The naming algorithm is terrible.

[Traderjill]

Yeah... that's not how it works
We're perfectly able to read bug reports without a riot.

Personally, after a certain threshold of inflammatory-ness of a thread, I think twice before posting in it.

Any plans to put out a FAQ for the server merge that covers the myriad of questions asked in several different threads?

An ounce of prevention is worth a ton of cure. I'm guessing that about 80% of the questions/concerns raised could have been preemptively addressed. There were already 2 or 3 FAQ style threads created from players and many questions asked in a few different monthly threads as well. I know you guys have read those threads because you post in them. So honestly, you could've just posted answers to questions and that would have solved most of your problems. Like right now how people are all unsure regarding your response on global research being reset.

[MajorOutage]

Don't worry OP, I've petitioned your name for being inappropriate meaning you can freely chose a new one when the GM contacts you.

"It's German for bull****."

[Ilaliya]

I have Gunnandahalf (a level 2 nt) instead of my Brother's created-on-release-day Gunnandahalf the first 200, first 220 NT ever

Really not sure what criteria could have possibly been applied to have that occur..

As I said, the naming scripts were broken

[Lolicon]

What was the point of buying my pitchfork if i don't use it :/

[cybertron]

Yeah... that's not how it works
We're perfectly able to read bug reports without a riot.

Personally, after a certain threshold of inflammatory-ness of a thread, I think twice before posting in it.

Fair enough, but i guess the problem is how do we(the playerbase) know when you've read a bug report and you're looking into it? There are tons of existing documented bugs in game that have existed for years that for all we know get thrown out with the trash everytime there's a significant change in staff and isn't on anyone's radar

A simple "something may not be right, we are looking into it" post when something first gets raised would help a lot in stopping a lot of the inflammatory comments simply because a lot of the inflammatory comments come from frustrated players who don't know if any new behaviour is intended or an accidental bug, and the reaction to the behavior if we think its what you intended

A little bit of communication goes a long way

[Liwa]

Yeah... that's not how it works
We're perfectly able to read bug reports without a riot.

Personally, after a certain threshold of inflammatory-ness of a thread, I think twice before posting in it.

Fair enough, but i guess the problem is how do we(the playerbase) know when you've read a bug report and you're looking into it? There are tons of existing documented bugs in game that have existed for years that for all we know get thrown out with the trash everytime there's a significant change in staff and isn't on anyone's radar

A simple "something may not be right, we are looking into it" post when something first gets raised would help a lot in stopping a lot of the inflammatory comments simply because a lot of the inflammatory comments come from frustrated players who don't know if any new behaviour is intended or an accidental bug, and the reaction to the behavior if we think its what you intended

A little bit of communication goes a long way

Yes, well unfortunately when everyone is very busy dealing with a large/significant patch on TL no one has a lot of time to respond to all those bug reports. I know for mine the only feedback I get is to see someone has viewed it ... and I understand resources are tied up with other more important stuff than posting to every bug report.

So maybe in these situations it would help everyone to post somewhere for all of us to see ...
Something to the effect of "We have received ample bug reports on XXX issue. And/or XXX issue has been determined to be not working as intended. We are looking into it. Or, yes XXX was an intended change for Live servers, please do not submit any more bug reports on issue XXX. Depending on what issue XXX is, of course. Thank you for posting your bug reports."

Kinnik

[Deemure]

Without intending to throw maptha into the flames, there is also the not so minor consideration that quite often the player based can't tell if a change is intentional, accidental, or a bug. This is not a flame at those working hard to make changes, rather it is another reason for reasonably prompt feedback when an issue is raised. Otherwise, people tent to consider that it must have been intentional. At the risk of being rude, please try to consider the developer's and uses viewpoints. Might halp a bit at least.

And remember
Does it work, asked the developer to the user.
Well, what is it supposed to do asked the user.
Well we really can't tell you replied the developer (we want you to figure it out/"classified algorythm, etc.)
Then we really can't tell you if it works replied the user (but we will assume the worst).

[Deemure]

ok, just logged into test live and I question whether the naming switches are all working correctly. My 202 fixer, that I play regularly lost her name to a level 2 adv on Atlanteen. In checking the names where I could not understand the determination with the prior patch, I did notice most of them seem to be corrected. Still lost some names, but the logic seems reasonable. it is good to see that some of the problems noted previously have been fixed, so clearly some progress has been made. Not sure if this is a recurrance or a new opportunity.

[Liwa]

It appears the Name Script has been re-applied on TL.

I have checked 5 accounts so far and 2 accounts came thru with no toons at all. One of my toons that lost name on first pass and should not have got fixed, so far.

Still checking accounts ...

Edit: I finished checking accounts ... some lost names were not lost this time, some are still lost and a few newly lost names. Only one toon now for me that was lost both passes seems like she should have kept her name. Posted Bug report for her. I lost 8 names all together ...

The accounts that came up empty above finally came thru after 3 or 4 tries ...

Kinnik

[TharBeDragons]

I don't know if any of my character names are actually used on another server, but characters were copied fine. Price of this is that apparently test server shows every unused nickname as invalid/reserved and no new characters can be created.

[Liwa]

You can check on your toon names on other servers by telling Helpbot !whoisall. If helpbot is not over-busy it will tell you all three dimensions.

Kinnik

[Jihnna]

Just checked my 2 accounts. 1 character on each account had lost their name. To inactive level-below-15 characters. One 220/30 and one 199/29 ... old toons, annoys me alot.

[Ilaliya]

Just checked my 2 accounts. 1 character on each account had lost their name. To inactive level-below-15 characters. One 220/30 and one 199/29 ... old toons, annoys me alot.

what were the names/account?

Sounds like something is still wrong with the scripts. Look, this is the obvious stuff. Obviously high level old and well played characters will (should) beat out inactive below 15 characters. Where it gets tricky to is "my 6 month old character with 3 months played vs your 4 month old character with 4 months played." But none of the complaints are in that category, so as I said seems like something is still wrong.

[Jihnna]

Sent you a private message with the info, Ilaliya

[Belph]

what were the names/account?

Sounds like something is still wrong with the scripts. Look, this is the obvious stuff. Obviously high level old and well played characters will (should) beat out inactive below 15 characters. Where it gets tricky to is "my 6 month old character with 3 months played vs your 4 month old character with 4 months played." But none of the complaints are in that category, so as I said seems like something is still wrong.

My 150 mp on rk1, belph0, is now named R13324382288. He was beaten by my level 1 rk2 placeholder.

:S?

Edit: this wasnt the case after the first test

[Deemure]

Well, based on the names I "got back" and new ones lost, at least it seems we are looking at a different issue. Thanks for the feedback and looking into it. I put mine in a bug report with all the character data, etc. They say the third time is a charm, so good luck.

[Utopian]

I also had my lower, new toons on Rk1 replace my RK2 toons on this pass. Was the opposite on last pass. Sounds like more work is needed. But - realizing it may never be "perfect" - will any toon that has its name changed get an automatic name change allowed or will it require a discussion with CS to get it updated?


Ilaliya - I sent a pm with info for my pair of examples.

[Liwa]

Now with today's patch to Test Live it seems like the First Name Algorithym was re-used rather than making the last few fixes to the 2nd version.

For my toons anyways, I am back to loosing the names I lost on the first pass ...

Mine is to the point that one of my lost RK2 names was to a non-existant toon on RK1 ... to test it I rolled a toon on RK1 today with the name I lost with today's patch to TL.

Bug report submitted/resubmitted ...

Any one else with similar results?

Kinnik

[Deemure]

Yes, but it increasingly seems that the algorythm isn't getting fixed, or at least not in a manner that stays fixed.

[Pennypacker]

Since restructuring is happening soon and the current ao team will not be working on ao after this and decided to only do the merge before they leave they have decided to use the old 1 step forward 2 steps back technique to ensure they have something to do until their employment ends.