Layering was not present in Vanilla WoW and should not be a part of the Classic experience.
Agree or Disagree?
10 Likes
but how will that one nightelf kill that one cat she needed to because Azeroth auto pilot told her too man to many people this is a single player mmo ill have you know
2 Likes
She won’t, because remember… she died in the the Burning of Teldrassil.
Blizzard has been pretty clear about why layering is a necessary evil.
I’d prefer the servers remain stable so that I can, you know, play the game.
1 Like
Agree.
Layering is just sharding on steroids.
It’s completely antithetical to what Vanilla WoW is about, yet they forced it on us anyway. And, look what happened.
3 Likes
I am glad we got layering. Means less dead servers. It’s okay a few now use it to get 60 fast and farm BIS. It’s okay streamers get a lot of raid lockout loots too. Layering has been successful.
1 Like
I agree. I wish they would not have included it at all. But hopefully it will soon be turned off at least.
I really hope there will be no funny business about this. Just a clean turn off, and then a blue post. If they do something like “we will keep layering up on some of the most populated servers in order to keep the stability of the servers but the number of layers is small and should not impact gameplay”. …: if they do something like that I would feel so betrayed.
1 Like
If the servers aren’t stable, even with layering, can you imagine how bad they would be without it?
1 Like
Whats scary is people aren’t and aren’t going to quit in the numbers they were expecting, so when they do turn layering off, they’re either going to have to split servers, or put us back in world of queue craft on every server again.
I totally like killing a buncha things only for them to instantly respawn because a few other people are in the area Who don’t even stop to help me. So yea. Layering needs to go. It’s a BAD SYSTEM.
I mean sure, they can bring hundreds of servers to spread players across instead. That was what eventually led to CRZ/LFG that people are not a fan of. I don’t see wow getting as popular as back in 05-06, so it would be even worse.
Core i9s weren’t part of vanilla WoW either. You ready to bust out your Pentium 4 and a CRT monitor?
At some point it makes sense to make compromises. I guess each person gets to decide where that point is. But the problem Blizzard faces is it’s impossible to please everyone so they just have to do what makes sense for the long term health of the game and accept that in the meantime some percentage of the playerbase is going to lost their crap over every decision they make.
2 Likes
I disagree for the same reasons Blizzard does. If they didn’t do layering, or something else, every server would be a ghost town three months from release. I don’t like layering, but I have yet to hear a realistic alternative.
It’s not necessary, Blizzard has more than enough money to make tons of servers then have regular merges to compensate for some population loss over time.
1 Like
It’s currently needed for stability. I think most people would agree it would be nice if they could remove it once things settle down enough, but who knows how long that will take. It’s a pretty awful system yes, but if we actually want to play we’ll have to deal with it, hopefully temporarily.
I’m mostly curious about how they’ll handle empty servers once things calm down. I wish they’d just merge at that point, but then come the player name issues.
It’s so refreshing to see a new topic posted on these forums. Thank you for this!
I totally agree that layering was not present in Vanilla WoW (at least, as far as I know).
Agree on the first part, disagree on the second.
Yeah they’ve sure been stable!
Ion stated that “each layer holds the same number of players that was the realm max in Vanilla WoW”.
In other words, layers give you the actual Vanilla experience: the same number of players.
The one thing layers don’t give you is 120 dead empty servers 3 months from now, when 85% of the current “curious players” are no longer playing Classic.
Is that your complaint? Fewer dead servers?
Regular merges = half the players have to give up their names. Then they have to do it again during the next merge. That didn’t happen in Vanilla!
Blizzard EXPECTS a huge influx of curious players for the first few weeks, followed by a massive drop when 75%-90% of them quit.
How would YOU handle that? Is your “merge” idea better for players than layers? If so, how is it better? Name one way it’s better.