LAYERING
WAS
What was it for?
It was about spreading out populations so zones werenāt overcrowded. It never had a single thing to do with queues. This is an idiotic forum meme created and spread by people who canāt read.
1 Like
It was about spreading out populations so zones werenāt overcrowded. It never had a single thing to do with queues. This is an idiotic forum meme created and spread by people who canāt read.
From a technical standpoint these are the same thing. Itās just them kicking off another instance.
jesus give me strength
Layers all on the same server. They are different instances of that server, but they are all the same server. If they were different servers, that would be more along the lines of the CRZ system that Retail has. But instead, we just have one server with many instances. All the instances are contained in that server. So when you sit in a queue, you are sitting in a queue to get into that one server.
1 Like
#3. force paid realm xfers. this was their only thought. then they saw the interest, much too late. then the released, way too late, a bunch of new servers, that should have been released 3 weeks prior. now, too late, #3 has worked out for their interest. however, with the 10K+ login Qās, its clear there is more fail than the 3 outlined by op. #4 is activision vs blizzard, neither of which cares about their decades of loyal fans post metzen, who begged for classic for decades. #4 should read: actiblizz and its shareholders see only subs. retail is a more profitable sub than classic, thus, classic is discouraged at all levels
1 Like
Layers all on the same server. They are different instances of that server, but they are all the same server. If they were different servers, that would be more along the lines of the CRZ system that Retail has. But instead, we just have one server with many instances. All the instances are contained in that server. So when you sit in a queue, you are sitting in a queue to get into that one server.
The āserverā itself that youāre referring to is just an instantiation of an abstract schema so thereās no reason that the instances have to be ācontainedā (no idea what this means from a technical standpoint in this context) within a server.
Interesting thought pattern. I would figure that theyāre already invested in Classic being that they formed a team and have paid salaries and overhead for 2 years to make Classic happen therefore they would want it to succeed to get return on investment and be parallel with retail so that thereās two target markets that are generating revenue.
Why do you say retail is more profitable? Simply because of the little in-game store?
Layering was supposed to āfixā thisā¦ as it didnāt not sure why we have it in the gameā¦
How about if they increase server cap and in turn create more layers so that more people can play? Then, if their drop off theory is true, reduce layers while rolling back the server cap to the intended # as people stop playing to maintain server density?
Or is the bottleneck the hardware of the server itself?
Please enlighten this illiterate soul, oh wise one, as this is not my area of expertise.
So instead they have Twitch steamers sitting in queues which will be news even on financial sites like Forbes, potentially impacting Activision Blizzard stocks. Stocks are fickle like that, and bad press about people not being able to play a 15 year old game has a big influence. People at Activision should put their foot down because this will affect their stock value too.
forcing people to spend money on realm transfers after launch is it imo
1 Like
Actually itās a well practiced marketing strategy to limit supply even if you can meet the demand. This is how the diamond industry works. Nintendo is also notorious for doing this.
I guess the media can also spin it to make it seem like the company does not have the capability to execute and operate a successful launch causing concern and doubt for shareholders.
Though, I personally think shareholders would see more of a positive in that there is excess and unforeseen demand.
I guess we will see tomorrow how the market reacts.
I can buy the second reason (generate interest with shareholders), the third reason (wait for money from realm transfers to come in) is utter bull. Mainly for 2 reasons:
- If that was the reason, then Blizzard would have added more servers earlier.
- Blizzard did in fact state that they will consider giving free server transfers later. They given them out for select servers before (of course, those were for people going from full servers to new servers).
I suspect bullet point two is most likely the strategy if Iām going to go all conspiracy theorist. Itās probably not intentional but they for sure have some gold teeth shining.
They specifically
Man, if the only the developers had recently answered a bunch of questions about that very subject.
Much in the same way they donāt have too many servers to avoid dead servers in the future, Blizzard doesnāt want to have too many people on one server because the more people they have, the harder it will be to compress to one layer before Phase 2.
Iād also like to note that its pretty great that for three months this forum was screaming āNO LAYERING NO LAYERINGā and now its āMORE LAYERS MORE LAYERS MORE LAYERS CAUSE WEāRE IDIOTS WHO DONāT UNDERSTAND WHAT LAYERING ISā
1 Like
Well, then retail players who did not play vanilla should be de-prioritized and placed in queue. Rubber neckers cause traffic jams.
population is gonna drop cuz half the fking ppl cant fking play
1 Like
Nailed it!
- They underestimated how big launch would be.
- Itās a WoW Launch, were you expecting smooth sailing?
- Players will pop off leaving the dedicated Classic players staying.