Layer Hopping now has Internal Cooldown

[Katerina-mannoroth]

I Already paid for it!

You paid for retail.

[Slientknight-blackrock (Slientknight)]

Yep, I paid for a license for BFA too, to my dismay.

[Katerina-mannoroth]

You can argue by assertion all you want, but without facts it’s just your opinion, and you know what they compare opinions to. You are entitled to your opinion, sure, but when you state your opinion as a fact, you might want to back it up with some evidence, otherwise you are just arguing by assertion and appealing to yourself as an authority on the matter.

He’s arguing from the position Blizzard itself has taken on the matter. If anybody in all of this has facts to back up their position, it’s going to be Blizzard, even if they don’t care to share what those numbers are.

That Blizzard appears to agree with his conclusions, and disagrees with the others speaks volumes on its own.

[Switzy-stormreaver (Switzy)]

Merges are worse than layering to anyone who is ok with layering.

The only people who prefer merges are people against layering.

I don’t think your solution is better. You do. Agree to disagree. The main reason I don’t is cause you build a community and economy and fracture it with merges. That never happens with layering. The community and economy that is build remains that servers community and economy even after layer collapse.

It’s not like each layer builds their own community and economy. No each server does that.

Layering stunts the growth of community from the outset by turning normal servers into connected realms (layers) with CRZ-lite. And then later you get merges anyway. No thanks.

[Eloraell-moon-guard]

We have no idea how long it’s going to be in place

Except that Ion literally promised on video, to remove it within the first few weeks…

[Slientknight-blackrock (Slientknight)]

Seems like another assertion without a source?

[Cipherr-suramar]

A cooldown will do. This crap is such a non issue anyway. Classics Lifespan is going to be years long, Layering is going to be in game for what, a month and a half perhaps until Phase 2? Maybe 2 months? Its gonna be gone before DireMaul even opens…

Nobody is even going to REMEMBER this crap once the actual game and raiding and pvp ranking really gets going. Its just something to fill the void whining about until it vanishes and people replace it with something else Im sure.

[Vedarian-thunderlord]

I’m pretty sure that line was never asserted by Blizzard. They’ve always expressed concerns about launch and the tourists since Classic was first announced.

Then they said directly that we were getting sharding, but just in the starting zones.

They also directly said, at the same time (well, okay, about a day later) that “there should be only one Kazzak, one Azeregos” and that sharding doesn’t make sense for those encounters. IE “there would be no sharding with that content”

Also: There was no “detailed rollout plan” known at the time of those statements.

Months later, we get the 4 phase rollout plan, which subsequently becomes 6 phases. And then:

Then they said directly that we aren’t getting that, but we’re getting layering across the whole world.

Then they said directly it will only be here till phase 2.

I seem to recall those two statements going hand-in-hand with each other. That they’d decided to use something different from sharding, called it layering, and then made clear they intend for it to be completely gone before phase 2 happens. Phase 2 being when the World Raid Bosses are released, and when the pvp honor system starts .

Blizzard has been very consistent on this one, all things considered.

It’s great if you think they’ve been consistent, I for one think just the opposite and my money will stay in my pocket until I see for myself what sort of product they deliver.

[Katerina-mannoroth]

The World of Warcraft is still in existence in modern day. We could play legal jargon back and forth all day. But when you get down to the nuts and bolts, World of Warcraft is the game. And what comes after it are the expansions. The base game, as it will always be referred to is what people buy WITH the expansions(DLC, in this case).

World of Warcraft as a brand still exists, but absent Classic, you do not have access to the original world of Azeroth. All you can get to is the post-Cataclysm version of the game.

Without Classic being available, there is a legal basis to claim “Pre-Cataclysm Azeroth” aka “Vanilla WoW” is abandonware.

Which is why we have Classic WoW, because it removes all basis to claim it is abandoned.

It also is why Classic WoW isn’t likely to be changed outside the scope of already delineated changes from Blizzard. If they do decide to make a diverging version of the game, it’ll be under a different title.

[Kurwen-stonemaul]

Then don’t play with layering.

Either way it’s happening so I’d rather try and help them fix the issues it presents then push for removal (which isn’t happening).

[Eloraell-moon-guard]

With that server mergers go silky smooth with zero draw backs, and no layer hopping nonsense.

Locked layers would have the same result, but either is bad because layering will go away fast and these methods actually make it remain longer.

Dynamic layering allows them to drop back to 2 layers as early as possible, and then switch it off as early as possible, because it’s seamless. Having these server merges that crash together disparate economies would do far more long term damage, and the longer a server goes with any sort of layering the more likely it is that it will have an impact.

1 week? Near zero impact.
2 weeks? Minimal impact.
3 weeks? A few people get to take advantage of a temporary resource boom.

Anything more than that and they become independent servers, complete with the merge damage that’s recognized in any MMO.

Also, for reference, Blizzard is one of the few MMO companies that has never merged servers. If you say “merge them” Blizzard will use connected realms and CRZ because that’s how they ‘merge’ servers.

Do you really want CRZ for Vanilla’s life, to save you from a few weeks of layering?

[Bricklethumb-anvilmar]

That explains layering, but not why layering isn’t bad for communities.

Layering is bad for communities because it cripples one of the more important methods of forming friendships, which is meeting random people out in the world.

Only in as much as you keep filtering it and not seeing that the layer you are on will have LOTS of people in it too. Without the frustration of ques and no quest mobs to kill.

And think of it this way. Once the layers go away, you will get a chance to see more people. So using the same logic you are using you actually will get to meet more people, especially if they stick around because they can play

Does that make sense?

[Vedarian-thunderlord]

We have no idea how long it’s going to be in place

Except that Ion literally promised on video, to remove it within the first few weeks…

It’s nice that you believe everything they say.

But IMO their history causes me to take everything they say with a large measure of salt.

[Switzy-stormreaver (Switzy)]

Then don’t play with layering.

Either way it’s happening so I’d rather try and help them fix the issues it presents then push for removal (which isn’t happening).

I have tried to help them fix the issues it presents, by promoting static layers. There are better solutions, but Blizzard chose tech that they already had to save time and money.

[Eloraell-moon-guard]

We have no idea how long it’s going to be in place

Except that Ion literally promised on video, to remove it within the first few weeks…

It’s nice that you believe everything they say.

But IMO their history causes me to take everything they say with a large measure of salt.

You can say they’re lying, but we do have an idea on how long its going to be in place.

[Pwnsdruid-burning-blade]

Then why are you still arguing about this if you know its not gonna change?

[Katerina-mannoroth]

@Slientknight-blackrock

I already paid the licence fee for WoW . . . They can’t charge me again for the same license, so if Classic is their preservation and support for that the license of that IP (WoW) they can’t charge me for it again, as I already paid for it. Which is why it isn’t “FREE”.

Gog.com says hi, and wonders if you’re interested in repurchasing preserved copies of games you’ve purchased before?

[Eloraell-moon-guard]

They can’t charge me again for the same license

It’s not the same license. The game you purchased back then is now called “WoW Retail”.

[Kurwen-stonemaul]

I don’t think static layers are better. It hurts the community and economies of each “layer” (really a server at that point) than the damage done by dynamic layering.

Edit: from my understanding with how cloud based everything is the cost is the same via static layering or dynamic so… not really about saving $$.

[Eloraell-moon-guard]

I have tried to help them fix the issues it presents, by promoting static layers.

Can you link to the topic you posted on your version of static layering?