Dawn of Light

So here's something that could be controversial, does displaying the amount of players on a server help or hinder the server?

If there are a low amount of players on the server will it prevent new people from logging in? If there are a large amount of players on one server will others flock towards it?

Discuss.

I voted yes. The more information the better, even though this hurts smaller servers like Storm. If you make a game people want to play they will come. Or something like that.

I voted no, due to the fact it hinders servers.

If people see a popular server, they will join it which starts a chain reaction with more and more people leaving other servers and joining the popular one..

I know a few people who only play servers like Uthgard and Eden because they have so many players, which is pretty lame when there are awesome servers out there like Age of Englightenment.

Also I don't think the Supporting/Established/Non Supporting server positions are a very good idea either, every server should be on a level playing field..

What about a system where we can vote for servers much like http://www.xtremetop100.com/ does for WoW (they even have a DAoC section but no one uses it). Servers could offer rewards if players vote for their server or something..

Sleep now , I have probably not made much sense

I voted no, due to the fact it hinders servers.

If people see a popular server, they will join it which starts a chain reaction with more and more people leaving other servers and joining the popular one..

I know a few people who only play servers like Uthgard and Eden because they have so many players, which is pretty lame when there are awesome servers out there like Age of Englightenment.

Also I don't think the Supporting/Established/Non Supporting server positions are a very good idea either, every server should be on a level playing field..

What about a system where we can vote for servers much like http://www.xtremetop100.com/ does for WoW (they even have a DAoC section but no one uses it). Servers could offer rewards if players vote for their server or something..

Sleep now , I have probably not made much sense

I have to disagree, this went on with RunUO, was just corrupt with server teams botting and mass voting for their own servers.

Yeah voting isn't a terribly good idea, neither is an even playing field.

If a server contributes more to the project they should be displayed higher.

What I've tried to push (and broken recently I'll see if I can fix the link tonight) is the server reputation system, where players can post reviews and say if a server is bad, okay or good. The more reputation the higher the server could be in the list (tiered with server groups)

Looks like adding another option to the poll resets it results last time i saw it was 6 for keep player count 2 for hide and 1 for shrug

Meh, I just hate the player count system, other games which rely on player made servers such as Minecraft and WoW etc do fine with nothing like DAoC Portal or anything

Yup, for me the driving factor for playing on a server should be it's features and reviews. Granted if your after encounters in rvr then population is a factor.

Yeah I guess but the Review system could get just as corrupted as the Voting system..

The argument for contributing servers getting higher slots is a bit hypocritical with how little they actually contribute, sure they give a few little things but what about a large amount of the things that are still broken in the public core? Why isn't there a drive to contribute more in order to stay up on that contributors list?

And of course player-count pushes people to servers, because people want to have actual PVP and RVR encounters most of the time, and with RVR more players is somewhat required, pvp can get away with lower character numbers to a degree (Until those characters get to the point that any new players get steamrolled).

Yup I'm all for bumping down servers that haven't contributed in a while, that's why I moved Uthgard a few months ago. I should work on moving the others.

I've been concerned players might use the rating system for no good. What Might be a better idea is to let staff here change ratings based on how we feel about a server and let that rating determine the sorting within a group. For example it would be nice if we could move Ysia's server to the top of the list and let contributors battle it out for the top spot.

I still vote for showing player count. If you don't, and someone wants to know, they will log into the server to find out. It's just an annoying block to information.

What Might be a better idea is to let staff here change ratings based on how we feel about a server and let that rating determine the sorting within a group. For example it would be nice if we could move Ysia's server to the top of the list and let contributors battle it out for the top spot.

That's a lot of power given to a few members of the staff, who would be accused of favouritism etc.

I would admit happily admit to favoritism. But we're talking about order in a category, and I could defend every decision. Staff rating followed by alphabetical. If every contributing server contributed at the same level (or close) then they would all be given the same rating. if a server lacked contributions their rating would fall and once it hit 0 they would be removed from the contributor category.

There's going to be drama, no matter what you do.

Oh, and this rating would only be for contributors ... I did not make that clear.

Another thing. The server's position have always been a feeling issue, so totally subjective.

As i said sometimes, i assume totally DOL is not democratic. I'm enough to let Recursion talk here, but not enough to endure DB dramas or whatever. The only democratic process that is needed is with the DOL team.

Related to the count, this is a choice that disavantage high pop servers, while a-contrario benefits low pop one. Above all, i think this is a pertinent information when you have to choose. I voted Yes, to keep the count displayed.