Is it against the terms of service

"MaruMaru;c-2087086" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2087082" wrote:

"MaruMaru;c-2087063" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2087056" wrote:

"MaruMaru;c-2087047" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2087045" wrote:

"MaruMaru;c-2087037" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2087036" wrote:

"MaruMaru;c-2087026" wrote:

"Waqui;c-2086898" wrote:
@ZAP The problems of choosing which players to move, where to move them to and in which order to insert them are similar whether you move 50 players from one shard to another or you move half a shard.

These are not remotely the same problems. I have no idea how they divided the infamous fleet shard, from furthers reports from people on the divided shards...the problem didn't fade.

In terms of finding a fair solution it's not much different. If you can move a low number of players - or even just a single player - in a fair way you can also move more players in a fair way.

"MaruMaru;c-2087026" wrote:

Anyway, you can divide a shard in two by a superbly simple logic. Just make a snapshot of players at some random time, put the even numbers in one shard and odd in another. That way you maintain the status quo while reducing the extremity of high end players on each.

Agreed.

"MaruMaru;c-2087026" wrote:

What's the paradigm you would go with if you were to shuffle shards and maintain some resemblence of fairness?

I'm not saying there's a fair solution. I certainly don't have a fair solution myself. But there's a solution which is just as fair (or unfair) as what was done with that fleet shard.

"MaruMaru;c-2087026" wrote:

Whatever scheme you can think of, will it solve the problem of collusion that this whole discussion stems from or does it merely shuffle the colluding parties?

If a shard shuffle was to solve the "problem" of collusion (I personaly don't see shard chats as a problem) it would have to be repeated very often and you need to ensure that each shuffle will result in different top end players being put together in each shard. In my opinion it would be terrible.

If shard chats is not the problem, is there a problem that calls for any change in shard structure whether easy to implement or not?

In my opinion there isn't but that's not the point.

Ok, I don't follow the point then.

You'll see the point back where this part of the discussion started:

"Waqui;c-2086775" wrote:

"Kyno;c-2086743" wrote:

"BobcatSkywalker;c-2086741" wrote:

"ZAP;c-2086728" wrote:

"BlackIrish;c-2086727" wrote:
I'm against shard mafias. I don't think EA does enough or anything to discourage or stop them.

Do you have any suggestions on how CG could stop it?

Random shard shuffle monthly. But keep limit the movement so people are always in a shard with others who started within the same 60 days to prevent new players from getting matched in shards with 4yr old accounts would help.

If people start setting up monthly shard chats then do the shuffle weekly. It can be a auto run job on their servers and takes 0 effort once set up.

how do you handle the regrouping? what order are they placed in?

CG could do it in a similar way as when they split up that one fleet shard. If they found a fair way to do it back then, they can also find a way to shuffle shards.

My response to Kyno's question. For some reason it spawn several responses.

Ok, I tried to address that in my first response to you. Whatever method they used for shard split, it's not the same with shard shuffling. Shard breaking doesn't introduce anyone new into the equation.

With regards to fairness the issues with shard shuffling are the exact same as with breaking up that fleet shard.

Doesn't introduce anyone new into the equation? How so? The players that were removed from that fleet shard were introduced into other fleet shards (at least that's how I understood what Kyno wrote)

"MaruMaru;c-2087063" wrote:

All the shard breaking experience shows is that it's technically possible to move someone from a shard, just like it's technically possible to multiply the stats of a toon by 10.

It also shows that CG found a solution for moving people between shards which in their opinion had an acceptable level of fairness.

"MaruMaru;c-2087063" wrote:

Shard shuffling would be more similar to matchmaking which we know has always been a glorious problem.

Matchmaking is completely different from shard shuffling. Matchmaking doesn't affect your current rank and doesn't affect which payouts your competitors have. Shard shuffling may.

As far as I understood about that particular fleet shard, it was just broken in two.

Since every shard in existence are segmented by the dates they are launched, that doesn't give a paradigm to work with. So which shard you should go to has to be determined by a process similar to matchmaking. Account dates? GP? Something. Obviously that something can not be "just randomly".

The something would be what it is today... based on when you started the game.

They can make hard barriers every 3 months and prevent people from crossing over so players are prevented from being in a shard that has people who started 6 months before or after they did.

As far as shuffling if there are 10 shards in that 3 month period everyone gets placed in a random shard within the 10 based on their position in their current shard.

So if I'm first place in shard 2 of 10 within the 3 month window I get put in the 1st place of shard 3 of 10. The guy in second place goes to shard 4 of 10. The guy in 3rd place goes to shard 5 of 10... but all within the 3 month "when did you start playing" window to keep arenas balanced based on exactly how they are set up now.