I would like to have #nochanges but I understand the need for layering for the initial level zones, however I would like to see layering removed once you enter a contested zone and dynamic respawns used only when needed.
I think this will help mitigate most of the issues but allow as close to possible the “vanilla” experience starting in the contested zones.
As with all the times this is raised: That is sharding. The community already voted no on that with its loudest voices.
Ok - but no one assumed Blizzard would come up with something worse.
It solves (in concept) the biggest problem that people raised, which Blizzard could solve. People disappearing every time they changed zones. That’s what everyone harped on about as being the biggest problem, so they fixed it.
I’m sorry, “selfish narcissist” is being used in an incorrect way here.
Let’s avoid the name calling and keep things rational, please.
I could even twist it just the same and call you the same for supporting layering, but, I choose not to go there.
I’m assuming you’ve never played on a pserver. I don’t see people quitting at launch because of crowding. Population on Northdale is still sitting at 8000+
You say this, followed by
Let’s keep it real please. Reality is, there won’t be 1000s of servers to die, ever.
That moment when you log out, log back in and find that the item has been bought by someone else in the other layer.
Or… PlayerA and PlayerB are on Layer1 and PlayerC is on Layer2. PlayerC invites PlayerB to group, now both PlayerB and PlayerC are on Layer2. PlayerB starts gathering for professions on Layer2. PlayerA invites PlayerB to group, now PlayerA and PlayerB are on the same layer. PlayerB continues to gather for professions. Rinse and repeat and we now have abuse of layering. PlayerD (guildie) enters the world and is on Layer3 and invites PlayerB to group, now the problem has been compounded even more.
I agree layering is needed in the initial leveling zones but once you move to a contested zone layering should be removed and dynamic respawns should be implemented.
Yet another Private Server example that is of no relevance. If Blizzard didn’t have layering, the server cap would be 3000, and the queue would be 15,000 people. As it is, we’re probably going to have long queues with layering to encourage people to spread out.
If you run the numbers, to reduce the queues of 3,000,000 people trying to log in, that’s 1000 servers. So maybe not “thousands” but logically “a thousand”. Blizzard will not open that many servers, and does not want gigantic queues, so… layering.
Its a 3 axis problem.
Number of Realms vs Size of Queues, with player counts being the baseline.
The more players you have, you either need to raise realm counts, or raise queue time. Blizzard built a way to add temporary capacity without increasing the number of Realms themselves.
Layering is the most elegant solution to this, because it provides access to the majority of players, while still leaving the server counts in a reasonably low place, so that when the tourists leave, we aren’t strung out across “nearly” 1000 servers.
I willing to wait hours or even to the next day just to get a non-layered server.
Is that why the server load for the PvP server is almost constantly listed as ‘high’?
Ya know. All this planned abuse and I was wondering what their plan is when they hop layers and someone beats them to their goal.
I just picture this lil gnome happily hopping thru layers. Then they get beaten to the node on 3 out of 4 layers by players just pkaying. Better yet Ganked on 3 out of 4 layers would be epic pwnage. Lol. Might as well throw some worst case scenarios out there for em. Seems appropriate.
Think if it happens to them enough they will stop trying to abuse layering and just play the dam game?
Maybe this is a community problem with a community solution?
Also, introduces abusable mechanics into the higher level zones, and you are still going to have people disappearing.
I would take sharding in the starting zones over this system.
What is “High”? Will “High” be the same as described in live WoW: Classic? Maybe “High” in beta is 30k players while “High” in a live Classic server is 12k.
These are all vague terms and they’ve even said they haven’t an idea on the size of servers come launch. That’s what all this beta testing is for, to determine these thresholds. Else, Vanilla WoW with 3k players is considered “High” and we know that there are more than 3k players playing Beta now.
If you wait 3-12 weeks, you will get a non-layered server ![:slight_smile:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=6" ":slight_smile:")
It is relevant. Pservers have proven they can run a smooth launch with 3-4x population. That alone proves something.
I’m suggesting that Blizz has Dynamic Respawns along with an approx 10,000 cap per server. The cap would daily reduce itself until phase 2. That way you don’t get a huge queue the day the layers collapse. Ween the population down.
This is purely your opinion. IMO sharding the first few zones was much better.
Dynamic respawns is already a proven winner. The only reason I can imagine Blizz not doing that is because “pservers had it first” so they don’t want to appear to be copying a pserver idea.
Me too. I would even go so far as to say that i’d pay extra to have non layered Classic from the Start, but i’ll withhold that because i want everyone to be able to experience the finished version of Classic from the get go and quite frankly think Blizzard can do better altogether and manage without this game breaking “new feature”.
It’s going to be better for the game overall, since people can experience the real deal MMORPG from the start, and decide if this is what they want fairly.
Dynamic respawns also completely alter and lead to abuse of it’s system, if not far worse because of the fact farming routes, nodes, etc. will be in far too abundance and the experience being tainted even worse than Layering could hope to accomplish.
It sounds like their goal is ~10,000 players a server and nothing like a bad experience having 1667 (10,000 / 6 (starting zones)) people to fight for a single gnoll spawn, that will get your game some pretty scathing reviews by the press.
/agree
Layering through your factions starting and leveling zones is acceptable but continued layering will lead to too much abuse.
No news is bad news from mass popularity. It’s free advertising.
The only bad news from any Blizz game I remember is with D3 launch. Nobody could log on for a week.
With WoW, it ain’t the same. Everyone gets in. A few hours later, you leave the starting zone. A few days later, everything is going smooth enough to quest with your group no problem.
That’s not bad media. Or long term game breaking.
It’s possible blizzard has a different set of rules for the beta servers, using separate code from their regular battle.net login gateway.
Or, they are using the existing architecture, just limiting which servers can be accessed by which accounts.
Occam’s razor applies here. It’s possible they built an entire different infrastructure just to handle the beta, but the simplest solution would be to just copy existing architecture.