Population Info ... Compromise?

Just spit balling an idea …

Blizzard gives people wanting to make an “informed decision” a “ballpark range” of where the threshold sits that throws the population of a server from Low over to Medium. Hell maybe throw the good ole “New” status on them and give people the rough number of when you’d change it from New>Low. This seems like
It would be too little an amount of info share to effect shareholders but Maybe that’s enough info to make people less afraid to make the leap from the high/full server, where they know they’ll have plenty of people remaining after an assumed decline,


1 Like

All servers will be big leauge numbers yuge.

1 Like

Okay. Now that Trump has chimed in I feel like the question is answered. Haha

Except that they’ve already changed that value at least once.

First,I don’t know that there are any numbers known to even confirm a change. Second, All indications point to that the current setup will allow WAY more players on any one server at a time. Maybe people would feel better knowing that if you see a server go from say “New” to “Low” that there are at least 3000 people on that server (which is commonly where people say Vanilla cap was).

Just trying to mediate an alternative that makes all parties happy.

I imagine it is possible, with layering, that we could see servers with the same populations that are on retail servers. Larger retail servers have at least 30k-60k accounts, as far as I can tell.

I’m not sure that I agree that them changing the Algorithm that will change high/full is the same as a known number or number range that would make people feel safer making a move over to “lower” population.

That’s nice. But the response was about the fact that not releasing the numbers allows them to adjust them.

Which they literally told us they did.

Tbh I wouldn’t be shocked if these mega servers could handle 50,000-100,000 players.

Which would make sense for the 13 realms we got. Unless classic is just that unpopular but I can’t imagine that.

This doesn’t really pertain to my argument… them changing the threshold, or “algorithm”, for when a high flips to full doesn’t even have to remotely be related to what I’m suggesting. Also why I suggested they roll in the “new” status that could represent any number that blizzard is comfortable with but just enough info to quell the “informed decision” crowd.

its not going to be as bad as all the doomsday prophets are posting about on here

I mostly agree with that and actually think Blizzard is attempting to learn from their past with how they are working this. I’m just proposing a way of offering a “Carrot on a Stick” to those who have concerns about leaping servers from one that is receiving queue warnings to the newer server. Just because I don’t share in the doom and gloom doesn’t mean I can’t be sympathetic to their concerns and look for a workable solution.