If Riot is going to have one set of servers for all of NA...

Linna Excel·6/8/2014, 6:55:51 PM·2 votes·207 views

Why not move them to Texas?

Texas has a more central location compared to California and would average out the ping on both coasts. It would be a better compromise location if you only wanted one set of NA servers.
You could probably move your LAN servers to the same building and consolidate more.
Texas doesn't have a state income tax and has a lower cost of living (better for the employees)
Texas has lower business taxes I believe (good for Riot itself)
Very low threat of earthquakes and half the state does not turn to flames every summer.

I'm a Floridian but IMO from a business perspective, moving to TX would be a better spot for Riot's servers.

6 Comments

MackleDoge6/8/2014, 8:31:12 PM3 votes

http://forums.na.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?p=45408337#45408337

This is at least one post where the issue is addressed directly by multiple Rioteers. The 5th Riot comment in the thread is the one that specifically states that "servers are in hand" and that they are waiting on further contract details (which in this instance most likely means appropriate location and connections between the servers and ISP).

MackleDoge6/8/2014, 7:24:38 PM1 votes

Well, for one thing, it would mean they have wasted all of the money, man power, and resources they have used in the past months changing their server locations and consolidations as well as wasted the time of all the ISPs and other relevant companies that they set up direct lines from, so there is that. It would also mean that the resources and money they've spent on servers that are, according to Riot themselves, already constructed and are just being prepared for delivery and set up upon a proper location being selected on the East Coast would also be wasted. Overall Texas would be better, but only assuming Riot is starting from scratch or hasn't already spent money and invested time and resources into other situations/solutions recently.