Character number limitations per account.

[stormxero]

As it was explained before, if you spend X time playing with 10 chars, and spend the same X amount of time playing with 5 chars, those 5 chars will double their needs since each char will be used on an average of X/5 time instead of X/10. That mean that your armors and weapons will get damaged two time faster...you'll consume the same amount of foods and drinks but will less chars...the economy will not suffer from the reduction of the number of available toons

Flawless logic, in a perfect world. But this is not a perfect world, for better or worse.

With respect,
My point, is that not everyone is going to play within the parameters of that equation.
Gamers nowadays are much more self dependent than they were many years ago and
in my humble opinion, changing the amount of toons isn't going to change that no matter
how much some people may want it to so they can better their vendor's bottom line.

Take me for a small example. To adapt to this change, I won't have many toons that
will need that type of upkeep anymore. Instead I'd be more inclined to make chars
that will support my main and my guildmates.

Which means when I need something important, I'll have it on demand.
Things that are less important, I'll get from a trusted friend in the guild.
This also means I won't have much need of others save for a selected few
favorites out there that I consider myself a loyal customer to.

I'm only speaking for myself here but I'm sure I caught posts of other people
talking about diversitizing their 5 slots, thereby switching their focus to
becoming more self sufficient, and I'm sure many others will as well.

And that's if they decide to stay at all.

What will happen to the economy then?

That compared to people making it rain with credits across the galaxy with all
those grinding combat toons. Is that supposed to be better for the economy?

I said it before, I'm gonna be spending a lot less credits and I won't be the only one.

[Brenna]

Ok not sure if this would be off topic or not. But if part of the reason to trim down number of characters per account is too not overload data base ,or whatever. Not very good with tech stuff ,. But what about all those folks that made a account never to be seen again. wouldn't removing them somewhere else help? Maybe after a year or some time limit?

[BigQEd]

Ok not sure if this would be off topic or not. But if part of the reason to trim down number of characters per account is too not overload data base ,or whatever. Not very good with tech stuff ,. But what about all those folks that made a account never to be seen again. wouldn't removing them somewhere else help? Maybe after a year or some time limit?

How would that be determined? Let's say you get hit by a truck tomorrow, slip into a coma and can't play for 6 months... you'd be rather upset if you returned to your beloved SWG server and your account was deleted. ::)

[Maximus0369]

Ok not sure if this would be off topic or not. But if part of the reason to trim down number of characters per account is too not overload data base ,or whatever. Not very good with tech stuff ,. But what about all those folks that made a account never to be seen again. wouldn't removing them somewhere else help? Maybe after a year or some time limit?

How would that be determined? Let's say you get hit by a truck tomorrow, slip into a coma and can't play for 6 months... you'd be rather upset if you returned to your beloved SWG server and your account was deleted. ::)

You better avoid all trucks then!

[Brenna]

I did not mean delete them but save them ..elsewhere ..like the old server. So if and when they come back you can just reinstate them , that's what I was asking if could be done.

[Meparch]

Old account data can be archived and reinstated at a later time. The problem is someone has to be willing to volunteer their time to make this happen. But yes over time, old unused account data will account for far more of the db than active players. Though who is active and who just logs in once a month to keep their data current is always a hard call. The best thing to do, is if you decide to leave for good, self delete your characters or at least make your data foot print very small.

[Win]

Old account data can be archived and reinstated at a later time. The problem is someone has to be willing to volunteer their time to make this happen. But yes over time, old unused account data will account for far more of the db than active players. Though who is active and who just logs in once a month to keep their data current is always a hard call. The best thing to do, is if you decide to leave for good, self delete your characters or at least make your data foot print very small.

The idea itself is good for the database size aspect of it. That being said, it would be very hard to even do something like this due to limitations that Berkeley Database poses. This is not a simple SQL DB where values can be easily edited or inserted.

With Core3, account data such as username, character name, and password are stored in an MySQL database, the rest of the data is stored in Berkeley DB, which is a bitch to edit...To say the least.

[Enchurito]

I chose 5, but honestly 3 feels right. You aren't able to have tons of lots, craft everything, and it will help the server be more diverse with better economy. I honestly want my rifleman combat medic, with my tailor image designer (in the works), with my future rifleman ranger. Honestly I could do with just 2 (dump the ranger one) but when I had 3 on the live server valcyn I used my third, but barely. If you were wondering how I had 3 on valcyn, well:
I unlocked jedi through professions, so had I 2, then they did the thing where they said "hey it's unfair that the people who unlocked with the village only have one as they had their original turned into the jedi. Everyone gets a second slot." so I thought "I wonder if they are going to screw up and just add a slot to everyone or if they are going to actually check if people unlocked and already have 2. NAAAAAH they won't screw up like that... but this is SOE... so they might, I'll laugh if they do" and they did, and there was much laughing.

[beowulfchauffeur]

The idea itself is good for the database size aspect of it. That being said, it would be very hard to even do something like this due to limitations that Berkeley Database poses. This is not a simple SQL DB where values can be easily edited or inserted.

With Core3, account data such as username, character name, and password are stored in an MySQL database, the rest of the data is stored in Berkeley DB, which is a bitch to edit...To say the least.

I'll be the first to admit that I have no familiarity with the details of database management, but if it's hard to delete entire accounts' footprints from the Berkeley DB, is it any simpler to delete half of all accounts' entries? Apologies if that's a silly question, but to a layman it sounds like you're faced with the same difficulties either way.

[IGFJohn]

with respect my guild mate stated one true fact and that is this at the moment we got 10 slots well 9 breaks 10 so we can only have 9 characters when it goes down to 5 that can only mean one thing 5 will break 4 so that be even less not attacking but i felt it needed to be said because even i did not catch that on

just my 2 cents

[Hunter]

The idea itself is good for the database size aspect of it. That being said, it would be very hard to even do something like this due to limitations that Berkeley Database poses. This is not a simple SQL DB where values can be easily edited or inserted.

With Core3, account data such as username, character name, and password are stored in an MySQL database, the rest of the data is stored in Berkeley DB, which is a bitch to edit...To say the least.

I'll be the first to admit that I have no familiarity with the details of database management, but if it's hard to delete entire accounts' footprints from the Berkeley DB, is it any simpler to delete half of all accounts' entries? Apologies if that's a silly question, but to a layman it sounds like you're faced with the same difficulties either way.

We're getting off topic and should move to another thread if we're going to go on about it, but the difference is unique IDs and serial numbers on items. If you remove items permanently you are fine (relatively). If you archive and remove them from the database they could get reused. Then you have trouble getting them back.
Someone is going to say primary IDs should be auto increment and won't be reused, but I've got arguments for that. Serial numbers need to be unique and are generated, and if the database grows too big, you'll need to start re-using IDs (which is probably why serial numbers are generated), or go to larger key sizes which take more space and are slower.
There are ways to solve these things and I'm sure the Devs are aware and capable; however, that would take time away from other things they could be working on (which is all volunteer time).

The system already has support for removing characters (you can delete your characters).

Also, you should always assume everything in game development is more difficult than it sounds

[beowulfchauffeur]

We're getting off topic and should move to another thread if we're going to go on about it, but the difference is unique IDs and serial numbers on items. If you remove items permanently you are fine (relatively). If you archive and remove them from the database they could get reused. Then you have trouble getting them back.
Someone is going to say primary IDs should be auto increment and won't be reused, but I've got arguments for that. Serial numbers need to be unique and are generated, and if the database grows too big, you'll need to start re-using IDs (which is probably why serial numbers are generated), or go to larger key sizes which take more space and are slower.
There are ways to solve these things and I'm sure the Devs are aware and capable; however, that would take time away from other things they could be working on (which is all volunteer time).

The system already has support for removing characters (you can delete your characters).

Also, you should always assume everything in game development is more difficult than it sounds

I've bolded a segment of your post, which is essentially what I was getting it. The system has support for removing characters, and therefore one can "easily" remove 5 characters from each account. How is it different from a database management standpoint to wipe characters from inactive accounts, then?

To clarify, I'm not talking about "moving" those entries into a backup server, I'm talking about completely deleting all account data for inactive accounts. I sense there may be some confusion as some users are talking about wiping inactive accounts, and some are talking about removing inactive accounts from the "main" database and creating some kind of backup archive.

If this is getting too far off topic, I apologize and trust that a CSR will be along to delete the post.

[Centurionforce]

Obviously, this is becoming less and less of a discussion. As more and more people vote for 10 accounts, I dont see the reduction happening ( we are to base it on this vote).

[Maximus0369]

Obviously, this is becoming less and less of a discussion. As more and more people vote for 10 accounts, I dont see the reduction happening ( we are to base it on this vote).

Good - I voted for 10

[Hunter]

If this is getting too far off topic, I apologize and trust that a CSR will be along to delete the post.

I responded in the merged database thread instead of here since we are off topic.

[skyhunter11]

I currently have 5 characters. I would vote for 2 characters but since 5 is going neck and neck with 10. I voted for 5. If you add together the votes for 2 and 5, 60 percent of the awakening community wants less alts. Better server performance, less resets, a faster improving economy is worth losing characters. Economic growth on awakening is at a snail's crawl.

Personally, i wish we had more options to vote for. Three or four characters on an account would be best. Three characters would still allow for plenty opportunities to explore different professions and still force players to trade more with each other for items and credits.

Also, less characters per account means its easier to remember players with less alts. My friends have too many alts and can't remember who is who all the time. I am sure they would say the same thing about my five.

[QuorTek]

Isn't that the same as voting for 5 or more or 10 or less, which would mean that 81% of voters would want something in between which would probably make the same kind of sense, just playing with words really.

[MysteriousDD]

having the ability to have 10 characters gives me the chance to roleplay various types of characters...and all of them contribute to the economy...kind of hard for them not to as I have no crafters...lol

[Nightcaper]

I'm pretty new to this, having joined only very recently. One of the attractive things that brought me here was, by far, the 'no wipes' idea. When I heard you could make *10* characters, I had to admit, I thought that was very generous. If I had to choose between 5 and 10, I'd actually prefer an in-between. I'm strictly an economist/crafter, I like making things, especially things of good quality, and I want to see people use those things I work hard on. Other than that, I don't care too much about being a super bounty hunter, having 7 different varieties of combat builds and buffers/other things. I just want to make cool things that people would find useful, 5 would be just *barely* enough to cover the mainstream crafts (excluding smuggler), but admittedly I think that a limit between 6 and 8 would be more reasonable. It would be enough to cover an area you intend on spending the vast majority of your time in-game with, and maybe 1-2 characters for fun/experimentation. I don't know how much my 2 cents is worth, considering this is my first post, and I only recently joined up a couple days ago, but I understand that both server resources are expensive and increasingly difficult to manage, and that newer players, like me, enjoy experimenting with different things, as a form of "what if?". I feel a compromise between 5 and 10 would go over much smoother than dropping straight to 5 (if it were to happen).

[jadiz]

Come on come on more people for 10 plox.... Grrrrrrrrr