And that philosophy is apparently to set no actual limits, leaving sharding throughout the game in perpetuity open as an option.
1 Like
I would rather it wasn’t there, but I also don’t want to wait in a queue for the first week or so after launch. It’s kind of the lesser of 2 evils if they stick to what they have announced about its planned uses.
I don’t know what to laugh at more. The fact that you don’t know there are specific ways to look at the Legacy achievements like PVP titles to tell who was there or that you think your statements are making you look better the more you talk.
Are you? You’re making broad sweeping statements of your own, yet questioning anyone else’s ability to counter point you. That basically makes you a self-righteous hypocrite with delusions of authority.
Please try and stick to the conversation instead of trying to belittle everyone because you can’t actually have a reasonable discussion.
I played Vanilla from November 2004, Day one. Just because I believe that Brian Birmingham understands the community and respects them doesn’t mean I started in WoD. Your attempts to discredit by ad hominem are literally undermining your credibility.
2 Likes
No it isn’t. They said they know its antithetical to the server community of Classic. I’m sure if they could find a better way to do it without sharding, they will. Which is why I’m interested to hear from them. But since none of us can come up with it, we’re working on the basis that their investigation came out the same.
No-one arguing against sharding (including yourself) is actually proposing something that will meet their stated diametric goals of a smooth launch and long term stability without sharding. They’re literally just saying “I’m going to have a tantrum if the server doesn’t burn”.
1 Like
The biggest problem with this forum is that there are two distinct populations trying to weigh in. One of players that actually were in classic when it dropped, and one with players that want to try it out. It seems to me that many of the people that wanted classic since even the cataclysm release want it for similar reasons and that points to [no sharding]. I don’t think it would be a wild guess to say that many people including myself that want classic as classic without sharding are accepting and even looking forward to the overpopulated start areas at release. This is how many zones were during classic and even the burning crusade release. You waited to grab a mob spawn for your quest, you pvp’ed people while you were doing this in some zones. You had que times of 3 days when you tried to log in. We are used to that and that is what we want, I am very good at sniping a mob from a waiting group, knowing full well that I will never be able to run dungeons with that group. You pick your enemies, and are stuck with them. That is classic wow, that is what is desired. If you believe that the overpopulation without sharding is going to ruin the experience for you, then your are admitting to being a tourist for the classic release.
1 Like
Blizzard’s ambiguity around the limits of sharding is completely intentional to reserve the right to use it however and whenever they want.
Once sharding is in Classic, something tells me sharding is there to stay in Classic.
People asked for it to be turned off in Legion - sharding remains in BFA. In fact, it is even more widespread (war mode).
1 Like
You’re calling Blizzard tourists.
1 Like
I understand where a few people are coming from, I am also expecting blizzard to run around us with sharding and most likely keep it implemented longer then vaguely described. I make that assumption on they want to keep the tech team small when its up and running to save costs. That and lets face it, they have lied to us about a whole lot in the past, and still treat their fan base like a in-law they hate.
TLDR: I dont trust these hoes, and sharding will kill community.
Since there is literally only 1 employee still at blizzard working on wow that was around during classic, yes they are all tourists.
2 Likes
Classic launch day will not be the same experience as vanilla’s. It will be closer to a private server launch.
2 Likes
i think no server sharding is better
3 Likes
In my opinion the best solution would be to release more realms in proportion to player demand.
Servers that are full or close to it can be labeled as such, and then players can decide accordingly if they would take a
more or less crowded realm. That way the integrity of server community is kept, which is a huge point for classic
WoW. I think it has the power to be a game changer. This approach overall is more concrete and less
‘simulated’ than simply sharding when a threshold is reached.
2 Likes
Definitely not going to have 5000 people in a zone with dynamic respawns. That’s not available on Blizzard servers. Its queues or sharding.
Why don’t you make an argument instead is stating absolutes?
Here is an anthology of players against sharding. It is my own Wall of No to sharding.
In it, I refer to an alternative from to Black Desert Online and proposed by a number of streamers.
My own solution? This is Vanilla. How about use a Vanilla solution? Queues. Additional Relams. Transfers.
I would choose those solutions over sharding, always. I am not willing to sacrifice Vanilla WoW gameplay (community is everything) for the sake of a cloud-based player population management technical solution.
I would rather have a que time of 2 weeks, and actually not be able to log in for 2 weeks, than have sharding.
4 Likes
Tourist isn’t “Someone who didn’t play during Vanilla”. Its someone who only plays during the first 1-10, maybe to 20 then quits. Sheesh, keep up. Even Blizzard uses the term for that.
1 Like
That’s exactly my point.
That’s nice. Blizzard has specifically stated that they want a smooth launch unlike Vanilla, without crashes or long queues.
And they’re the ones developing the game. So if Sharding means you won’t play, can I direct your attention to Pantheon instead of spewing bile in the Classic forums?
2 Likes
What was that cap, do we know? Google is saying 2.5 to 3k?
Mark Kern said 2k with a flexible ceiling.