Connected Realms =/= Merged Realms
So no, we were not told “mergers” were happening.
If I had my way, there would never have been so many realms at release. But bundling subs will do that to bloat.
Even across all the servers the population is kind of low, but manageable at least. I think if they reduce the number of servers and merge most of them together, this will boost confidence in the game being something viable for many people, and hence over a short period of time, there will be even more people online than the total now.
1 Like
I appreciate your interaction. But yes the way to resolve a handful of dead dying servers is to 1. merge them 2. provide a place for people to create a new (fresh)
if things are fractured and impossible to raid MC bc there are only 25 players online TOTAL (not all even 60) how do you play the MMORPG (that again requires players to be online… and progress)
What I don’t get is are you working for Bliz? “We messed everything up, just deal with it” seems to be your attitude.
I think the original posting player is absolutely right to voice their opinion. They made a well spoken statement that should be discussed… not ‘silenced’ because YOU ‘don’t want to hear it’
It seems to me all you do is denial instead of looking at the situation that was obviously bound to happen given the decisions Blizzard made. It’s not rocket science to know that if you push TBC most will go there. if you provide no home for Classic players the servers will die.
By all rights this poster should be entitled to a 100% refund (as well as every player who paid to preserve their toon on Classic copy) BUT I highly doubt Bliz will be so honorable… that’s why I make alternative suggestion of ‘fresh’ 
cheers
1 Like
This is the most absent-minded solution I have ever heard. Yes lets split the Classic Community even further than directly fix the pressing problem at hand.
My grandfather used to have a saying… “You’re picking the fly sh*t outta the pepper.”
If you want to nitpick for the sake of nitpicking, yes, connected realms are not the same as merged realms. You can go through my posts above and replace merged with connected and my posts convey the same message.
This is a problem for Blizzard to solve. How they solve it is not terribly important to those who care about this, just that it is solved. If they want to do it through mergers, connected realms, or any means, as long as Classic players can play with each other then we’re good.
I agree, to an extent. I liked that they handled initial loading with layering. It wasn’t ideal but it solved the problem. Dialing it back was nice but yea, there were totally too many servers at the start. Blizzard always knew they were going to have to deal with dwindling populations, more so with the launch of TBC. Here we are… it’s time to deal with it.
Truth be told, do you think Classic has more than a server’s worth of combined population at this point? It looks like “a server’s worth” would be around the 15k to 20k player mark.
2 Likes
and your lack of common sense to the point of asking people to read EULA before purchasing a game service that is presented in such a transparent way is disturbing.
you might want to call it “lack of agency” but you’re undoubtedly possessed by an ideology called individualism. and you also lack common sense (which is the minimum requirement that people use to bond in society).
and related to the topic, i think that one solution to classic era might be 50% discount or free clone services. i’ve paid for the service but i wouldn’t mind if they do it for free if that means more population in the game.
1 Like
Yeah, that’s totally unreasonable, isn’t it.
Actually, I ask people to read the EULA before that start whining about having their rights infringed.
I’m possessed by an ideology of thinking. It’s pretty corner-case, I admit.
2 Likes
yea, you think… like a sophist. that’s why you should leave logic for the grown-ups.
and thinking it’s not an ideology. but pretending you’re unbiased is.
Predicate algebracists, you mean.
I’ve got it.
Note to casual readers: When you can’t attack the argument, attack the debater.
“i’m possessed by the idology of thinking” your sophistry doesn’t need any personal attack. it’s all over your arguments.
Okay.
Oh, is that now one of the “new” insults going around? Does being an individual, instead of indoctrinated and swallowed by the hive mind, make that person one of the “deplorables” who need to be thrown into a gulag for “reeducation?” Is thinking for oneself and being out of lock-step with the hive mind now a derogatory thing? Is it now “woke” to insult and demonize individualism. Is it now a negative, undesirable thing?
Does accusing him of that “deplorable” thing lend weight to your arguments and invalidate his? /smhatsadsadworld
1 Like
What’s really funny is I’m a flaming libtard.
no. the ideology called individualism presupposes that we all are unique and differentiated individuals responsible for ourselves, like newtonian bodies interacting with each other (this is even wrong in physics because the newtonian cosmology is obsolete). this was well established in ancient greece and later in medieval thinking & capitalism.
the fact is that there are societies that never developed the idea of a unique and differentiated individual, and relate to each other as part of the same compost (they lack individuality, because isn’t part of their language to categorize, divide and that doesn’t allow them to think they’re unique individuals like we do in contemporary western society).
you can pretend your name wasn’t given by other, and that your language wasn’t given by other, and that your entire identity wasn’t shaped and given by others, that’s an ideology and it’s called individualism. we always exist inmixed in otherness whether we like it or not.
You’ve lost me and I think you have a really interesting idea.
I’m totally bought into that.
Gah, will you stop editing your post while I’m trying to quote it?
Keep posting. You have interesting thoughts.
[quote=“Antifresh-herod, post:65, topic:1058137, full:true”]
What is your proposal on how to fix the problem. Identify the issues you see and address them with creative solutions:
I just don’t think Bliz CAN fix what they have broken. That’s why my solution is clean slate… just start over and agree they will NOT BREAK things a second time.
This was really foreseeable. I don’t get why people wanted it, since you can still keep and play your character in TBC. If you’re sentimental, you can keep your T3 and Gressil or whatever in the bank. Why would anyone bother playing on the era servers where there would be no updates? There would be no more character progression, the whole point of playing a character.
Mmm not the whole point. I’m one who enjoys the journey and leveling alts. To me end game is not everything. It’s not even the ‘majority’ of the game just a small part of getting gear to be as strong as you can be for out in the open world (I do PvP servers) the river of players coming in going for goals is what creates the community and without stimulus yes a server will die out. But PLAYERS can create their own stimulus to keep game experiences alive. How do you think RP servers stay active? It’s the same concept. The game provides pretty much endless possibilities that one person could never achieve or accomplish all things in it in a life time. People who ‘get bored’ imo simply lack creativity and passion.
While I’m keen on the idea of fresh, what leads you to the conclusion that something like connected realms or mergers won’t solve, or at least mitigate, the current population problems.
For clarity, I don’t think anybody expects pre-TBCC population levels, but if every server has between 10 and 40 players active at peak times, bringing them together drastically improves the size of the Classic Era community.
[quote=“Speedyfera-whitemane, post:77, topic:1058137, full:true”]
You know damn well they can fix it. How hard it is to implement realm mergers/more connections/ temp global xrealm?
See my other post i quoted you. It is well documented in the mega thread.