[MUD-Dev] Star Wars Galaxies: 1 character per server

Caliban Tiresias Darklock caliban at darklock.com
Thu Jan 16 08:57:45 New Zealand Daylight Time 2003


From: "Marc Fielding" <fielding at computer.org>
> [ Caliban Tiresias Darklock ]

>> The defense of your playstyle is reasonably irrelevant. The
>> question at issue is more one of whether a game MUST support your
>> playstyle, and I would argue that the answer is "no" regardless
>> of who you are and what your playstyle is and how many people
>> agree with you.

> Incorrect. While no game MUST support every playstyle, advocacy
> for the inclusion of a very popular playstyle is far from
> irrelevant. This is especially true given the stated goal of
> growing the MMOG market.

You've gone in a big circle now. First you say you want to defend
your argument in favor of growing the market, then you say your
argument is based on experience, and then you say that your argument
is relevant to growing the market.

  But what is the argument? I've said it before, I'll say it again:
  I don't see that you HAVE an argument. You just want something,
  and your friends say they agree with you, so you think everyone
  wants it. But there's no real *reason* to want it. You can tell me
  how much fun it is until you're blue in the face, and that doesn't
  make it any more sensible than it was before you started. You want
  MCS because you like MCS, but you don't have any real *rational*
  reason why MCS belongs in a game.

An argument is a connected series of statements intended to
establish a definite proposition.

<EdNote: Deletia>

>> Exactly. An MCS server can't support as many players as an SCS
>> server, so you need more servers. And that's not an intra-server
>> issue at all.

> Of course it can. You just need to provide extra resources to
> cover the additional characters per player.  New shards can be
> added to handle excess players, but that's an issue applicable to
> both SCS and MCS.

Sure, let's look at that. After all, we have an S which is driven by
P/X * Y, so we have some options when Y increases.

   - We can reduce P, kicking players off the game.

   - We can increase X, upgrading the capacity of our servers.

   - We can increase S, adding more servers.

All three options are equally available to SCS and MCS systems, and
-- strangely enough -- result in exactly the same math *proving*
that SCS supports more players.

> Your own analysis is complicating the problem for you.

No, it isn't. What is complicating the problem is that people refuse
to understand it.

If the *only* difference between two servers is that one is SCS and
the other is MCS, then the SCS server can support more players,
regardless of your game or its policies or the exact physical
specifications of the server. Nothing you or anyone else can say
will ever disprove this.

> P.S.: You *do* know that most MCS systems only allow one character
> per player to be logged at a time, right?

And you *do* know that this doesn't matter, right? "Regardless of
the game or its policies" -- and how many simultaneous characters
you can have logged in is just a game policy.

<EdNote: Deletia>

_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev



More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list