Growing Pains

Take a look !

If we continue to grow at our current rate, we could be at 150 or 200 players at peak times for NA by year’s end / early next year.

I’d like to make the suggestion, since server stability is a Major priority for the Owners and Admins, that we entertain the po$$ibility of adding a third $erver to our Univer$e - once we reach a high enough population.

NA - East (Coast)
NA - West

Another server of course means more $ out of pocket for our intrepid leaders and admins.

So I suggest that, if it’s possible, Rex add four buttons to the Donor Page:

 1. $5 per month for 3 months     (one donor package per month)
 2. $5 per month for 6 months
 3. $10 / month for 3 months    (one donor package every two weeks)
 4. $10/ month for 6 months

Call me lazy(and cheap), I’d like to have $5 automatically drafted from my PayPal account / credit card instead of enduring the laborious task of clicking a mouse button and typing #s and letters to do one-time donations. :slight_smile:

Am I an anomaly or are there others who share my passion and <3 for Empyrion, the Devs, HWS and its Owners & Admins?

Who’s with me!?

looks around…

while possible, i would rather wait until we actually need to. if we are constantly at cap then sure lets do this, hell ill give more if needed.

It’s just sad that other servers can’t even get remotely close to the quality of this server. Running a server should be made a bit easier. But on the other hand, this is also nice because now it feels more like an MMO. Everybody in the same server with cross server warp.

But as with every game, the USA is almost always the biggest market with the biggest playerbase. It surprised me that the EU was ahead for so long in this game.

I think I’d rather have @RexXxuS figure out the financials and host capacity issues.


It’s more than just finances, What about the added " drama " " babysitting" , Took us how long to get a NA pm admin ? I mean the Admin team is pretty thin as it is.

Also we are seeing a few people come here now that the EAC is no longer active. So if / when that gets turned on again maybe a small drop of players

Idea what about a locked " donator only " server ?


(7 characters)

what exactly would be the purpose of that… solves nothing. If the server reaches capacity then the easiest thing to do is not split the server but to get more resources to increase the limit. Multiple servers is a temporary bandaid that causes more issues than fixing. More robust machinery would be the better alternative to support even more people would be my recommendation. to be fair i would love to know the specs of what they are currently running

Can the game in its current state of alpha support 200+ players - regardless of multi-processor / RAM / RAID ?


Oh… interesting thread.
Well… as some long-term player might know the NA server started as a “test” server because we had one Server for free for a limited time. We never thought it would reach this state…

So we are considering a third server but not now. So much going on with our real life, so much going on with the game itself behind the scene. I can’t make any promises right now but yeah, sooner or later we want to expand.

This does not mean automatically we add more donator stuff since you already supporting us incredibly good… thanks for that again!

But like Token said… we can handle restore stuff with our tool, we can do almost everything technically. The most time consuming thing right now are dramas and the whole community. Achilles already prepared something but still I might look out for someone helping with the community.
Even though this is one of the most difficult job :wink:
We have to see. Currently we need to settle things down first.

This is another problem. It is possible but the more player the more bugs can happen. For now. We are working on a solution for that.

1 Like

I remember at the beginning of this year a server even with 40 people as a cap with 8 cores. After the 20th something person bugs started going insane. Saw blg’s attempt I was on the few times they peeked to like 80+ lol talk about log in and fall right through the world XD. Now the game shows in ways its way better optimized a 16 core server handling almost 100 people without 50+ experiencing bugs. To me that’s a huge accomplishment in less than 10 months time. For both server owners and game devs. In another year we might have servers that handle 500-1k plus without hardly any issues.

The EU server still has an larger playerbase than the NA period, just that he did take an screenshot on NA timezone dosent give an fair picture, if i would take an screenshot on EU primetime the NA would have those 8 players.

Hello Thranir !! o/

I wasn’t trying to imply anything about the difference in Player #s.

We operate on different timezones and peak at different hours.

The main point of my post was lost, I think.

What I proposed is that I would like the ability to pledge $5 or $10 a month automatically and have that on the donor page.

Also suggested an additional server as each player pop reaches 200 - if it does. :slight_smile:

Not trying to start an NA / EU war !! :smiley:

Awww and here I had hope in our new admin :frowning:

jk :blush:

I’m an Olive Branch type of guy…

Honey > Vinegar.

We already kinda have that. We can donate anytime we want and reset out donor packages.

I really really really do not like the idea of any kind of ‘subscription’ service as it will often be seen as something that is essentially required to stay competitive.

Even as is I feel that the $10 donator pack is pretty much a must as level 5 OCD is a HUGE game changer.

I do not have a problem throwning money at this server, with a planet and everything except and NPC I have pretty much exhausted the donator options.

The idea of any kind of a “monthly” payment option just really rubs me the wrong way and I think it would be a turnoff to many potentially new players to even see it offered as they may percieve it as a ‘required to stay competitive’ option.

Just look at some of the drama about donator planets being seen as pay 2 win.

You and I both get that the resource packs are meaningless and the instant BPs are a minor conveniece at best that only really helps in the early weeks before you are sitting on several hundred stacks of 999 combat steel L blocks that can be used to rush production down to minutes if not seconds

Still perception is more important than reality with these things so I’d caution against any monthly payment options…and I say that as someone who’s been throwing $5 a month at Dwarf Fortress for the past 4+ years.

Not Monthly Payment… Monthly Donation… voluntary…

But I could accomplish the same by just donating $20.

That’s 4 months - right there. :slight_smile:

I get that you don’t want to go down the ‘sub’ road though.

I don’t either, but I can tell you that if it were $5 a month… I’d pony it up. :slight_smile:

Like I said. Perception is everything and with the industry plagued with “Free To Play” games that offer totally optional “subscriptions” without which the games are essentially unbearable - ie World of Tanks - I’d rather the server did not offer the option.

Stick with one time payments. I like the idea that everything HWS offers is a small one time payment that persists through wipes. I think it helps with the server appearing honest and not Pay To Win.

I’m curious as to why it would be structured as a recurring option. If you want to donate every month that option is available right now.

Something other than the current setup would seem to indicate that there would be a point to the recurring charge rather than just donating every month yourself. These changes could very easily appear to be pay to win.

Donate every month if you so chose. The infrastructure is already in place.

Would have to agree with this , the whole industry is going f2p model , has been now for a few years. To have a game in early access then to have options to pay a monthly sub to what amounts to alpha testing " bug reporting " I think would be perceived negatively. Could be wrong about this but atm lets get the max numbers first. :slight_smile:

Regarding a [possible] third server, here is something that would make me jump up and down like a girl:

Since EU and NA population curves don’t overlap very much and the CSW (Cross Server Warp) is in place and seems to be working (?). Would it not be doable with a “shared universe”? I’m thinking EVE, where the player base is spread out in one big universe.

Think of the current CSW as a VERY long warp between different parts of this universe. NA and EU would share the economy, which in itself would be very interesting.
It would allow for different solar systems on three different servers, with their own “rule sets”, like …

  • Red space with little or no rules, 100% PVP space, several gold planets but with less gold each. think 0.0 space (OMG hes using EVE references again!). Gate camping should be allowed, but the should be atleast 4 paths out of the CSW zone …
  • Blue space, governed by police but mainly PvP, kinda like todays server. PVP systems with rare resources. Home for hub resources like the “Elemental Market” and the main Marketplace. Several taxed PvE planets, one per faction would not work.
  • Green space, with starter planets and room for more PVE planets but with no gold for example. Home for the “I only want to build”-population.

The biggest challenge would be …

  • Design this so that the population spreads itself out and don’t all end up on one server.
  • Deal with the amounts of buildings generated by what is two server populations today.

I realize this is a big change, but i don’t think it’s totally impossible. Complete wipes WILL happen in the future either way. I also realize that i’m borrowing a lot from EVE, but the foundation in EVE has been in place since 2004 and it’s still working …

I’m just brain storming here, so don’t get hung up on the details.

1 Like