Server Login Queues vs Sharding vs Other

[Melaned-blackrock (Melaned)]

Thank you.

[Eloraell-moon-guard]

Lets say blizzard only anticipated 30k sticking around for classic.

I would raise that number by a factor of 10. They’re going to launch with far more than 4 servers.

[Laeric-wyrmrest-accord]

I’m pretty sure 4 servers wouldn’t be enough. I’d say about 10.

[Matcauthon-steamwheedle-cartel (Matcauthon)]

That we actually value our time and money and would rather actually play the game than be stuck at the login screen waiting to play the game while important in-game events are happening?

Actually, the GLARING commonality is that you are all level 120.

Is anyone surprised that some people seem to be concerned only with their own convenience?

Knock that crap out Fesz. I told you already that an attitude like that does not help anyone.

Those of us who have played can also turn the tables and talk about your lack of playing all these years. . except. . possibly in other “off the book” ways. Which… what kind of leg is that to stand on.

Also. . man. . come on… I have read these forums just like you and I do not think I have heard one person say they where PRO sharding ALL THE time!!

You are taking a bias against those of us who have played for one reason or another to a high degree of shaming and classism.

Can’t we all just get along…WE ALL WANT CLASSIC. You do NOT hold any special want or need for it more than any one else.

Thank you sir!

And yet I’m 120 and have clearly played and i know how invasive sharding is.
And yet i don’t want that garbage in vanilla at all

[Laeric-wyrmrest-accord]

I don’t either.

I want login queues and crashing servers even less.

[Matcauthon-steamwheedle-cartel (Matcauthon)]

Actually, the GLARING commonality is that you are all level 120.

Is anyone surprised that some people seem to be concerned only with their own convenience?

As opposed to a level 10, 30 achievement point character?

Its not about convenience, it’s about the greater desire to have Classic succeed. If you make tourists sit at the door for hours on end, we lose any chance of gaining new players who aren’t diehard classic fans.

And again. This thread isn’t about sharding launch. It’s about after the toursits are done.

[Matcauthon-steamwheedle-cartel (Matcauthon)]

Lets say blizzard only anticipated 30k sticking around for classic.

I would raise that number by a factor of 10. They’re going to launch with far more than 4 servers.

I was using it as an example. My point is made though.

[Laeric-wyrmrest-accord]

I’m sorry, man. It seems this thread got out of hand.

[Eloraell-moon-guard]

And again. This thread isn’t about sharding launch. It’s about after the toursits are done.

Then problem solved. There’s not going to be need for queues after tourists go.

[Laeric-wyrmrest-accord]

How do you know?

[Eloraell-moon-guard]

Any system that can cope with the tourists, in such a way that they aren’t heavily queued, will easily cope with an environment with a tenth of the population. I don’t understand why this is a real question.

[Matcauthon-steamwheedle-cartel (Matcauthon)]

And again. This thread isn’t about sharding launch. It’s about after the toursits are done.

Then problem solved. There’s not going to be need for queues after tourists go.

But you’re missing the point.

Say blizzard planned for x population after launch died out.
Say we end up with population 2x instead.

Melaned wants to know what then? Because we’d have lots od people waiting in queues

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

Simple solution. If login queues are that bad open new servers.

This is not the simple solution that leaves the game in a better state once the tourists leave. The dead server mergers are part of the downfall of communities.

And yet you don’t see me advocating to open lots of servers.
Say we open with 10 servers.
Say 2 months down the road were higher then expected population. Open an extra server.
Don’t go ham mode on it. Do it slowly and controlled.

That’s fine long term, what it doesn’t address is the servers having issues in the present.

[Laeric-wyrmrest-accord]

Because there’s still a chance – maybe not a huge one, but a chance nonetheless – that Classic WoW actually will see player growth rather than player stabilization.

IF that happens, then measures will have to be taken to ensure server stability.

On the current architecture, all it takes is 200-ish, possibly more but 200 is the number I heard, people in the same zone, on the same shard, to crash a server.

[Fesz-cenarius]

That we actually value our time and money and would rather actually play the game than be stuck at the login screen waiting to play the game while important in-game events are happening?

Actually, the GLARING commonality is that you are all level 120.

Is anyone surprised that some people seem to be concerned only with their own convenience?

Knock that crap out Fesz. I told you already that an attitude like that does not help anyone.

Those of us who have played can also turn the tables and talk about your lack of playing all these years. . except. . possibly in other “off the book” ways. Which… what kind of leg is that to stand on.

Also. . man. . come on… I have read these forums just like you and I do not think I have heard one person say they where PRO sharding ALL THE time!!

You are taking a bias against those of us who have played for one reason or another to a high degree of shaming and classism.

Can’t we all just get along…WE ALL WANT CLASSIC. You do NOT hold any special want or need for it more than any one else.

Thank you sir!

I began playing the day WoW was released.

The only expansion I have played on live is BFA, which I BETA tested and found to be the least enjoyable experience of any expansion and not worth the price, even for the new allied races.

I’ve never touched a private server.

Not every pro starter wants sharding all the time, but the three I mentioned certainly do seem to be pushing for sharding to extend well beyond those “starting areas” and that “brief time at launch”.

Some claim that they do not want sharding, even though they specifically stated they advocated sharding in perpetuity, but refuse to consider any other option that has been presented.

[Matcauthon-steamwheedle-cartel (Matcauthon)]

Any system that can cope with the tourists, in such a way that they aren’t heavily queued, will easily cope with an environment with a tenth of the population. I don’t understand why this is a real question.

Okay lets say you plan for x people playing after launch.
You are using sharding so you can exceed your normal server cap during launch.
That lets you use the same amount of servers to accommodate your x population that is going to stick around and 10x tourists. Because sharding will ensure no one has queues and splits everyone up.

But what happens if you have 2x people post launch? You don’t have sharding anymore so you’re back to queues.

[Eloraell-moon-guard]

By ignoring launch, you’re throwing away the mechanisms that prevent the queues.

1. At launch, every man and his dog is going to try it because its free (to anyone with a subscription)
2. Many of those people will die out before level 20.
3. In order to handle that load, they either need to raise caps, or create more servers.
4. Assuming they increase servers at that point, there’ll be too many afterwards.
5. Assuming they increase caps at that point, they can always lower them afterwards.

Player growth in the range of 30% after the tourists leave, sure, add more servers and provide levelling character transfer options. Raising the caps permanently is not a solution without including sharding which none of us want. But for things like AQ, they can temporarily increase a cap so that all players with a current account can get online, hardware permitting. And add a restriction of no new characters from the point where the final quest is completed prior to the opening.

These sort of things are the least of Classic’s worries.

[Matcauthon-steamwheedle-cartel (Matcauthon)]

Simple solution. If login queues are that bad open new servers.

This is not the simple solution that leaves the game in a better state once the tourists leave. The dead server mergers are part of the downfall of communities.

And yet you don’t see me advocating to open lots of servers.
Say we open with 10 servers.
Say 2 months down the road were higher then expected population. Open an extra server.
Don’t go ham mode on it. Do it slowly and controlled.

That’s fine long term, what it doesn’t address is the servers having issues in the present.

Well they got the launch window to figure that crap out.

[Melaned-blackrock (Melaned)]

Haha no worries at all. I am not surprised.

[Laeric-wyrmrest-accord]

Nor I, sadly. I blame myself, I should have just stayed out of this. Can’t even give a dissenting opinion without people pouncing on it and trying to use it as a weapon.