Server Rank Changes

[Akkadius]

Most of our updates have been in Discord in recent time but we will be making a better effort to at least reciprocate to the forums for the time being

+ Preferred

General unofficial criteria for being preferred is having 20-30+ players on daily, good standing in the community, up for 3-6+ months stable

• EQ Classless
• Project Lazaurus

- Preferred

We are considering removing dead preferred servers from the list. This is a harder one because these servers got to preferred for a reason and don't deserve to be unfounded on the standard server list, but would be better to have on some sort of standard list. If the community has input on what we should do on these servers please voice your opinions in thread *constructively*

[Huppy]

Originally Posted by Akkadius

We are considering removing dead preferred servers from the list. This is a harder one because these servers got to preferred for a reason and don't deserve to be unfounded on the standard server list, but would be better to have on some sort of standard list. If the community has input on what we should do on these servers please voice your opinions in thread *constructively*

I would agree, in quoting "these servers got to preferred for a reason". Usually it involved the hard work and effort they put into the server to get there. But as far as the criteria, for actually staying on that list, would that mean they are expected to continue to put that work and effort into it ? There can be many different servers that will easily hold a 20 to 30 (or more) population for 3-6 months, then it can die down (or dry up), but the reasons can vary from server to server. Is it possible that some devs may become too comfortable and relaxed, after they get on that green list, then don't put that work and effort into it anymore ? or has the interest by the player community run it's course for that particular kind of server ? I wouldn't want to be the one judging that, nor would I want to stress myself out trying to get my server on that list. The player community can be unforgiving when it comes to the demand for new content. It wouldn't be easy for a small team of devs, let alone a one man operation. During my years around this project, servers have come and go on that green list, in some of the same ways they do on the standard white list. Also, if a server got promoted tomorrow, and it was "a dead server" 6 months from now, would it be removed ? I assume people would be monitoring that.

[jsr]

Low pop preferred, or hall of fame would be my suggestions. Storm Haven is an obvious example of high quality content with a low pop, and shouldn't fall into the generic list.

[provocating]

Also please consider the boxing variable. A server can have just a few players and hit over a hundreds "players" and then you can have another server with 20 and those are 20 physical players. This really is a hard topic to pin down and there is much to consider. Overall I think a server with a long history and is being actively maintained should hold a lot more weight on the list than one that has only been around a few months and could just go poof overnight.

[Huppy]

'Dedicated" would be my choice for a group label, for those who have been around a long time, and maybe even dedicated themselves to the whole emu project, in a contributing way.

[J3wish]

Originally Posted by Huppy

'Dedicated" would be my choice for a group label, for those who have been around a long time, and maybe even dedicated themselves to the whole emu project, in a contributing way.

Agreed. Or something like "Special Mentions".

[Dogmai9]

IMO there is no reason to feel nostalgic about long dead servers. (I'm not trying to be harsh)

[Huppy]

Originally Posted by Dogmai9

IMO there is no reason to feel nostalgic about long dead servers. (I'm not trying to be harsh)

I don't have any "nostalgic feelings" about any server, anywhere. My "dedicated" suggestion has a lot more behind it, than simple population, which was never the only criteria to get on that green list. Respect for the owners behind those servers is what I was referring to, because of the major contributions that some of them have put into this whole Emu project. People like devn00b, trevius, Scorpious2k, N0ctrnl (just to name a few) and many others on those upper lists have given a lot to this community (and it's development). It's kind of like you work for a company for 25-30 years and at the end you're given a rolex for your dedication ?

[FievelMousey]

I say this they earned GREEN let them keep to they go offline be way do it as people come and go to servers as seasons change.

[jsr]

It's not about nostalgia, so much as letting new players (or players who haven't played on a server) know which servers have good content/stability.

[Dinggo]

"Legacy Server" would probably be the best title for a category of servers that paved the way for many but no longer have a significant following.

As someone who has been around since pretty much the beginning, I would be disappointed if I could not log into some of the Grandfather Servers we have today in EMU. Its like having Grandpa's old Model-T in the garage, you are not going to drive it every day, nor use it to get groceries ... but hoping in the seat and motoring around town every few months brings back fond memories and allows other to see what a grand old classic was.

[chrsschb]

Legends
Preferred
Legacy
Others

Anything that is in Legends or Preferred that doesn't meet the requirements for those categories, including Red and Admin owned servers, should be demoted as necessary or moved to Legacy.

Then when legacy is a mile long we can come up with another category called REALLY Legacy and move stuff there.

[DreadDev]

Originally Posted by chrsschb

Legends
Preferred
Legacy
Others

Anything that is in Legends or Preferred that doesn't meet the requirements for those categories, including Red and Admin owned servers, should be demoted as necessary or moved to Legacy.

Then when legacy is a mile long we can come up with another category called REALLY Legacy and move stuff there.

I definitely agree with adding in a category for the servers that have been a staple in the community (Legacy) to help clear out the preferred list.

That brings up another problem actually clearing out the preferred list and setting criteria that are ACTUALLY representative of how well the server is doing.

Originally Posted by Akkadius

General unofficial criteria for being preferred is having 20-30+ players on daily, good standing in the community, up for 3-6+ months stable

This sends the message to me set up a server log in 20 - 30 boxes let it set for 3 - 6 months and you get yourself a green server name!

Before I continue I apologize to Profusion for using you as an example it is just kind of glaring and needs to be addressed:

There is a server up there at the moment that seems to have figured this out.
https://eqprofusion.com/clone/?a=online
Crazy how you can filter it by zone and see that there are a TON of level 1's in Nexus and PoK with generic names who have not and will not move.

There either needs to be a different metric for gauging server success other than players online or it needs to be adjusted to account for IP Limit.

20 - 30 Players online is a great standard if the IP Limit is set to 1. But does that mean if servers have an IP Limit of 2 the players online should change to 40 - 60 Players online? And what would happen if there is no IP Limit; would those servers just be disqualified from green status?

I think the only real answer here is to change the metric, lets create a poll once every quarter with the choice of the 4 most populated "white" list servers (by Avg.) for the past 3 months and allow the community to vote on who gets the green tag that quarter.

This paired with doing a clean sweep of inactive/dead green servers I think will move this issue in the right direction. These are just my thoughts though... What do you guys think?

[chrsschb]

Originally Posted by DreadDev

I definitely agree with adding in a category for the servers that have been a staple in the community (Legacy) to help clear out the preferred list.

That brings up another problem actually clearing out the preferred list and setting criteria that are ACTUALLY representative of how well the server is doing.

This sends the message to me set up a server log in 20 - 30 boxes let it set for 3 - 6 months and you get yourself a green server name!

Before I continue I apologize to Profusion for using you as an example it is just kind of glaring and needs to be addressed:

There is a server up there at the moment that seems to have figured this out.
https://eqprofusion.com/clone/?a=online
Crazy how you can filter it by zone and see that there are a TON of level 1's in Nexus and PoK with generic names who have not and will not move.

There either needs to be a different metric for gauging server success other than players online or it needs to be adjusted to account for IP Limit.

20 - 30 Players online is a great standard if the IP Limit is set to 1. But does that mean if servers have an IP Limit of 2 the players online should change to 40 - 60 Players online? And what would happen if there is no IP Limit; would those servers just be disqualified from green status?

I think the only real answer here is to change the metric, lets create a poll once every quarter with the choice of the 4 most populated "white" list servers (by Avg.) for the past 3 months and allow the community to vote on who gets the green tag that quarter.

This paired with doing a clean sweep of inactive/dead green servers I think will move this issue in the right direction. These are just my thoughts though... What do you guys think?

Not naming names, but there are a lot of servers with AFK/stay-logged-in-forever rewards.

[DreadDev]

That is what I was getting at chrsschb. There needs to be a better way to gauge the quality of the server other than how many people are afk in the hub zone.