How do you think Intrepid should handle server merges for Ashes of Creation? Comment Below! 👉Join the RitchieSH Discord! :D discord.gg/CDRsqsB 👉AoC Referral Link: ashesofcreation.com/r/EPFVAR5T1BQL2RPQ 👉Threads: www.threads.net/@ritchiesh 👉Twitter (X): twitter.com/RitchieSH 👉Twitch: www.twitch.tv/ritchiesh/ 👉Instagram: instagram.com/ritchiesh/
I have been saying for a while that low pop servers should trigger world threatening events that the server population can rally together and face to save the server. If they succeed, they become a host server for low pop servers that fail. If they fail, the players will have the opportunity to caravan their goods to the devine gateway, which would be how they show up in the world of their new server. In this way, they keep the server storyline intact. Imagine your world of Vera is threatened by a world destroying comet that can only be averted through special religious quests related to the constellation system. Imagine your server is unable to stop the disaster and the comet grows larger in the night sky over a week while players rush to save what they can and bring it to the portal, while bandits wait on every road looking to profit from the chaos. Imagine you make it through to an alternate reality where the world has not fallen and your caravan, loaded with goods, is protected and brought to a nearby city where refugees are greeted with offers of citizenship and your housing certificate can be traded in for the gold cost of your original home or freehold. Struggling cities would compete to attract these immigrants to strengthen themselves and grow to new heights. This is the way. Not the loss of your server, but the conclusion to its unique story. Not a restart, but instead, the beginning of your characters next adventure.
Really like this overall but there must be a working number of servers that fail and succeed to get the job done properly. You can't leave that in the players hands that much. Maybe the first to succeed "wins" and the second automatically fails type of thing. Basically it becomes a race against other servers.
Wow, that is a great idea. Adding on to what a person commented below. "Maybe do even also a race against time. The first to succeed will be the host server. " That would be perfect! Did any one post this on the forms? I would advise that it should be done so intrepid can see this awesome idea.
Well, for me, all the possible solutions that you mentioned are so bad that I'd have to play the rage quit card. I do like the idea of an apocalyptic world ending event that requires you to fight your way to the exit with just what you can carry. Now that has potential. I wouldn't feel so bad winding up a destitute refugee if there were an interesting event that got me to the new server. The next time you talk to Steven, tell him that idea has my approval.
Server being deleted should get a chance to earn a bunch of siege scrolls so when they go into the new server, they can act like a invading horde. This would allow the old server ppl a chance to earn some properties for those who lost everything and give incredible server lore to the ones receiving "we resisted the horde invasion"
I also had an idea that is sortof a mix between different things said here, that I also mentioned that on a loreforged stream before: Servermerges trigger a devestationg world event, and to survive/prepare the population of each server that is merging has the opportunity to fortify one or more nodes of thier choice so it can withstand that apocalypse. Players could then also bring thier goods to that node to secure them. Maybe also allowing them to "deconstruct" thier housing to get resources back from that sacrifice. The amount of nodes, or even buildings etc, that can be saved could for example be limited by some special resources needed, creating poptential conflicts between players in different cities etc. Alternatively, to lower the conflict potential, one could also do a server wide vote on the nodes that should be saved. The amount of resources available could also be based on the server population. Other than the fortified nodes everything in the world gets reset, creating a blank slate that the newly merged population can build up together, however they want, while still having a well set up base of operations (that also allows for higher lvl content) and not loosing everything during the merge. Server against Server competition could also still come into play if conflicting nodes are chosen. Maybe some "in character" warnings could be given when that happens that makes clear that they're competing for that node to survive. That could also allow for a server to change thier selection if they do not want to take the risk. I think something like this allows for a lot of active player agency and gives both sides the chance to save some piece of thier world and doesn't "doom" the entire thing for the smaller/weaker server right from the start. The reset of the remaining world might also help with forming new alligances and promote cooperation( or conflict) between the existing groups from the old servers. This might work better for servers of similar sizes but feels possible for a larger gap as well. Because I imagine with a "the smaller/weaker server gets merged into the bigger/stronger one" scenario, it'll be rather hard for the smaller server to integrate into the big existing one e.g: - Guilds from the smaller server have no base/limited resources and will have a hard time competing with the well set up guilds form the bigger server. - Verra is huuuge and since every server is likely to be different it'd be a huge learning curve to get to know the new layout, traderoutes, resources, crafting areas, farming areas etc etc. again putting the population from the smaller server at rather big disadvantage, instead of having an "organic" (re-) discovery of those things for both sides. - The housing issue, while also a problem with the "partial wipe", would also again seem to be giving the stronger sever a big advantage, since they'd still have thier citisenships etc intact while the smaller server needs to somehow first accquire that (maybe already hotly contested) satus... But yea... it'd be a lot of work and idk if it'd be worth it, especially if there'll be a lot of merges early on.
Why not just merge to low pop servers into one with resets on everything? If the issue is the strong>weak server. Only merge weak servers together with a reset and leave the strong ones be. The likelihood of just one server being weak across them all is extremely low.
Remember that in all likelyhood the same template as for node / freehold destruction applies to the transfering player for their assets. Housings would be templated, so all they would have to facilitate is flagging the character to have a free first purchase or at least discount the purchase with the amount they paid for their old servers housing. The more problematic is not the housing or assets, but the player reputation and player contacts that you've build during your play on the other server, as well as guild efforts etc. A minor inconvenience will be the difference in economics as well. Server merges are always problematic, but i think Strong + weak is a better solution then Multiple weaks put together or two mediums getting put together.
I believe that the way Intrepid is planning is a good way. If I'm on a broken server, I'd rather be allocated on a healthy server than be transferred to a new server. You mentioned player losses such as houses and efforts to build cities, but you forgot to mention the benefits of playing in a Low Pop server, such as easy access to farm zones that would be crowded, lower risks to farm at open pvp areas, etc.. I hope they stick with that idea.
One way i believe that Intrepid can handle this situation is to have an initial 3 month of 6 month period when they open the game with a full reset after the initial `trial` period, essentially a `soft launch` like a soft opening for a business. In this way they could open as many servers as they need to cope with the initial influx of players with a set merge or `relaunch` date where servers that are thriving could be retained and those that are dwindling could be closed and the remaining players could go into existing or new servers as preferred. In this way instead of merging players from quiet servers into established servers they could simply restart as many servers as required to house the players from quiet servers on an equal footing with each other or allow them to top up numbers on existing ones. Because each server is unique they have the option for players to restart this way instead of being merged and could offer a choice. I would absolutely prefer to start from scratch on a level playing field than to drop into a server that has already been running for months and then try to carve out something against the established powers. The other part of this is that they could seasonal competitions this way too. Imagine that a server gets completely dominated by a guild or two and player numbers decline and the same is happening on another server, Intrepid COULD offer them a chance to compete in a new server to see which one is the best.
They could always give players the option option of joining a temporary server at launch that will merge into a pre stated server after launch week to skip waiting in queue. Might not hurt as bad if you know ahead of time your going to be merged around week 2 and nodes still haven't fully developed. Some people might choose that over a 6 hour queue
Or they could just go the route of classic wow and have 2 layers for the first week. Layers aren't ideal but if it's just for the first week it's not the end of the world
Having your server merged into a stronger one while being a mayor, freehold owner, or maybe anyone will definitely feel bad. A tough problem to solve indeed…
The way to fix this is not to have multiple worlds but one world like eve online. They need to compensate the weaker server players doing the move. Or have world ending events where ppl could rally the ppl on the low population to start moving assets to an island, which this island end up part of this larger server
In a game like this there is no win. Someone is always going to lose. It sucks. But unfortunately with unique servers, limited freeholds slots, character names, etc this is the result of servers needing to merge. Hopefully the whole cost of a freehold will be refunded. What happens to storage? What if you have items stored in a node that doesn't exist on the new server. Do they mail them? Put them in limbo? Do they just pick one at random? And what if that geological location sucks for the storage you were keeping? Now you have to risk it in a caravan just to move it to a more profitable location just because you got merged? It sucks. It creates a lot of questions.
i can see this pissing a lot of people off but it makes sense the weaker server merges into the stronger server, that being said not sure if its a good idea the strong server could potentially lose there freeholds or housing, don't seem to fair but am sure with time and testing they will come to some resolution. Server merges will need to be done for the greater good of the game long-term when pop dies off, if they can limit the servers and like you say have reasonable queue times it should help.
Here's an idea, make a group of servers that will be labeled as "Set to Merge" from the very beginning. These would have less queue times and entice players who don't care much about player housing. Once the player base drops, the "Set to Merge" servers get merged. Player agency 😁
Hey, the first time I read this, I thought, "WHAT A TRASH IDEA." But I think this could work! This could solve the queue problem at launch and keep the gameplay playable during the first month, reducing problems like 15 players trying to kill a mob that spawns once per minute for a quest. I think this idea can be refined somehow to work nicely for the launch... Maybe tag a server as the main server and have ~3 smaller satellite servers that will merge in ~15 days.
when did steven say hte weaker server loses any thing. he said htey need to get a new house that does not mean the items you have are nto still availabe. more then likely those items will end up in your/a warehouse.
Correct the items you’d still have, just like a siege, they would be deposited into storage. I’m talking about the property loss. Since there is only so many non instanced housing/freehold slots, being on the weaker server would cause you to lose these while potentially not being able to gain access to another one easily on an already established server
"inevitably fall off". I'm telling you, if they keep iterating and improving things at the rate and quality that they have been and if they implement everything they said they are going to implement, I expect to see the player numbers like WoWs launch. Up and up for multiple years. Nobody seems to know it yet, what this games going to really look like when it's filled with it's systems and a population. It's mostly the small things that people aren't taking into consideration, the vibe, the RP potential, the community, the heavenly joy from having a proper MMO and all the tiny details about the game none of us know yet that is definitely being left out. On top of being the most ambitious, It's surely going to be the most thought out MMO that exist. I think peoples minds are gonna be blown. You know when you play a game and it takes days of playing it and thinking about things before it hits you in the face like a freight train "holy shit, wtf... this game is so well thought out, what a masterpiece". Yup, I'm pretty sure that's going to be the deal with this.
What about merging two to three wrak servers together while closing large server to new players. Players are given gold equivalent for properties. Weak server players know their server is in trouble and needs more players. Merging weak together has both populations with the same problem. Any hardship is the medicine to solve their mutual problem. Merging weak to strong would punish the strong server. Why do that?
having to change your name is bad, best they can do is keep the name and clearly show it's from the old server, because alot of people paid for the name reserve on release
as long as ppl who wants to stay should avoid streamer servers .. i actually agree with making limited servers enough soo server dont go over double the queue of server cap better to suffer at start than losing stuff after 90 days of playing
Talking about server merges already, have they even confirmed server population numbers ? (Max server population) If it’s another new world cap at 3-5k players that’s not really “mmo”…. I’m not investing in the game for them to merge servers and kill the player base and population. At this rate the game will die after release when we can’t play with our friends, get merged multiple times, with varying ques to get into a overall low populated server. Even 10k isn’t enough. Might aswell look at sharding and having cross server queing…. They’ve already created a problem with the name changes now. Because they’re server not global. And the housing situation isn’t a fair solution, when merging isn’t our choice. Shoulda made it more accessible from the start. And should put more forethought into the community aspect. This is feeling like a rust server that gets wiped, not the mmorpg we are being sold on. This video drastically changed my opinion on Ashes. So it’s not even an MMO ? Kek
I hate BDO, but i think it's probly the best way server works (everybody can play witch each others) just sub server and (just use a useless family name) so we don't have to change caracters name...
Server merges suck, period. and with a game like Ashes, it’s going to suck x2. Their is no great work around. the name thing really bothers me, what if you are one of those people who bought the name reserve?
How do you think Intrepid should handle server merges for Ashes of Creation? Comment Below!
👉Join the RitchieSH Discord! :D discord.gg/CDRsqsB
👉AoC Referral Link: ashesofcreation.com/r/EPFVAR5T1BQL2RPQ
👉Threads: www.threads.net/@ritchiesh
👉Twitter (X): twitter.com/RitchieSH
👉Twitch: www.twitch.tv/ritchiesh/
👉Instagram: instagram.com/ritchiesh/
I have been saying for a while that low pop servers should trigger world threatening events that the server population can rally together and face to save the server.
If they succeed, they become a host server for low pop servers that fail. If they fail, the players will have the opportunity to caravan their goods to the devine gateway, which would be how they show up in the world of their new server.
In this way, they keep the server storyline intact. Imagine your world of Vera is threatened by a world destroying comet that can only be averted through special religious quests related to the constellation system. Imagine your server is unable to stop the disaster and the comet grows larger in the night sky over a week while players rush to save what they can and bring it to the portal, while bandits wait on every road looking to profit from the chaos.
Imagine you make it through to an alternate reality where the world has not fallen and your caravan, loaded with goods, is protected and brought to a nearby city where refugees are greeted with offers of citizenship and your housing certificate can be traded in for the gold cost of your original home or freehold. Struggling cities would compete to attract these immigrants to strengthen themselves and grow to new heights.
This is the way. Not the loss of your server, but the conclusion to its unique story. Not a restart, but instead, the beginning of your characters next adventure.
Actually, smart idea and take on AoC lore
yes this one pls. i will gladly lose my 1000 hr progress to experience such a unique story in my server and escape to another reality.
I honestly love this idea
Really like this overall but there must be a working number of servers that fail and succeed to get the job done properly. You can't leave that in the players hands that much. Maybe the first to succeed "wins" and the second automatically fails type of thing. Basically it becomes a race against other servers.
Wow, that is a great idea. Adding on to what a person commented below. "Maybe do even also a race against time. The first to succeed will be the host server. " That would be perfect! Did any one post this on the forms? I would advise that it should be done so intrepid can see this awesome idea.
Server merges are never fun. I'm sure Intrepid will do what they can to make the situation as easy as possible for players.
This is definitely the thing i worry about the most.
It’s 100% going to be very challenging for them to nail down and keep people happy
Well, for me, all the possible solutions that you mentioned are so bad that I'd have to play the rage quit card. I do like the idea of an apocalyptic world ending event that requires you to fight your way to the exit with just what you can carry. Now that has potential. I wouldn't feel so bad winding up a destitute refugee if there were an interesting event that got me to the new server. The next time you talk to Steven, tell him that idea has my approval.
Server being deleted should get a chance to earn a bunch of siege scrolls so when they go into the new server, they can act like a invading horde. This would allow the old server ppl a chance to earn some properties for those who lost everything and give incredible server lore to the ones receiving "we resisted the horde invasion"
I also had an idea that is sortof a mix between different things said here, that I also mentioned that on a loreforged stream before:
Servermerges trigger a devestationg world event, and to survive/prepare the population of each server that is merging has the opportunity to fortify one or more nodes of thier choice so it can withstand that apocalypse. Players could then also bring thier goods to that node to secure them. Maybe also allowing them to "deconstruct" thier housing to get resources back from that sacrifice.
The amount of nodes, or even buildings etc, that can be saved could for example be limited by some special resources needed, creating poptential conflicts between players in different cities etc. Alternatively, to lower the conflict potential, one could also do a server wide vote on the nodes that should be saved. The amount of resources available could also be based on the server population.
Other than the fortified nodes everything in the world gets reset, creating a blank slate that the newly merged population can build up together, however they want, while still having a well set up base of operations (that also allows for higher lvl content) and not loosing everything during the merge.
Server against Server competition could also still come into play if conflicting nodes are chosen. Maybe some "in character" warnings could be given when that happens that makes clear that they're competing for that node to survive. That could also allow for a server to change thier selection if they do not want to take the risk.
I think something like this allows for a lot of active player agency and gives both sides the chance to save some piece of thier world and doesn't "doom" the entire thing for the smaller/weaker server right from the start. The reset of the remaining world might also help with forming new alligances and promote cooperation( or conflict) between the existing groups from the old servers. This might work better for servers of similar sizes but feels possible for a larger gap as well.
Because I imagine with a "the smaller/weaker server gets merged into the bigger/stronger one" scenario, it'll be rather hard for the smaller server to integrate into the big existing one e.g:
- Guilds from the smaller server have no base/limited resources and will have a hard time competing with the well set up guilds form the bigger server.
- Verra is huuuge and since every server is likely to be different it'd be a huge learning curve to get to know the new layout, traderoutes, resources, crafting areas, farming areas etc etc. again putting the population from the smaller server at rather big disadvantage, instead of having an "organic" (re-) discovery of those things for both sides.
- The housing issue, while also a problem with the "partial wipe", would also again seem to be giving the stronger sever a big advantage, since they'd still have thier citisenships etc intact while the smaller server needs to somehow first accquire that (maybe already hotly contested) satus...
But yea... it'd be a lot of work and idk if it'd be worth it, especially if there'll be a lot of merges early on.
There is no getting around it. Server mergers are going to be ugly. Very ugly.
My biggest problem would be losing my name that would suck major ass. I would even be so bold to say you should be able to keep your name.
Why not just merge to low pop servers into one with resets on everything? If the issue is the strong>weak server. Only merge weak servers together with a reset and leave the strong ones be. The likelihood of just one server being weak across them all is extremely low.
Remember that in all likelyhood the same template as for node / freehold destruction applies to the transfering player for their assets. Housings would be templated, so all they would have to facilitate is flagging the character to have a free first purchase or at least discount the purchase with the amount they paid for their old servers housing.
The more problematic is not the housing or assets, but the player reputation and player contacts that you've build during your play on the other server, as well as guild efforts etc. A minor inconvenience will be the difference in economics as well.
Server merges are always problematic, but i think Strong + weak is a better solution then Multiple weaks put together or two mediums getting put together.
I believe that the way Intrepid is planning is a good way. If I'm on a broken server, I'd rather be allocated on a healthy server than be transferred to a new server. You mentioned player losses such as houses and efforts to build cities, but you forgot to mention the benefits of playing in a Low Pop server, such as easy access to farm zones that would be crowded, lower risks to farm at open pvp areas, etc..
I hope they stick with that idea.
One way i believe that Intrepid can handle this situation is to have an initial 3 month of 6 month period when they open the game with a full reset after the initial `trial` period, essentially a `soft launch` like a soft opening for a business. In this way they could open as many servers as they need to cope with the initial influx of players with a set merge or `relaunch` date where servers that are thriving could be retained and those that are dwindling could be closed and the remaining players could go into existing or new servers as preferred. In this way instead of merging players from quiet servers into established servers they could simply restart as many servers as required to house the players from quiet servers on an equal footing with each other or allow them to top up numbers on existing ones. Because each server is unique they have the option for players to restart this way instead of being merged and could offer a choice. I would absolutely prefer to start from scratch on a level playing field than to drop into a server that has already been running for months and then try to carve out something against the established powers. The other part of this is that they could seasonal competitions this way too. Imagine that a server gets completely dominated by a guild or two and player numbers decline and the same is happening on another server, Intrepid COULD offer them a chance to compete in a new server to see which one is the best.
They could always give players the option option of joining a temporary server at launch that will merge into a pre stated server after launch week to skip waiting in queue. Might not hurt as bad if you know ahead of time your going to be merged around week 2 and nodes still haven't fully developed. Some people might choose that over a 6 hour queue
Or they could just go the route of classic wow and have 2 layers for the first week. Layers aren't ideal but if it's just for the first week it's not the end of the world
Having your server merged into a stronger one while being a mayor, freehold owner, or maybe anyone will definitely feel bad. A tough problem to solve indeed…
I expected you to comment “nyce”
@@RitchieSH psssh I’m not that clever
The way to fix this is not to have multiple worlds but one world like eve online. They need to compensate the weaker server players doing the move. Or have world ending events where ppl could rally the ppl on the low population to start moving assets to an island, which this island end up part of this larger server
In a game like this there is no win. Someone is always going to lose. It sucks. But unfortunately with unique servers, limited freeholds slots, character names, etc this is the result of servers needing to merge. Hopefully the whole cost of a freehold will be refunded. What happens to storage? What if you have items stored in a node that doesn't exist on the new server. Do they mail them? Put them in limbo? Do they just pick one at random? And what if that geological location sucks for the storage you were keeping? Now you have to risk it in a caravan just to move it to a more profitable location just because you got merged? It sucks. It creates a lot of questions.
i can see this pissing a lot of people off but it makes sense the weaker server merges into the stronger server, that being said not sure if its a good idea the strong server could potentially lose there freeholds or housing, don't seem to fair but am sure with time and testing they will come to some resolution.
Server merges will need to be done for the greater good of the game long-term when pop dies off, if they can limit the servers and like you say have reasonable queue times it should help.
Here's an idea, make a group of servers that will be labeled as "Set to Merge" from the very beginning. These would have less queue times and entice players who don't care much about player housing. Once the player base drops, the "Set to Merge" servers get merged. Player agency 😁
But how will they predict those are the servers whom will have their populations drop? 🤔
Hey, the first time I read this, I thought, "WHAT A TRASH IDEA." But I think this could work! This could solve the queue problem at launch and keep the gameplay playable during the first month, reducing problems like 15 players trying to kill a mob that spawns once per minute for a quest.
I think this idea can be refined somehow to work nicely for the launch...
Maybe tag a server as the main server and have ~3 smaller satellite servers that will merge in ~15 days.
Another solution is new servers, and world ending events on several others.
You did miss an important point, some people LIKE low pop servers. So as long as the server subs pay enough, it may remain.
when did steven say hte weaker server loses any thing. he said htey need to get a new house that does not mean the items you have are nto still availabe. more then likely those items will end up in your/a warehouse.
Correct the items you’d still have, just like a siege, they would be deposited into storage. I’m talking about the property loss. Since there is only so many non instanced housing/freehold slots, being on the weaker server would cause you to lose these while potentially not being able to gain access to another one easily on an already established server
It's also possible your home might be a tier 0 node on the other server.
"inevitably fall off". I'm telling you, if they keep iterating and improving things at the rate and quality that they have been and if they implement everything they said they are going to implement, I expect to see the player numbers like WoWs launch.
Up and up for multiple years. Nobody seems to know it yet, what this games going to really look like when it's filled with it's systems and a population. It's mostly the small things that people aren't taking into consideration, the vibe, the RP potential, the community, the heavenly joy from having a proper MMO and all the tiny details about the game none of us know yet that is definitely being left out.
On top of being the most ambitious, It's surely going to be the most thought out MMO that exist. I think peoples minds are gonna be blown. You know when you play a game and it takes days of playing it and thinking about things before it hits you in the face like a freight train "holy shit, wtf... this game is so well thought out, what a masterpiece". Yup, I'm pretty sure that's going to be the deal with this.
What about merging two to three wrak servers together while closing large server to new players. Players are given gold equivalent for properties.
Weak server players know their server is in trouble and needs more players. Merging weak together has both populations with the same problem. Any hardship is the medicine to solve their mutual problem. Merging weak to strong would punish the strong server. Why do that?
having to change your name is bad, best they can do is keep the name and clearly show it's from the old server, because alot of people paid for the name reserve on release
Give Streamers Whitelist but they have to go on specific Servers, and merge Streamer Server with other Streamer Server.
I suggest a system where you pay real life money to force other servers to merge into yours. I think everyone would love it.
But each server only has a limited time window to do it before it passes!
as long as ppl who wants to stay should avoid streamer servers .. i actually agree with making limited servers enough soo server dont go over double the queue of server cap better to suffer at start than losing stuff after 90 days of playing
100%
Talking about server merges already, have they even confirmed server population numbers ? (Max server population)
If it’s another new world cap at 3-5k players that’s not really “mmo”….
I’m not investing in the game for them to merge servers and kill the player base and population. At this rate the game will die after release when we can’t play with our friends, get merged multiple times, with varying ques to get into a overall low populated server. Even 10k isn’t enough. Might aswell look at sharding and having cross server queing….
They’ve already created a problem with the name changes now. Because they’re server not global.
And the housing situation isn’t a fair solution, when merging isn’t our choice. Shoulda made it more accessible from the start. And should put more forethought into the community aspect.
This is feeling like a rust server that gets wiped, not the mmorpg we are being sold on.
This video drastically changed my opinion on Ashes. So it’s not even an MMO ? Kek
everyone know thats gonna happend after idk 1 year or later,they need to think about that how to make best possible transfer system for players!
I hate BDO, but i think it's probly the best way server works (everybody can play witch each others) just sub server and (just use a useless family name) so we don't have to change caracters name...
Server merges suck, period. and with a game like Ashes, it’s going to suck x2. Their is no great work around. the name thing really bothers me, what if you are one of those people who bought the name reserve?
That is a very good point, I didn’t think of it 🤔
Great video!
oh this 2016 game .......you can figure the rest out (if your smart)
It could be nice if the weaker server merge in the stronger like an Alien Invasion 😂…
Give the weaker 200% stat increase and no corruption penalties for 24 hours 😂
mergers will destroy the game lol look at archeage lol for example hahaha
Thanks!
You da best ❤️
Um the arche age remake is doing tons wrong not just this bud. it;s ok hype train away
I wish that we hear someone could find a way find a wybto create a meg6 server.n. DAoC actually handles this well and is still around.