Downsize?

This is a general open discussion for all ALFA, Neverwinter Nights, and Dungeons & Dragons topics.

Moderator: ALFA Administrators

Should ALFA downsize by taking servers offline?

Yes.
37
51%
No.
29
40%
Don't care.
7
10%
 
Total votes: 73

User avatar
borgia
Dire Badger
Posts: 149
Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2004 3:54 am
Location: Neuw Ziland

Post by borgia »

The devil is in the detail. Great concept, should have happened months ago, but who goes? By rights it should be the servers with the least logged dm/players over the last 3 months from now. Also if the players and dm's from those removed servers leave and don't bolster the ranks elsewhere then there is no point.

Can we parse the logs for activity and see where the peeps really are? Would be interesting to say the least.

borgia
ADM 006 The Long Road
User avatar
bizmiz
Goblin Scout
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 9:22 am
Location: Detroit

Post by bizmiz »

I see this as pointless this far into the game.

Unless DM's are garunteed to go to other servers, with the players, there is no point to it.

ALFA NWN2 is right around the corner. (kinda) To divert time and effort away from it for this is useless.

Btw, I am still not convinced that rewriting NWN2 to be a suitable and viable engine for ALFA is worth the effort, but then I'm not a code monkey trying not to do it. On the surface it seems like far too less gain for way too much pain. Pretty graphics will not /save/ ALFA.

People have been leaving ALFA because of all the OC BS, not because the engine is old and ugly. And with all the updates NWN has gotten over the years, it's not too ugly imo.

If your going to go for NWN2 then divert all your resourses to it now. Don't waste time, cutting servers, pissing off existing members, or wasting resources.

If NWN2 turns out to be impracticle, fine. Make a decision quickly to that effect. Start rebuilding ALFA with NWN1, with standards in place from the start. Updated base mods incorporating everything that is available from the start. Redo the haks from scratch. Make it right, do a relaunch and lets get back to playing in the best damn PW out there.
Retired ALFA Persona : Dain of the Ironstar; Ky'Talas

"Tough shit - Deal with it."

Common sense just isn't all that common anymore.
User avatar
Rotku
Iron Fist Tyrant
Posts: 6948
Joined: Tue Jan 06, 2004 1:09 am
Location: New Zealand (+13 GMT)

Post by Rotku »

Voluntary downsizing I agree with. Forced downsizing at this stage? Silly.
< Signature Free Zone >
User avatar
Aerthrin
Brown Bear
Posts: 279
Joined: Wed Aug 10, 2005 12:19 pm
Location: Palmer, Alaska

Post by Aerthrin »

Yeah, I'd go along with what bizmiz is sayin here... I don't think NWN2 is going to be worth the trouble, personally... and I wouldn't mind waiting to find out before making this move, again personally.

I just think something needs to be done, if we decide to stay with NWN1. By that, I mean the structure of our servers and yadda yadda.

I don't mind waiting though... *shrugs*

//my last bit on it
Currently: Sam'saer Blackbow - NWN2/TSM
RIP: Rukis Torhammer, Finn the Black, Elisaer the Wit, Gumphy Blackforge and 'ol Deg

<Ayergo> For the record, i'd like to say that the blackforge brothers r0xx0r.
Ronan
Dungeon Master
Posts: 4611
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2005 9:48 am

Post by Ronan »

Why are the people who voted "yes" so shy? Hmph.

I haven't voted yet.
User avatar
Lazlo
Dire Badger
Posts: 107
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: Florida GMT -5

Post by Lazlo »

Ronan wrote:Why are the people who voted "yes" so shy? Hmph.

I haven't voted yet.

*takes his clothes off and streaks around the forums*

I also voted Yes.

Commence the consolidation!
Warning: Game Experience May Change During Online Play

Past PCs: Exceeds the 325 character limit.

NWN2 PC: TBA
User avatar
Fionn
Ancient Red Dragon
Posts: 2942
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 7:07 am
Location: Seattle, WA

Post by Fionn »

Rotku wrote:Voluntary downsizing I agree with. Forced downsizing at this stage? Silly.
The poll, as written, is vague which side the former falls on.

Anyhoo - I hope Admin doesn't have the hubris to take down mods over the objections of their DMs and Players. This means that any such 'downsizing' that we do - even at the request of Admin or yet another comittee - would be voluntary.

Perhaps a better question would be: If we had sufficient DM coverage and static content to let you play 24/7, what Live servers would you play on? If 90% of our members list 3 servers only, that's a lot better info than 48% stating that 'downsizing' should happen. Bear in mind, that's 48% of the 25% that voted (assuming 150 active players).
PC: Bot (WD)

Code: Select all

     -----          -----          -----          -----
    /     \        /     \        /     \        /     \
   /  RIP  \      /  RIP  \      /  RIP  \      /  RIP  \      /
   |       |      |       |      |       |      |       |      |
  *| *  *  |*    *| *  *  |*    *| *  *  |*    *| *  *  |*    *|
_)/\\_//(/|_)(__)/\\_//(/|_)(__)/\\_//(/|_)(__)/\\_//(/|_)(__)/\\_(
User avatar
Inaubryn
Ogre
Posts: 694
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 7:42 pm
Location: Dallas (GMT -6)

Post by Inaubryn »

I'd say Ronan's campaign server idea is the best of the bunch. It leaves all current servers in place and simply designates those infrequented as "campaign servers". This means that any PCs may play there that are already there, but new PCs couldn't be created/validated there w/o a DM. And PCs who need to cross the server would be given the option of walkin' or jumpin' to the next closest server. That seems plausible and viable to me. But, what do I know?
"You people have not given Private Pyle the proper motivation! So, from now on, when Private Pyle fucks up... I will not punish him. I will punish all of you! And the way I see it, ladies... you owe me for one jelly donut! Now, get on your faces!"
User avatar
Spider Jones
Pit Boss
Posts: 593
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 1:40 am
Location: The Windswept Depths of Pandemonium

Post by Spider Jones »

Inaubryn wrote:I'd say Ronan's campaign server idea is the best of the bunch. It leaves all current servers in place and simply designates those infrequented as "campaign servers". This means that any PCs may play there that are already there, but new PCs couldn't be created/validated there w/o a DM. And PCs who need to cross the server would be given the option of walkin' or jumpin' to the next closest server. That seems plausible and viable to me. But, what do I know?
Ronan's system will require hak updates, but BG will be heading in that direction soon.
User avatar
NickD
Beholder
Posts: 1969
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:38 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Post by NickD »

Link to campaign server idea? (Yes, I am too lazy to look for it)

How does it work in terms of players travelling between servers? Would it be considered acceptable to server hop between these servers and your home server for DMed events? The name would indicate that's what their purpose would be, but a lot of people object to that kind of behaviour. If not, then what's the point of them?
Current PCs:
NWN1: Soppi Widenbottle, High Priestess of Yondalla.
NWN2: Gruuhilda, Tree Hugging Half-Orc
User avatar
Spider Jones
Pit Boss
Posts: 593
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2004 1:40 am
Location: The Windswept Depths of Pandemonium

Post by Spider Jones »

NickD wrote:Link to campaign server idea? (Yes, I am too lazy to look for it)
Inaubryn wrote:It leaves all current servers in place and simply designates those infrequented as "campaign servers". This means that any PCs may play there that are already there, but new PCs couldn't be created/validated there w/o a DM. And PCs who need to cross the server would be given the option of walkin' or jumpin' to the next closest server.
Just like ze man says.
User avatar
Mord
Specialist
Posts: 799
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 1974 12:41 am
Location: The north sea

Post by Mord »

I must say this is exactly the sort of compromise I was hoping for.
User avatar
NickD
Beholder
Posts: 1969
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:38 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Post by NickD »

Spider Jones wrote:
NickD wrote:Link to campaign server idea? (Yes, I am too lazy to look for it)
Inaubryn wrote:It leaves all current servers in place and simply designates those infrequented as "campaign servers". This means that any PCs may play there that are already there, but new PCs couldn't be created/validated there w/o a DM. And PCs who need to cross the server would be given the option of walkin' or jumpin' to the next closest server.
Just like ze man says.
Yeah, OK. So in answer to my questions? Would it make server hopping back and forth for DMed events acceptable?
Current PCs:
NWN1: Soppi Widenbottle, High Priestess of Yondalla.
NWN2: Gruuhilda, Tree Hugging Half-Orc
User avatar
Mord
Specialist
Posts: 799
Joined: Sun Jun 16, 1974 12:41 am
Location: The north sea

Post by Mord »

I would assume no.
User avatar
NickD
Beholder
Posts: 1969
Joined: Sat Jul 31, 2004 9:38 am
Location: Auckland, New Zealand

Post by NickD »

So what's the point then?
Current PCs:
NWN1: Soppi Widenbottle, High Priestess of Yondalla.
NWN2: Gruuhilda, Tree Hugging Half-Orc
Post Reply