So what or where is the solution? They need to be prepared for AQ and these current events are minor in comparison to what AQ will be. We need to be productive here.
No kidding. Thereâs a few here that think this thread is about bringing layers back. People need to read the OP before barfing out their nonsensical responses.
1 Like
Also for the record I am not supporting layering it is not the solution we seek.
1 Like
Sure, but if something goes wrong on a private server people just say âmeh, its a p server, what ya gonna doâ. If things go wrong on Blizzards server it is a very different reaction. You seem to be glazing over the part where a commercial game release has to have many more layers of security and dependability.
I believe that dedicated hardware is the answer. A server or few per realm.
Cloud computing isnât working. And itâs also annoying going to the mailbox and seeing toons from other realms pop up when typing in the mail recipient
3 Likes
I am absolutely glazing over that stuff.
Not sure what those things have to do with performance in mass PvP though.
1 Like
I agree #nochanges
Error checking costs performance. Cheat detection costs performance.
Letâs try to stay on track guys. This thread is meant to be productive and seek solutions.
We all want servers that can handle large scale WPvP, and the mother of them all, the AQ event.
For blizzard we are all hoping this is in the realm of being possible without layering.
Reality check: retail canât handle large scale world pvp. Warmode is a disaster.
Its not happening. They havent figured it out in 15 years. They wont for classic.
Also #nochanges
Lol. When did they do that? That was not my experience there or those who complained about it daily in chat.
Itâs even funnier looking at it by itself. 
1 Like
It seems the server dynamically adjusts itâs own tick rate to compensate for the load it has. As the lag gets progressively worse but no one or very few people DC.
They need to deploy blade servers again. One for each continent for each server running on the baremetal or at the very least, one virtual machine per server. Then you can still run the low pop servers off the same box while letting the big servers have the compute they desperately needs.
1 Like
I was in IF and no graphics adjustment would improve my FPS. There must be some crazy calculations the world server is doing to produce all these players in one location.
Blizzard? Invest money? BACK INTO the game that built them their castle? hA⌠hahahhahahahahahahhhhaa
1 Like
Thatâs an unrealistic expectation. No company does that anymore because itâs cost prohibitive to have idle server capacity spinning somewhere. These large scale battles are infrequent and sporadic, so itâs difficult anticipating and spinning capacity for them on the fly.
1 Like
Why would they invest all this money in server capacity for like 2 weeks.
Any casual will likely quit when the no-lifers/unemployed kill everything that moves.
The game is going to be a ghost town.
Raid logging for 2 hours a week and no-lifers will make up classic by December 1.
1 Like
Tankskie there are many people who enjoy classic and realistically many will continue to contrary to your December 1st prophecy. Please try to remain constructive as we are seeking a response from Blizzard.
Blizzard doesnât respond when called out and theyâve said so themselves they donât like it. Obviously whatâs going to happen is phase 2 will arrive and people will scream lag on the forums when tauren mill wars turn into ultra slow motion dances. Then and only then will blizzard address it
Whatâs the incentive for Blizzard to address this? How many players will end their subscriptions as a direct result of it going unaddressed? Is it more than the cost of âfixingâ the servers in question?
What percentage of the playerbase engage in battles large enough for these scenarios to take place? How often do they happen and how long do they last? Half an hour?
The peak of these situations will be P2 and maybe P3. Assuming, that will be about 6 monthâs worth that theyâd have to invest into improving pvp servers to handle a⌠80 person battle without lag? 100? 200? What expectation do players have in terms of those numbers?
Which is more likely, that they change the servers or let the playerbase adjust their encounters to a smaller functional limit, discouraging it altogether (or continue to engage in overpopulated battles)? What is the cost of either scenario to Blizzard?
My server was smooth 40v40.