I completely agree with your post. Just want to add that a reason the DRS (dynamic respawn) system was abused was mainly because of virtual machines / multi boxing. No charge for accounts, make as many as you want
Depends on what they do with Sharlayers.
If they are true to their word and Sharlayering will only happen early on in overflow situations, it wont affect game play that much at all.
If they use it as a means to create consistent populations over time, where a server is 5,000 to 50,000 player split into up to 100 shalayers, then it is a serious issue. Instead of being part of a small town where you know everyone we’re back to being strangers on the streets of Manhattan.
You got wonder why they renamed Sharding, Layering.
Layering is Shards only everyone has the same server name and instead of going to a default dead or populated shard, you just go to whatever random one that isn’t dead but has space.
1 Like
this is how it is accept it or move on.
ya they all have dynamic spawning
Layering is necessary to beable to even play come release . Seriously come on who cares if ppl abuse it their losers who take the game too seriously so they will get what they ewant anyway. How do you even layer swap anyway lol
Layering there just to make the launch manageable and for making the server populations healthy after the initial launch period.
Take a chill pill people it’s only going to be there for a few weeks.
Getting all stressed out about a temporary measure is really not worth it.
Have you seen beta streams? That’s happening already in a beta where nobody cares about actual progression.
Nowhere, absolutely nowhere, it was confirmed by Blizzard. If that was true the entire world, like it is now in beta, wouldn’t be sharded but it is.
1 Like
Yea, if they had tens of thousands on one server I’d think of that as more of a megaserver concept, which they could also do. I think their idea of layering is to have a small limit per server and then a queue.
I actually wouldn’t have a problem with them having both a megaserver with permanent sharding and “normal” servers without it so the people who don’t have an issue with it can go to a place that never has to deal with dead servers/merger issues and then there’s less of a demand for as many normal servers. Then the anti-sharding people can be happy on their zero sharding servers while the people who don’t want to wait in queues or deal with dead servers can choose that as a priority by going to a megaserver.
A megaserver with perma sharding/layering would have to have a bunch of other additional changes to accommodate things like world bosses (IE: spawn them more frequently based on total playerbase + give people the ability to see what layer the bosses were up on and allow them to manually swap to it + add a weekly lockout to the bosses so the same group couldn’t farm them constantly). I think a lot of people would still pick it as a tradeoff for not having to deal with population issues.
You are right.
The fact that they blue post spell batching and other minor stuff- and not one addressing layering tells me they either (1) aren’t being transparent or (2) do not have a set plan for layering.
1 Like
1 Like
I have a very similar thread to this. OP, do you want to possibly work on a megathread together with other Layering posts so we can compile all of our stuff into a single big post?
1 Like
They know how people feel.
Here’s the thing. Why rebrand Shard into Layers instead of just saying, “We plan to use sharding at launch to handle overflow in areas.”
Most likely if they went to the trouble to rebrand it, they have plans for it.
“Servers populations healthy after launch”?
They’re bringing Cross Realm into classic by renaming server groups, servers and then giving all the different servers the same name.
Is that good or bad?
It’s both.
And if that’s what they’re planning and that’s what happens, I’m more worried about the disingenuous behavior of the company than any particular change.
1 Like
That video again? That’s not a confirmation, that’s an interview of somebody who talks a lot but rarely delivers. BfA is a prime example of empty promises.
Most of the aspects of Classic development were described in great detail in blue posts, except sharding. There is this video about how he “understands” that sharding is garbage, and that he “plans” to remove it with no timeline.
Plus it’s already inconsistent, he talks about copies of the entire world while what we see in the beta streams is a good 'ol shard hopping from BfA.
1 Like
Because it’s entire copies of the world and not zones like the sharding.
It’s better to call it with different name as it is so vastly different.
It’s kinda like comparing a puddle to a lake. Why have different names for them they are both just bodies of water aren’t they. There is a clear difference between the systems and say they are named differently it doesn’t have to be more complicated than that.
If an answer from the game director of World of Warcraft himself is not enough for you then nothing will be.
Not really, It’s just server groups but all the individual servers have the same name. Instead of going to default shards for your realm you just go to a populated one.
It would probably save money as well. Instead of having 30 nearly dead realms all taking up their own shard, you can just give them the same name and put them all on one shard.
What they appear to be doing actually makes a lot of technical and business sense. It’s just not going to give players the small town everyone knows everyone experience they want.
Yeah for the first few weeks.
Some people just refuse to accept that about the system and are diehard about it being a permanent thing in Classic even though the game director himself has said it’s going to be temporary measure for the first few weeks.
Sounds cheaper than making 90 servers.
Maybe it is only the first few weeks, but I doubt it.
From a business perspective, you have two products and a large portion of players are going to be zero sum, that is if they’re playing one version they’re not playing another, but they do play both.
If you create 50 realms with 5k each, you always got to be paying for at least 50 shards even if there is only one person on a realm.
But if you create one realm and just dynamically allocate shards based on usage, you save a lot of money when retail comes out with new content and everyone migrates to retail for a while.
And if the game director said it, lol. Big part of lawyering is the art of hiding the lies in the truth.
1 Like