame server merger.

http://board.us.ogame.gameforge.com/boa ... universes/

In particularly I would like to point the topics about location and temps of planets after the merger. It says that the devs will try to keep the same planet locations down to the system. If there is conflicting planets they will be moved to the closest location. If the new planet location is a considerable away from the original a Relocation Card will be given to the player.
Planet temps will also be kept the same before the move. Doing so will ensure that a cold planet that was built from gas production, It will remain a good gas production planet afterward.


Hawk

Talizorah
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
Posts: 589
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 10:16 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Server Merger

Postby Talizorah » Sun Mar 02, 2014 7:36 pm

That's a good example HAWK! I never played o-game, but that FAQ showed the merge was well thought out, and fair to the players. It would be good to have an in-depth FAQ for the server merge here, and with at least a few weeks notice to prepare our accounts for the merge.

It will be interesting to see what the solution is for merging servers that have varying ship prices, etc. Merging Taurus and Scorpio makes sense, but if all the servers were to be moved this issue will have to be addressed. Either way, it seems players will have to take a hit to their score, their fleet, or see their score grow by quite a lot, depending on which way things go. I do not think it would be fair to take away fleet from players, nor to give fleet to players from certain merging servers. But I am sure some sort of compromise will be worked out. I am interested to see how this continues, and am eager for the merge. Please keep the thought process on this merge visible to the players!

sphinx.frank
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Server Merger

Postby sphinx.frank » Mon Mar 03, 2014 1:46 am

thank you guys, for your concern on the merge. the example looks good, let's see if it's operationable. we will try to make it fair and balanced for players from different servers.

User avatar
Greco
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 5:19 am

Re: Server Merger

Postby Greco » Mon Mar 03, 2014 5:31 am

I think the example provided by Hawk is an excellent one for best practices and besides the concern of placement of planets I would like to raise an additional one which is covered in this FAQ provided.

The fact of certain players having multiple accounts on servers and them finding themselves on ONE server with a these accounts. I believe this should not happen. Rather these players should be redirected elsewhere or remunerated for there loss. To find ourselves on "A" server with someone with 2 or more accounts of a significant magnitude, which can be controlled by a sole player, is not an appealing thought. On the contrary it is an inhibitor to continue the game.

Greco

User avatar
DoctorWho
Posts: 25
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 1:43 pm

Re: Server Merger

Postby DoctorWho » Tue Mar 04, 2014 2:52 am

I am interested to know how they merge servers with different economic systems. I can't really see a fair way to get that accomplished. When this server update is complete I will re-exam the other servers somehow during my brief scouting to see scores I guess I didn't check to see costs on ships were insanely differing as I now hear from mods on my server. 1/3 cost for ships means with the same score those guys will have 3x my fleet, that's a serious disadvantage. Although honestly this isn't my most pressing concern I'm ok with being a small fish again I will just work my way back up that is the fun part anyway. I am even more interested in compared rule sets being provided so I can see what was different and what we will be merging in to. Those players could also get screwed if say the gas cost was cheaper there and they then come to our rules for gas prices and can no longer afford to move their fleets. So fleet build cost isn't the only consideration, although it is a huge game change from being a shark to being a tadpole. I have a feeling we will settle for the newer prices though as I am guessing they found them to be more balanced and is why they opted for them on the newer servers. So the question is will travel costs go down to accommodate those big fleets? I have and will continue to ask for removal of gas cost to use jump gates. Feel free to join me.

Talizorah
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
Posts: 589
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 10:16 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Server Merger

Postby Talizorah » Tue Mar 04, 2014 11:17 am

Id like to see a fluid scaling system for merging players based on a statistical comparison of the old and new systems. These would take Into account the % of fleet out of total score of the player and compare with players of a similar score (score adjusted to reflect costs). If you remove fleet from score and base the scaling on building and tech score, and then factor in fleet size as a % of score, I think a much more accurate system to scale players on the older servers to the newer server could be reached. Fleet and defenses are the only things hat have a difference in price (resulting in a difference in score). If that is dealt with seperatly, and we can see these numbers, I think more players would be willing to see their fleet size reduced heading into the new server, knowing that their fleets are being scaled based on equililant size of players in the new system and not just having their fleet arbitrarily reduced to 30% strength.

I would like to see other factors added to this process taking into account mine production difference over time , the ratio difference in debris and res plundered per hit on the old system compared with the new, and the potential difference in tech research avaiability on the old servers as opposed to the new. Play and build strategies are likely different between the systems based on the availability of res, with players tendency to focus more on research because of higher ship prices as opposed to making more ships due to cheaper prices.

sphinx.frank
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
Posts: 97
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2014 9:31 pm

Re: Server Merger

Postby sphinx.frank » Wed Mar 05, 2014 7:19 pm

hi guys, we'll keep you updated once the we have the entire scheme ready for you. thank you.

Iplaygaw2much
Posts: 3
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2014 8:16 pm

Re: Server Merger

Postby Iplaygaw2much » Fri Mar 07, 2014 11:10 am

Ok here's a question will every1 see a 70% reduction or just the people with a certain amount of ships? And if there is a reduction of any kind I think they should b clear about it ie: any1 with over 500 of each kind of ship for example. And with reduction they should clearly state that only people with ships over a certain number because if u cut players big and small that would cripple a lot of smaller players and leave them vulnerable to attacks even more then they already r?

Talizorah
OFFICIAL
OFFICIAL
Posts: 589
Joined: Sat Jul 20, 2013 10:16 pm
Location: North Carolina, USA

Re: Server Merger

Postby Talizorah » Mon Mar 10, 2014 5:23 pm

Iplaygaw2much wrote:Ok here's a question will every1 see a 70% reduction or just the people with a certain amount of ships? And if there is a reduction of any kind I think they should b clear about it ie: any1 with over 500 of each kind of ship for example. And with reduction they should clearly state that only people with ships over a certain number because if u cut players big and small that would cripple a lot of smaller players and leave them vulnerable to attacks even more then they already r?

I agree, the amount reduced should be based on the ratio for ship score to the players overall score on how many ships they lose. Say Player A has a total fleet size of 1000cr, and that is 20% of his overall score. Player B has a total fleet size of 10000cr, and that is 50% of his total score. Going off the 70% scale, Player A would be left with 300cr and Player B would be left with 3000cr. The proportional difference between the two players fleet size is exactly the same. However, the number of ships lost is much more drastic for Player B than Player A.

With a fluid scaling system, info would be collected and averaged based on the ratio of fleet to score for each players score range. If Player A has a total score 50,000 and those cr's make up 20% of his score, players of roughly 50k score would be compared. If their average would be found to have fleet score equal to 25% of over all score, then Player A would see a fleet reduction to 375 ships. If Player B had a score of 500,000 and those cr's make up 40% of his score, player roughly 500k score would be compared. If their average would be found to be 30% of overall score, then Player B would see a fleet reduction down to 2250cr, but would be adjusted back up to the maximum of 3000cr.

This scaling would keep things closer to the actual average for each player, while favoring the smaller score players. Is it completely fair? No. I would like to see a higher retention for players with ratios above the player average, but figuring out that formula is beyond my math skills.


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests