Community discussion/involvement in the upcoming merges?

  • So, we know the mergers are coming:


    08.11: Merges


    piink


    Questions:


    Will there be any community involvement in the decision-making for which unis are designated target and exodus?


    Whether that's through polls, forum discussion, etc., will the community have any voice in this prior to the announcement or are we going to have to do the normal frustrating time-honored tradition of post-announcement frustration posting, complaining, begging, etc. that we've experienced with all previous mergers? The last round of mergers left people with a decision of bad, horrible, and ugh (including that last-minute save of the only 1x uni w/Dorado).


    How far out in advance will we know which unis are going to be target/exodus and what the setting changes will be if any? I ask because historically players get frustrated when they buy DM only to find out that they have no viable options to choose from and will have to retire. I don't want to invest in DM if I don't have options that fit my lifestyle. It would be really nice if we could plan accordingly.


    Will, there be an option for a 1x FLT/ECO/RES uni option like Dorado or are we going to be forced into having to choose graveyard or speed unis? It kind of goes back to the previous question, I don't want to invest any more time, energy, and/or money into a game that doesn't have a place for me anymore (again).


    Can they make the graveyard a target uni for those that don't like any of the available options provided when they're released?


    This is probably all moot as traditionally mergers go frustratingly horribly wrong for the community of players...

  • I’ll once again suggest creating 4 or x new servers with set settings that everyone can choose from. Save us from the disadvantage of being thrown into an established server where people already have safe systems etc.


    Give the entire merge group a fresh start.

    Space Pyrate

  • i`ll just point out the most obvious issue



    DO

    NOT

    CHANGE

    FLEET

    SPEED(S)



    there..just so that we dont have again the same problem as with EVERY previous merge

    of ppl being forced to different fleet settings


    'Stalno u kafani..ja sam nesto poput sanka'



    'Zaboravljamo heroje i junake,pamtimo samo loše likove'

  • I’ll once again suggest creating 4 or x new servers with set settings that everyone can choose from. Save us from the disadvantage of being thrown into an established server where people already have safe systems etc.


    Give the entire merge group a fresh start.

    Why not force every account to the graveyard, delete some servers, and then let people decide where to go.

    Both suggestions are very reasonable

  • I hate to bring this bit of reality into this conversation but first we have to know merges are coming to us which we do not know.

    The only community which is getting merged as a trial to see if the process even works correctly is Greece.


    It is perfectly fine to discuss the possibilities but do not get your hopes up yet - let us just see if it works first.

    After that, we can see with what kind of situation we are dealing and try and change the direction to something hopefully better for everybody.


    Also, while I can appreciate the idea of brand new servers where everybody can merge, I would submit for consideration older universes would lose a lot of history.

    I am not sure that is the best course of action, to be honest.

    For this reason, I think having older universes as targets would be the preferred strategy.


    In fact, I have proposed we have 6 targets for any merge.

    This way, each war fleet speed (1x-6x) would be represented (though what the target universes would be has not been decided - we are not that far in the negotiation and this proposal has not yet been accepted).

    My idea is these 6 targets would be permanent targets which would never change.

    This would mean the fleet speed can never be changed in a server poll for these servers but it also means this community knows what those targets are for any merge.

    No more confusion.

    No more surprises.

    Also, theoretically, no more complaining - but I know you some of you will not be able to help yourselves. :biggrin:


    I look forward to your hate mail explaining how out of touch I am with reality. :thumbsup:

  • I hate to bring this bit of reality into this conversation but first we have to know merges are coming to us which we do not know.

    The only community which is getting merged as a trial to see if the process even works correctly is Greece.


    It is perfectly fine to discuss the possibilities but do not get your hopes up yet - let us just see if it works first.

    After that, we can see with what kind of situation we are dealing and try and change the direction to something hopefully better for everybody.

    Well based off Raven't post, aren't we to assume that mergers are coming?

    Quote

    It's been a long time coming, but on Monday 8th November, the universe merges will be starting up again, and the first community is OGame.gr! 🇬🇷


    I guess maybe I'm confused because what you're saying doesn't really line up with Raven's post and the link Raven posted. Raven said the merges are coming, and that Greece is first.


    08.11: Merges


    OGame Greece Merges

    I don't see anywhere in Raven's or Prong's post that implies this is some kind of trial or test run. If it is, what is the test that differentiates this merger from previous mergers?

  • The message we got included the words, "If the GR merge works" and then tells us what the next community to get the merge is.

    Since it is a trial run, it was decided to not post the next community which would get the merge.

    However, if you look at the post on the .de forums, it does have this text which also shows it is a test of the merge process.

    :shrug:


    I can tell you though, ORG is not the next community to get a merge if the Greek trial works.

  • kewlness


    Good idea of the 6 target uni's with 1 to 6x speed, but all the new unis have 3 speeds now, which wouldn't fit your idea :-p


    I will as always not complain but just adapt to where I go...

    Lets just hope the merges are going to come soon to .org

    -Drink my blood to taste my love-



    Uni4 Erabus[TSE]
    Uni35 Erabus[-][-]

  • Ah...so that's probably where the confusion lies then, we (the players) here on .org got a different or an abbreviated release compared to what the staff and/or the .de community got then.

  • I suspect the war speed is the most important factor so the 1x-6x would be for war speeds which would be fixed in my idea.

    In this case, I would not care what people do with holding and peaceful fleet speeds.


    Maybe that is the wrong approach?

  • I would hope that they would at least keep one uni with legacy settings (1x flt/eco/res). Personally, I think that should have been uni 1 and it should have been barred from changes but that genie was let out of the bottle a long time ago and is never getting put back into the lamp. Now the only hope for legacy settings is Dorado and we're just relics of oGame's past here because there is a very small subset of players that want legacy speed settings.

  • the war speed is the most important factor

    however im not sure many would be able to adapt to the friendly fleet speed change


    imagine playing in a x2 fleet for 10 years..then being forced to adapt fleetsave of the already built fleet

    to the x6 friendly deploys..thats a lot more deut and a lot more DM to adapt the account to a new fleet saving speed

    its quite the game changer that not many will know from the start


    edit:

    by friendly i meant peaceful missions [such as deployment]


    'Stalno u kafani..ja sam nesto poput sanka'



    'Zaboravljamo heroje i junake,pamtimo samo loše likove'

  • From DE forum https://board.de.ogame.gamefor…onale-fusionen-2021-2022/


  • What is existing in the oldest unis such as uni 1, Quantum, Vega, Oberon Cygnus unis. Then there is Xanthus that have No ACS , and then there is Volans multi accounts with some rules that do not apply.


    So where does it end and begin ? There are many unis with different specks.


    So my thinking is:

    1) The oldest uni should stay,

    2) The slowest uni should stay,

    3) 1 No ACS uni should stay.

    4) Volans multi accounts uni , should stay.


    The above unis are all unique with there own play styles and specks, so they all should not be up for exodus. Make them target unis, but they should stay and be left alone .


  • Oh, Volans isn't merging anywhere if I have anything to say about it. :rant:


    As far as the oldest uni - it is also the slowest (Uni1).


    It is the different universe settings which generates so much frustration and with the last merges the overwhelming consensus was: Fleet speed is the MOST important consideration.

    It is going to be next to impossible to provide targets based on 2 criteria like fleet speed and DiDF setting or fleet speed and ACS setting, or fleet speed and probe storage setting, etc...


    I mean, which particular fleet speed should get the no ACS setting?
    And what about the other people who want that fleet speed but also want ACS enabled?

    We honestly need to pick the most important factor and stick with it.

    Based on the feedback from the last merges, fleet speed is that factor.


    And this does not even guarantee my proposal will be accepted.

    Something else can be decided, but I am trying to fight for this for you guys.

  • Something else can be decided, but I am trying to fight for this for you guys.

    I believe that we can all appreciate you putting up a fight for us and I appreciate the rationally thought out and player considerate suggestion. Also, thanks for not fighting to merge Volans. That would be insane.