Server Populations

t times it is a blessing, and sometimes a curse, when a Thursday Update goes by without substantial information regarding a system of the game. That is the situation I found myself in last week when we received concept art (Goblin) instead of the hotly anticipated details for the Lore-master class. The reasoning could be obvious: perhaps Turbine was not comfortable publishing such information yet? Regardless of whether that is a correct assessment we (the community) are suffering from a lack of information. So in my editorial this week I must choose something else to discuss: server population.

If it was not for the early stages of Dungeons and Dragons Online (DDO) I might not even have discussed the concept of server populations or more specifically, a cap. I do not know if this will transcend into the release version [of DDO] but they spoke about capping server population at a lower number to embrace a tighter-knit community. Truth be told at first I thought this to be ridiculous.

I have always imagined in any MMORPG it is better to have more then less in any given situation. If there are more players, when the game goes into decline the server populations are least affected. In addition, more players means more guilds, groups and player versus player opponents, which can only be good things. Given the fact that almost every MMORPG these days employs instancing of sorts, any potential problems associated with over-population are solved. So I suppose the question is: do I feel the same way for Lord of the Rings Online (LotRO)?

The simple answer is no, I don't. Though DDO is not for me (a lack of non-linear world to explore and no crafting did it in for me) I can see the logic of the proposed, or maybe reality, of such a cap, especially one set in Tolkien's world of Middle-earth. It is seldom discussed but many players have a fear of lore-breaking elements that would be generally unavoidable if not for a cap.

To reference such concerns, imagine the settlements of Hobbiton and Rivendell, for example. In the case of the former, it is a beautiful landscape filled with trees and Hobbits running to and fro, living out their daily lives. Take that very same Hobbitton and imagine it in the MMORPG that will come to be known as LotRO. Due to the fact that players can create any race - Man, Elf, Dwarf and Hobbit - and consider that most players will not be stuck in the same dogmatic beliefs that are common to the [races], they will want to explore these places, such as Hobbiton. I suppose what I am trying to say is: expect a Human, Dwarf and Elf invasion of Hobbiton and nearly every single Hobbit settlement.

This particular case is something that you could call an "acceptable lore-breaking element." Unless you want to create an invisible wall to Hobbiton for everyone except Hobbits (which is completely unacceptable) this is a reality that we all must live with. Though it is on this note that many a discussion can grow: what is acceptable as far as "race distribution" and overall server population? These are the interesting questions at stake.

If you want an answer to the former - that on race distribution - all one needs to do is look at the race restriction for every class. True, we do not have the information for the Lore-master class yet (please Turbine make it this week!) but we do know that the race of Man will occupy every single class that has been revealed thus far and every other [race] significantly less. To myself and other community members this means one thing: the developers want to encourage the race of Men to populate Middle-earth over all others. While this tactic may not be drastic enough for some of us, it is the most viable method to keeping the game realistic and as close to the lore as possible. After all, we don't want to see 70% of the population as Hobbits and have to defer to "race caps" in order to stay true to the lore. So from all accounts race distribution is a non-issue and should work out in a satisfactory way.

Server population is another beast altogether and where the genius of DDO comes into play, especially for a game like LotRO. The simple reality is the higher your population cap, the more unrealistic and lore breaking it gets. To show what I mean let us look at simple percentages. In this instance, there are 100 characters per server and 40% are Man, 30% Dwarf, 20% Elf and 10% Hobbit. This means that there are only 40 Men, 30 Dwarfs, 20 Elves and 10 Hobbits. Let us now increase the server population to 10,000 (half of what many of World of Warcraft servers are). We now have 4,000 Men, 3,000 Dwarves, 2,000 Elves and 1,000 Hobbits. One more increase: this time to 20,000. That leaves us with 8,000 Men, 6,000 Dwarves, 4000 Elves and 2,000 Hobbits. I want to point out the Hobbit figures: we went from 10 to 1,000 to 2,000. According to the lore, for a race that minds its own business, does not care much for the outside world and generally speaking does not adventure, that is a lot.

I know the counter-argument: we are all adventurers so it's natural for the numbers to be higher. I recognize and accept that but we have to look at the lore of the world and stay true to it and the easiest way to do this is to implement a low population cap. The next question is, how low is low? I would suggest a 5,000-8,000 population cap. At worst - using the percentages given earlier - would result in 800 Hobbits. Keeping in mind that not everyone will be on at the same time this would be more than acceptable to keeping the lore in check.

What needs to be raised as well with this whole argument of population cap is the tight-knit communities that DDO was talking about pursuing. What would be better for the experience of the game is to have a "everyone knows your name" kind of atmosphere in the game world. The most obvious positive to this is the decreased amount of griefing that would occur. Simply put, if the griefer knows his or her chances of getting away with an act is low (through word of mouth) they will be persuaded not to do it. There are other positives as well which include the fostering of relationships with your fellow community members, something that is sorely needed in World of Warcraft: a player is more then just a name this way.

The truth behind all of this discussion will certainly not be revealed until a much later date, as Turbine isn't even discussing server populations at this time. Though when those discussions do occur, I certainly hope that we see a low server cap not only to cater to the lore - a very important feature of this title - but to foster a tight-knit community, something that has been sorely needed since the original Asheron's Call tapered off.