I think that combining queues with layering could work. Once a queue gets to 1000, then it’s dumps the queue into its own layer.
If population dwindles down to 2500 combined between layers, then they collapse together. It makes both a desirable single layer, but an undesirable phasing together. I’m sure there’s time to iron out the wrinkles though
Or, if the population is 3500 ish. And let’s say 800 of the population is level 1-19, there could be a layer dedicated to lvl 1-19.
Only downside is, it will suck being a low level and not seeing all the 60s in the city. No big brothers and sisters to look up to
The player currently subscribed to retail wow, that are conditioned towrds convenience, and conditioning Classic wow to be convenient even before it has been released? Convenience already beginning to seep into the game that was promised to be as close to the original as possible? Gotcha. I guess those players include a select few.
Let’s do some quick maf, software + servers > Software == TRUE
Yep, see above.
You might be playing 2 games for 1 price, but some people are playing one game for one price, you can’t impose your personal circumstance on every other player. Since you sub is pretty much guaranteed regardless of what happens to classic, why should your opinion matter more than ones who is questionable and is paying for a single game they payed for and want to play the way it was when they bought it?
Hopefully it never makes it in the game, but by that time the damage will have already been done, if the abuse hasn’t been addressed, and the integrity of the game destroyed from day 1 layering.
Let’s do some more quick mafs: $240 per year != FREE (the != means not =)
An outdated game that some people want in a certain way and have a means to voice the way they want it. Some people aren’t asking much, they just want what they were promised. The game was promised to be as close as possible to the original version, if that promise can’t be upheld, then how can we believe that the promise to remove the reason the promise was broken will not also be broken? Promises, broken promises, promises, broken promises. Warts and all, remember? Commitment to bring that cohesive world back, remember? So this is me holding them to their “promise” which overrides the second promise as it was broken from the second promise that layering will be out phase 2. Which Layering is breaking the initial promise already so why do I believe the second promise that shouldn’t even be there?
Welcome to layering and infrastructure FAIL. (and broken promises)
No. The people on the forums that chose pservers, had those closed down on them, and continued to request Classic from Blizzard.
Let’s do proper math. Software required anyway =/= additional cost.
Except… I generally don’t play BFA. Only resubbed recently to start farming gold to pay for my Classic sub LOL. But your argument turns against yourself. The normal view is that you’re getting 2 subs for the price of one. It’s up to you to decide if you want to play both or not. Why is your personal decision of only playing for one overshadowing the ability to play two?
So you’d rather massive queues, server crashes, and people turning away from it before even getting in. Got in. Yep. Words in your mouth cause that’s all that argument ever is with “No layering”. At this point, you have either of those options. I’ll go deeper into why ‘no layering’ is bad further if you want. Because there are more ways to exploit no layering and queues than to exploit layering.
Classic isn’t a game you paid for. Vanilla world of warcraft is. Try again. You have paid NOTHING toward WoW Classic.
You said it already right there. As close as possible to the original. With the subtext of “Without letting it flop, fail, or putting so much extra effort that it’s not worth the process anyway”. You’re getting that promise. This is as close as possible given modern times. Unless you’d rather the game flop.
I’m not sure you even know how they work. I gave you the result of if they took out layering on a high pop server. Which also has little to do with layering itself. If there was no layering, most of the servers would just be overpopulated queuefests. And there would be people that stay on them. But a fair few that wouldn’t.
You’ve done nothing to actually sway anything so far. Your ‘mafs’ are fundamentally wrong. Your retorts are empty. And opinions heavily biased. Take a look at your words again if you don’t understand. Or will you just turn a blind eye and continue plugging your ears and shouting?
Oh really? And what evidence are you basing this claim that pservers players requested sharding/layering and that blizzard complied?
You just contradicted your initial argument that you are getting classic for free, when you are obviously going to be paying for it.
Relax, you don’t need to be so dramatic, it would just be fore the first week or so, I PROMISE, and it would preserve the integrity of the game/realm/server for the long haul! SO yes, I definitely would take a week of chaos and mayhem to preserve the integrity of the game over convenience easily!
Not if bringing it back prevents the original World of Warcraft from going to abandonware. Otherwise private servers will eventually be legal and blizzard wouldn’t have claim to the IP anymore. Seems doubtful, right?
Nah, you added that stuff, unless you have a source?
Layering? Changing Vanilla WoW? Nothx, I prefer to play the game I bought to play, not some weird rendition with supernatural layering added, thanks for the offer though!
In other words, reduce the likelihood to meet people again by a factor related to the number of layers? We want a persistent world and a persistent population, not a chance to have that, and certainly not a 25% chance.
Also, Blizzard has stated that they will be keeping the number of servers to a minimum, so hopefully it’s just four layers and 2-3 weeks.
If it’s 12k per server and 3k per layers its 2 layers for the whole of Azeroth per server.
Layers are continent wide (so it’s said) so only 2 layers of each continent are required to hit that.
As far as meeting more than the 25%. Custom chat channels aren’t layer specific but server specific so it’s very easy to chat/meet people who aren’t on your layer.
I was on realm 3 on the last test. That realm had low pop layers like really low pop layers. While I didn’t see anyone out in the world I had zero issue finding groups when I wanted. Whether that be from using server wide chats or the old tried and true method of /who and whisper people.
Will your entire Classic experience be confined to one play session on one continent? It’ll take 100 hours at an absolute minimum to level to 60, and 200-300 hours is more likely. That’s broken down into dozens of play sessions over months of play. And, even within play sessions, you’ll be bouncing between continents for dungeons, quests, pvp events, professions, and simply choosing a new leveling zone.
The randomization doesn’t happen as often as CRZ, but it’s still going to be exceedingly common.
Where’s your evidence Blizz threw it in on their own? My argument is that people whined about shoddy launches. If you’ve got blue posts of them announcing sharding without any prior community feedback, I’ll concede it. Get hunting.
No, I’ll be paying for a World of Warcraft sub. I’m not paying for Classic at all. It’s a game that’s freely added to said sub, that gives me access to both games.
We’ll come back to this as a focus if you want. But that chaos would cause so many more imbalances both economically and community-wise on the server than layering.
Firstly, this isn’t relevant. You have given $0 to Blizzard for WoW Classic. If the pservers get it, you still give $0 to Blizzard. And even so, the initial expansion of WoW is far more likely to be defended by the current existence of World of Warcraft… considering the exact title of the base game is iterated in the expansion title. pservers would lose that. (Or find me someone certified in law to explain otherwise)
It’s a pretty simple concept that you don’t make a game to fail. That’s a waste of money, and hurts a company in capitalist economies. It’s legitimately common sense. No meme.
What game is that? You haven’t paid for WoW Classic. It’s a free addition to the World of Warcraft sub.
Still just more “layering is bad” rhetoric. Give me some legitimate reasons. And not just “it hurts the community”. Gotta express why.
So, in a non-layering world, you would have a 75% chance to never see someone in the first place. Then a continually strong chance of not seeing new players, as the current players are doing whatever they can not to be logged off so they can keep playing. Fewer people getting in. Those players rocket ahead. Those players corner markets on materials, and we have economic imbalance along with community fracturing. Welcome to how a non-layered launch would function.
Not sure what this is meant to mean. But you’re eating… ‘excrement’. Try to come forward with a legitimate argument before trying to act like you’ve said something useful.
Vanilla populations were 3k per server, not continent. It’ll be 1.5k per continent if they keep it vanilla-like.
I don’t know if chat channels cross realms in retail, but groups bypass CRZ, and that hasn’t stopped CRZ from stunting overworld socialization. Layering breaks one of the pillars of vanilla community, which is simply meeting the same people out in the world who you are not actively trying to group or guild with.
Groups and guilds are important to vanilla community, but the world is important too, and layering is highly detrimental to a persistent world population.
The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) can be a problem for the preservation of old software as it prohibits required techniques. In October 2003, the US Congress passed 4 clauses to the DMCA which allow for reverse engineering software in case of preservation.
— Exemption to Prohibition on Circumvention of Copyright Protection
In November 2006 the Library of Congress approved an exemption to the DMCA that permits the cracking of copy protection on software no longer being sold or supported by its copyright holder so that they can be archived and preserved without fear of retribution.[[89]]
People are so gullible to think they are doing this for “us”, they are using us to pay for the preservation of their work. Which is fine as long as they do it right, and I can play the game I paid for, otherwise it really isn’t a preservation of wow at all.
There is the whole “nobody is coming you are on your own”
Then there is “Somebody did come to help, but they can’t help you, because an arbitrary game mechanic is stopping them, you are on your own.”
One can be turned into fun, the other can be turned into fun, but is far more likely to inspire rage instead, which is likely to result in a /gamequit.
While I know many pvp’ers liked to think that they caused people to gamequit back in Vanilla, that kind of approach to pvp in Classic is likely to be not very beneficial to the community in the long term.
But hey, if you want to twist Blizzard’s arm into implementing policies which actively drive people away, be my guest.