You want to put tourist on a layering realm while non tourist on a realm without layering. To do that you would first need to know which one is a tourist and which one isn’t. How do you know that?
You guys would be shooting yourself in the foot with this one.
I’m down for no layered servers but only if thats our only option.
Giving us both would most likely mean a lower number of un-layered realms leading to even longer queue times as a majority would probably flock to those and I can only see that getting worse as most people would make those servers their home so you’d be stuck with log in queues for the whole of Classic rather than just the beginning.
What kind of nonsensical response is this? You can’t help yourself from trolling.
There are plenty of documented problems with layering that many of us would prefer to avoid for a “long que time.”
2 Likes
Why do you assume all tourists will choose a layered server? If they are only trying things out, wouldn’t it make sense for them to try both? So wouldn’t they be just as likely to choose unlayered servers?
Nah you right they must all think alike and do the same so they would all definitely roll on a layered server. Much like anyone who “really played” vanilla is adamantly against layering right?
Yes and there are plenty of very real problems with non layered servers, which happen to have ramifications beyond the temporary problems layering might cause.
1 Like
I’m not sure you could have missed the point any more than you did, YOU don’t need to know who is a “tourist”(apply that term to whoever you want it doesn’t matter) because NO ONE is PUTTING anyone ANYWHERE, TF you get this from must be your own arsse because I said nothing of the sort, The issue that blizzard is describing is players who don’t intend on staying around for long and intend on leaving (not planning on grinding all the way to 60 or raiding or any of that jazz) FOR THESE PLAYERS AS SPECIFIED WHO KNOW FOR THEMSELVES IN THEIR OWN MIND THEY ARE NOT PLAYING TO 60 (FFS WHY DOES THIS HAVE TO BE EXPLAINED) there little to no reason why they would VOLUNTARILY CHOOSE the one of two options that means they could potentially waste time not being able to log in or having to wait longer or fight harder for mobs(taking more time they don’t want to spend) it makes sense that THESE PEOPLE would want to choose the option that ENSURE they get on INSTANTLY and those mobs are PLENTIFUL and those nodes are not so restricted and who don’t mind the drawbacks to layering, this would naturally be more rewarding to those who don’t care about the drawbacks of it, FOR THOSE PEOPLE THIS IS THE BETTER CHOICE FOR THEIR OWN INTERESTS.
MEANWHILE those who REALLY REALLY don’t like those drawbacks that come with laying and are ok with not always being able to farm a specific resource at all times then THIS type of server is NATURALLY MORE REWARDING TO THESE OTHER PLAYERS! And you’d be making a DANG FOOL of yourself to try and argue that you could implement one of these and force all others to it would go over easy.
THAT’S NOT EVEN MENTIONING it could be as simple as pressing a button for them to have both as they’re already planning to remove layering, so the ability for them to turn it off is obviously there, it’s not like it’d take a TON of work to remove and rework the feature as it being able to be turned off has been a big point they keep bringing up when people complain about layering.
2 Likes
Negative Zir. Everyone knows that layering is the only thing posing real long term problems to server health, communities, and economies.
1 Like
Temporary? I guess that’s relative.
How did vanilla WoW ever survive?
1 Like
The problem is that blizzard has no way of knowing who might or might not be a tourist because the players themselves don’t know yet. How do you guarantee that every single person who decides to play on a non layered server actually sticks around? Do you force them to sign a contract?
Free time galore, lots of patience from the players (which won’t be given this time around), and server transfers/migrations (which is debatable if they worked).
Oh and opening up new servers asap constantly.
It dealt with the issues in various ways, if you think that blizzard’s answer to server queues in vanilla was “just suck it up” you are very wrong. And as I said those other solutions had very long term and negative consequences.
It didn’t?
No one would flag themselves as a tourist.
1 Like
No, why would we? The idea isn’t to force anyone anywhere or to be 100% on anything, anyone who is assuming that is just a fool who expects the world to split perfectly, the issue of layering or not is not some long term method of culling the weak, it’s to deal with the early rush of new servers, some would argue that having layering for potentially months(they’ve said possibly staying until phase 2) or even just a few weeks can seriously mess with the economy due to the exploits(not to mention PVP issues) .
so allowing some servers to go a more traditional route and have a more vanilla retail experience warts and all would allow them to have that unexploited* world. Which is what a large portion of the community is calling for, so if they have both THEY COULD EVEN COMPARE THE RESULTS! GASP! Almost as if they’d be able to compare them side by side after layering and actually have data on what those exploits end up changing instead of relying on pure speculation that’s going to undoubtedly PO a large portion of their base by forcing one on the other.
1 Like
First of all - let go of the misconception that layering is intended primarily to solve the start-up zone overcrowding and long queues. It is a side effect of layering that the queues will be shorter and the zones will appear less crowded, yes; but that is a side effect.
Layering is an attempt to prevent the long term problem of many dead, low pop servers a few weeks or months after launch.
Blizzard is assuming a dramatic drop off in Classic population after the tourists have exhausted their interest. Layering lets Blizzard load up realms with 2,3, 4 times the intended long term population and collapse those layers as the tourists leave.
It’s a good idea. There is a chance though that the tourist problem is not as large as Blizzard predicts. If that is the case and the population doesn’t drop, maybe it even grows, Blizzard can then offer free transfers to new realms as needed.
What you suggest is silly. Basically you are suggesting that players choose their realm based on whether or not they are tourists. That is a crazy question. How would a tourist know that until they have tried the game and can then decide whether it is something they want to continue on with? Furthermore, many players will choose a realm based on where their friends have also chosen to go.
Layering will be around for a few weeks to a few months at most. Once the kinks are worked out, and that is a primary function of the beta stress testing, you will not generally even see layering at work.
3 Likes
I have a better choice. You play on the servers blizzard releases, or you don’t. If you really can’t deal with layering don’t play for the first 2-3 weeks.
And layering isn’t only about tourists. 3000 players online at launch is not the same as 3000 players online at 8:30 on a Wednesday night in February. They’re using layering to try to make sure servers have a solid pop so peak hours later on are still full servers.
2 Likes
Documentation for outdated versions used as your source?
If Classic has a method to draw in new players (IE new content) this layering solution would never be on the table.
Right here is where you messed up, that is not what is being asked of the players to choose, it’s not “am I a tourist or not” it’s “do I want to deal with the drawbacks of nonlayered or layered” the players that have the mindset AS BLIZZARD AS DESCRIBED AS A “TOURIST” would naturally want a layered server, BECAUSE IT ALIGNS WITH THEIR VALUES, they are not picking this because they align themselves with the label of tourist but because they picking it because they don’t mind the drawbacks that come with layering, if they stay around on layered or nonlayered server DOES NOT MATTER THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS OPTION IS THERE FOR!
BY default those on nonlayer will those who on average stay around longer BECAUSE THEY CHOOSE THE OPTION FULLY AWARE THAT THEY WOULD HAVE THE DRAWBACKS POTENTIALLY HAVING TO SPEND MORE TIME THAN THE ALTERNATIVE SERVER TYPE. does this mean that there will be NO TOURISTS on nonlayered? No that’s stupid to assume it would as again SEPARATING PEOPLE BASED ON A LABEL IS NOT WHAT IT DOES! IT SEPARATES BY MINDSETS! So like minded people who value the same thing(not dealing with fallout of layering exploits).
And if you need an explanation on why people who are less invested pick the less time intensive option then wtf are you even doing here? like wtf are you even wasting your own time making a fool of yourself if you don’t see this.
1 Like
…LOL what
It had like twelve million subscribers, you serious?