Do you guys think that the community would be less upset if Sharding/Layering wasnt automatically done and instead if the Shard/Layer you were on has a low population you would be prompted to move? Like exactly how Guild Wars 2 does it. (for retail and Classic)
3 Likes
Community would be less upset if they removed sharding altogether.
It’s an horrible “feature” that not only breaks immersion but also disrupts the world and it’s easily exploitable.
16 Likes
Sharding and layering are two different things. Sharding is per zone while layering is per server. A lot of people are unhappy with layering in the first part: but they are happy that it at least isn’t sharding.
1 Like
Yeah, but since we are stuck with it do you think Blizzard should consider doing something like that? Because its the lack of control and timing that bother people about Sharding/Layering, it just happens whenever it wants. The common complaint is it happening when you are in combat, if the system prompts you then you can finish your fight, gather an herb or whatever. Its not perfect you still have a lot of the same issues with the current version but at least you know when its happening.
If I had to choose between the two evils I’d rather it be automatic. Else it’d be even more immersion breaking in my opinion ![:confused:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/confused.png?v=6" ":confused:")
1 Like
Not to mention: They plan to remove the layers as the pop balances out more after the initial hype week.
1 Like
I have a better idea,
Have servers that displays in the realm list as follows;
eg
Uldum 1
Uldum 2
Uldum 3
Each server is broken into X amount of layers(and locks once server cap is reached) that you need to pick to play on and will be merged later on down the line. Each layer is for it self, you cannot transfer any way to the different layers on each realm. If one layer is still full at the end of the period then it breaks off into a server of it self and is given a new name.
It’s a better system that allows the servers to be more classic like than anything else as well as keeping the community and economy in tact.
3 Likes
Isnt that just having regular servers then server merging when needed? I mean thats already what Layering is (plus cross realm ie different layers) the only difference is that you cant change between them. Kinda feel like Layering is a fools errand.
Not really different at all. a layer is just a big shard.
5 Likes
if you want to layer hop then just relog
Very interesting, thanks for the input.
Sharding is basically we have 5 instances of this area, so once we’re above a certain population, it’s going to be even split between those 5 instances.
Layering, you’re in an instance of the entire continent, and a second instance is only created if enough people are online. You stay in that instance unless you group with someone from a different one.
Except that it literally doesn’t unless you’ve memorized every single person on your server to be able to notice if they’re there or not, vs just not being online at the time. If me and you are questing together in the starting zone, we’ll keep running into each other because layering doesn’t work like you think it does.
1 Like
You don’t get it if you didn’t play.
2 Likes
I was just thinking that.
“Self”, I asked myself, “what would make sharding better?”
The answer, I told myself, was obvious: a popup in the middle of the screen right while I’m in the middle of combat. Yeah, Self. Just think about it. Big ol’ box-o-text, a glowy “ACCEPT” button, absolutely no “REFUSE” button 'cuz Blizzard never makes an offer you can refuse. “That’s it, Self. That’d be the absolute best. OOH, especially if it was modal and blocked all other actions. Combat over. Pure win.”
1 Like
You do understand that it’s a CONSTANT instance of the entire continent, meaning you’re going to keep seeing the same people the entire time you’re online, and that it’s NOT going to involve people randomly disappearing in front of you, and that it ONLY happens when the population online is over a certain point, right?
It is 100% identical to the people you don’t see just not being online.
It doesn’t hurt your immersion!
1 Like
This is the proper solution. It strips out the sharding/CRZ aspects of layering while keeping the primary purpose of layering intact, merging populations after an anticipated population decline.
2 Likes
No it isn’t. Do you understand exactly how many people will be online at any given time for about a month, when Classic first launches? You also understand you contradicted yourself, right? Sharding isn’t random, layering also isn’t random.
It isn’t identical to people not being online, especially being cognisant that they are, in fact, online. When I played Vanilla, this sort of technology wasn’t in place. Does it mean it is unhealthy to have it? No. Is it authentic? No.
There’s no argument that it doesn’t break people’s immersion who have actually experienced pre-Cataclysm CRZ.
That is incorrect. You group with someone in another layer and you will see everyone disappear as you get moved to their layer.
You will see players disappear in front of you as they move layers because they grouped up.
And what happens to everyone on the boat when it goes to the other continent ? Do we all get ported to the same layer or do we all go into different layers ?
It’s not as constant as you claim.
During the first stress test, I hopped a zeppelin from Org to STV. On the zep with me was one other person, but when we transitioned to the Eastern Kingdoms, there was 10+ people on the zeppelin. Continent transitions definitely cause layer swaps.
The community really just needs to get over it.
Layering is a great solution to the overpopulation at launch problem.
1 Like