Overlooked Possibility (Keyword) That Nobody (Generalization) is Really Talking About

WoW Classic WoW Classic General Discussion
1

TL;DR - The Perma Classic Servers may be (key phrase) Connected Realms (ish). Proof below.

Preface
With the introduction of BC, and Blizz scrambling to find ways to appease a plethora of audience, one thing I noticed and/or heard was the possibility (keyword) of the Perma Classic Servers being “Connected Realms” (ish). How did I come to this conclusion? One of the questions (during the Q&A) was asking about how names were going to be saved for both the BC and Classic Servers. Granted, the answer did state that they were NOT going to save those names forever, BUT there was something said that caught my attention. Below, is a Time Stamped version of the Q & A, that takes you directly to that Question (if you would like to see, for yourself).

Time Stamped Video
https://youtu.be/kUO5-VeAMhc?t=1541
Question

After I play Burning Crusade, when I decide to play my main character additionally on a Classic Era Realm at 60, will you have my name reserved for me there or is there a chance I’ll have to rename them?

Answer

Well, that’s a great question! And, I think kind of building on what Holly said, it really is like a “snapshot” taken, at the time we launch the patch. And, so, at that point, you do have your name, in both places. Um, of course, part of the reason we want to make people, uh, make a choice here, and encourage them to choose the place they want to go, is so that we don’t have people parking on those names, forever. So, at some point, we might, uh, decide to, uh, relax that, and let those names be unreserved. But, if you decide on “Launch Day”, that you’re gonna pay for the clone, and you want to have that Clone in both eras, you’ll have your name in both places. Uh, one of the things, we’re (also) concerned about is, though, what that looks like, in Classic Era. Like, uh, as we expect most players go to “Burning Crusade”, and we’ll probably have to do something to resolve that. Our current plans is that you’ll be able to keep your current name but probably have something similar to our "Connected Realms, that let’s you have a (the) “Realm Name”, on the end, so we could resolve any conflicts, if we have to do any mergers, like that.

Again, this is just a possibility, that the Perma Classic Servers may be or even become “Connected Realms” (ish) due to this point, here:

Our current plans is that you’ll be able to keep your current name but probably have something similar to our "Connected Realms, that let’s you have a (the) “Realm Name”, on the end, so we could resolve any conflicts, if we have to do any mergers, like that.

My Conclusion
If I’m reading this right, only shared names will suffer the “Realm Name” attachment, to help players keep their names, as Servers merge, together (in the future). OR, we’re all going to be under “Connected Realms”. I hope Blizz finds some way to do the former and not the latter. Just something I wanted to point out and be known to those of us wanting to stay and remain in Classic.

1 Like
2

I have no problems with connected realms. Classic only servers NEED them. The population just won’t be big enough. Even if they force all PvE’ers to be PvP, i’d agree to that also. It’s about community for me.

3 Likes
3

I like Server identity. I’ve ran into many of the same people, and people knowing who I am. I’d rather they do a merge (not Connected Realms) and slap the server name attachment to same name folks. If they must.

2 Likes
4

Yeah, that caught my attention too. I mentioned it in another thread. I hate the idea of having some hokey “tag” on my name. That’s just so tacky. I don’t know how “connected realm” really works or if it effectively becomes mega servers. I’d probably just throw in the towel on this game if we end up forced onto mega servers. So I suppose I could live with the tag if that was the only alternative. I was pleased that we get to stay in Classic. I hope it’s not at the expense of things that make Classic “feel” like vanilla.

1 Like
5

This is true, and I am grateful. I’m just hoping we can still have Server Identity.

1 Like
6

Oh i don’t know the difference merge and connected. I always assume both meant having server name attached to it.

7

We will. We will …

8

IMO, Merge doesn’t put the Server Names next our names (and actually merges servers, together instead of keeping them all separate still), meanwhile Connected Realms does.

To me, Server Names next to our names just creates animosity and resentment.

I hope so.

9

Frankly, I’ll come back when the TBC crowd is gone. I quit a few months into Classic, after my low level dungeon running was done and I hit 60.

10

I think now is a good time to level lol

11

“LFG BRD for fun. Not a jump run. Not for BiS. Not a speed run.”

I don’t think they’d know how to handle that.

For fun, i actually posted in Discord recently, “Looking for guild that doesn’t use world buffs”. People had no idea what I was talking about. Like, they couldn’t fathom that doing things without world buffs was a thing.

1 Like
12

I’ve mentioned the “Classic Era” realms being merged several times on these forums based on that Q&A but the comments are in other threads.

I’m ok with it for a few reasons:

  1. I really think the population will be low enough that it will be needed, Blizzard said it will be monitored. Before I heard about the connected realms/merger possibility, but after I heard about each server being mirrored, I was tempted to find where the people who stuck around for Classic Era would be so I could just transfer over to it when that time came. Now I may not have to.
  2. Actual server communities for each server should still stay in TBC. So unlike the first time they did this (where my server community just flat out stopped existing) the community will still exist.
  3. With the way Classic is, without CRZ or click a button to join anything, I think a server community will still carry on. My current server essentially merged horde side when 25+ horde guilds came over from Incendius in one night. I hated it at first but it grew on me and it’s ok now. Merging isn’t necessarily bad.
13

Oh, you’re one of THOSE people :woman_facepalming:

I don’t mean this as a disrespect, I have a HUGE problem with players advertising “LFG” instead of “LFM”. “LFG” (to me) screams “carry me”. I’m sorry to say, but it does.

Legit, I was in Westfall (minding my own business), and I see somebody LFGing for deadmines, in the General Chat. Then, somebody else followed it up with “I’ll go with you, if you can get a group for it”. That really bothered me, so I asked “Why does one person have to do all of the recruiting? Why can’t both of you, work together as a team, to recruit?” I never got an answer.

I find some (not all) respond better to “LFM”. Doesn’t matter how “ridiculous” the run may appear. I just think some (not all) are just happy to be in a run, in the first place.

14

Save it for the semantics dome, E.B. White.:crazy_face:

15

in retail you won’t see it but you’ll see people with the tag when they post in trade.

my old realm before i transfered in retail was sisters of elune, and it was connected to cenarion circle.

so items would say soandso-cenarioncircle if the item wasn’t crafted by someone on your home realm.

and they’d see you as blahblahblah-sistersofelune in trade chat.

16

It’s not about semantics. I’ve been interviewing people, and they even told me, they respond better to “LFM” ads than “LFG” ads. Change the tone and see the results, for yourself.

IMO, some (not all) aren’t really “LFG”, per se. They’re looking for a Leader (LFL).

17

if you’re looking for a group you’re looking for a group to join (to me)

if you’re looking for more you’re looking to fill a group yourself (to me)

like if me and a friend were making a group you’d say LFM as you’d already have part of a group.

or maybe i’m just complete nuts?

though i usually ignore people who spam LFG 98734923874324 xs. no one wants to join their stupid group. especially if it’s some random dps making the group.

18

lol. lfg. lfm. makes no difference to me.

but i guess i can see your point. i honestly don’t remember which one i use when i want to run something.

19

you could try AWD

aka anyone will do. you have 3 spriests and a shaman tank? gg!

20

I do understand that, but what I dislike about it is, when it constantly gets spammed, over and over, again. If you’re not getting whispers nor a response, than there probably isn’t a Group out there, running what you want, therefore you ARE the group that should be advertising to fill.

Which don’t advertise for very long because they get filled rather quickly.

Even as a single person, you can still be THE Group to fill.

No. Just unaware of what’s actually happening around you :slightly_smiling_face:

I don’t mind them “spamming it” (within a reasonable amount of time) with LFM. 'Cause somebody can log in at any moment, during the 10th posting, but it’s the 1st posting, to them and may not know that there’s a group looking to fill.

I’m usually the “random DPS” forming Groups, though :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

IK and understand that. The only thing that matters is your audience. And, I’m telling you, they respond better to LFM than LFG.

Thank you, and I do understand why people use LFG to ensure they’re not overlapping another group or something (which DOES happen!). But, that’s still great 'cause that means the amount of people wanting to run said dungeon exceeds the 5 player limit.

I NEVER use “LFG”, ever! I’m ALWAYS “LFMing” or just respond to a LFM :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

I do feel bad for those that just LFG because IK not A LOT respond to that, so I then talk to them and take on that leadership role, like I always do and get that run going for them.