Sharding in classic is GAME BREAKING

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

Is it reasonable to expect that the AQ event will likely have “hundreds of people killing the same few mobs”?

Well the event or the actual opening of the gates event?

[Fesz-cenarius]

What I see is people who favor the convenience of reduced competition that sharding provides telling us all to take Blizzard’s “promise” that it would only be the “starting areas” and only for “two weeks” as Gospel. I’ve yet to see any official statement that sharding would only be in the, as yet undefined, “starting areas” and only for “two weeks”, let alone a “promise” from Blizzard that would be the case.

That’s because they haven’t committed to anything really beyond some vague statements about launch. They know there’s going to be a large influx of players initially which will drop off quickly, sharding was mentioned as one way to deal with that.

We know they are being vague. That is the point.

I question their motives for being vague.

Blizzard wouldn’t be intentionally vague, while choosing specific words in order to lead players into thinking they “promised” something that they never promised, so as to later be able to claim “We never ‘promised’ anything, or even gave any limits to the use of sharding”, would they?

If they have not “committed to anything really beyond some vague statements about launch”, where are all those “Blizzard promises” that those desiring the convenience of reduced competition from all those obstacles in their way want us to take as “Gospel”?

[Fesz-cenarius]

What I see is people who favor the convenience of reduced competition that sharding provides telling us all to take Blizzard’s “promise” that it would only be the “starting areas” and only for “two weeks” as Gospel. I’ve yet to see any official statement that sharding would only be in the, as yet undefined, “starting areas” and only for “two weeks”, let alone a “promise” from Blizzard that would be the case.

Calm down friend. We all want sharding to piss off. Direct that towards Blizz.

Not everyone wants sharding to “piss off”.

Some want sharding in “as many zones as necessary”. Some want sharding all the way through the level 20 areas. Some want sharding all the way up to level 60.

No one has yet shown ANY Blizzard “promise” as to the geographical or time limits for sharding, though.

[Fesz-cenarius]

Is it reasonable to expect that the AQ event will likely have “hundreds of people killing the same few mobs”?

Well the event or the actual opening of the gates event?

Either one has to potential to have “hundreds of people in the same zone, killing the same few mobs”.

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

What I see is people who favor the convenience of reduced competition that sharding provides telling us all to take Blizzard’s “promise” that it would only be the “starting areas” and only for “two weeks” as Gospel. I’ve yet to see any official statement that sharding would only be in the, as yet undefined, “starting areas” and only for “two weeks”, let alone a “promise” from Blizzard that would be the case.

That’s because they haven’t committed to anything really beyond some vague statements about launch. They know there’s going to be a large influx of players initially which will drop off quickly, sharding was mentioned as one way to deal with that.

We know they are being vague. That is the point.

I question their motives for being vague.

Blizzard wouldn’t be intentionally vague, while choosing specific words in order to lead players into thinking they “promised” something that they never promised, so as to later be able to claim “We never ‘promised’ anything, or even gave any limits to the use of sharding”, would they?

If they have not “committed to anything really beyond some vague statements about launch”, where are all those “Blizzard promises” that those desiring the convenience of reduced competition from all those obstacles in their way want us to take as “Gospel”?

They have said there won’t be phasing and there won’t be sharding and that the extend of sharding will be specifically to address very legitimate issues.

Certainly something worth asking about but hardly cause to cry that blizzard will be sharding everything and noone will every see another player in the world.

[Fesz-cenarius]

What I see is people who favor the convenience of reduced competition that sharding provides telling us all to take Blizzard’s “promise” that it would only be the “starting areas” and only for “two weeks” as Gospel. I’ve yet to see any official statement that sharding would only be in the, as yet undefined, “starting areas” and only for “two weeks”, let alone a “promise” from Blizzard that would be the case.

That’s because they haven’t committed to anything really beyond some vague statements about launch. They know there’s going to be a large influx of players initially which will drop off quickly, sharding was mentioned as one way to deal with that.

We know they are being vague. That is the point.

I question their motives for being vague.

Blizzard wouldn’t be intentionally vague, while choosing specific words in order to lead players into thinking they “promised” something that they never promised, so as to later be able to claim “We never ‘promised’ anything, or even gave any limits to the use of sharding”, would they?

If they have not “committed to anything really beyond some vague statements about launch”, where are all those “Blizzard promises” that those desiring the convenience of reduced competition from all those obstacles in their way want us to take as “Gospel”?

They have said there won’t be phasing and there won’t be sharding and that the extend of sharding will be specifically to address very legitimate issues.

Certainly something worth asking about but hardly cause to cry that blizzard will be sharding everything and noone will every see another player in the world.

IMO, the opinion of someone that wants to see Classic made as far from vanilla as possible is worth less than nothing.

However, it is laughable that you contradict yourself.

You say “They have said there won’t be phasing and there won’t be sharding”, then in the very next breath say “the extend of sharding will be specifically to address very legitimate issues.” How can there even be an extent to shading is, as you claim, they have told us that there won’t be sharding?

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

What I see is people who favor the convenience of reduced competition that sharding provides telling us all to take Blizzard’s “promise” that it would only be the “starting areas” and only for “two weeks” as Gospel. I’ve yet to see any official statement that sharding would only be in the, as yet undefined, “starting areas” and only for “two weeks”, let alone a “promise” from Blizzard that would be the case.

That’s because they haven’t committed to anything really beyond some vague statements about launch. They know there’s going to be a large influx of players initially which will drop off quickly, sharding was mentioned as one way to deal with that.

We know they are being vague. That is the point.

I question their motives for being vague.

Blizzard wouldn’t be intentionally vague, while choosing specific words in order to lead players into thinking they “promised” something that they never promised, so as to later be able to claim “We never ‘promised’ anything, or even gave any limits to the use of sharding”, would they?

If they have not “committed to anything really beyond some vague statements about launch”, where are all those “Blizzard promises” that those desiring the convenience of reduced competition from all those obstacles in their way want us to take as “Gospel”?

They have said there won’t be phasing and there won’t be sharding and that the extend of sharding will be specifically to address very legitimate issues.

Certainly something worth asking about but hardly cause to cry that blizzard will be sharding everything and noone will every see another player in the world.

IMO, the opinion of someone that wants to see Classic made as far from vanilla as possible is worth less than nothing.

More than someone who wants a time machine, unless you have a flux capacitor handy you can loan to blizzard?

[Fesz-cenarius]

What I see is people who favor the convenience of reduced competition that sharding provides telling us all to take Blizzard’s “promise” that it would only be the “starting areas” and only for “two weeks” as Gospel. I’ve yet to see any official statement that sharding would only be in the, as yet undefined, “starting areas” and only for “two weeks”, let alone a “promise” from Blizzard that would be the case.

That’s because they haven’t committed to anything really beyond some vague statements about launch. They know there’s going to be a large influx of players initially which will drop off quickly, sharding was mentioned as one way to deal with that.

We know they are being vague. That is the point.

I question their motives for being vague.

Blizzard wouldn’t be intentionally vague, while choosing specific words in order to lead players into thinking they “promised” something that they never promised, so as to later be able to claim “We never ‘promised’ anything, or even gave any limits to the use of sharding”, would they?

If they have not “committed to anything really beyond some vague statements about launch”, where are all those “Blizzard promises” that those desiring the convenience of reduced competition from all those obstacles in their way want us to take as “Gospel”?

They have said there won’t be phasing and there won’t be sharding and that the extend of sharding will be specifically to address very legitimate issues.

Certainly something worth asking about but hardly cause to cry that blizzard will be sharding everything and noone will every see another player in the world.

IMO, the opinion of someone that wants to see Classic made as far from vanilla as possible is worth less than nothing.

More than someone who wants a time machine, unless you have a flux capacitor handy you can loan to blizzard?

Far less actually.

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

What I see is people who favor the convenience of reduced competition that sharding provides telling us all to take Blizzard’s “promise” that it would only be the “starting areas” and only for “two weeks” as Gospel. I’ve yet to see any official statement that sharding would only be in the, as yet undefined, “starting areas” and only for “two weeks”, let alone a “promise” from Blizzard that would be the case.

That’s because they haven’t committed to anything really beyond some vague statements about launch. They know there’s going to be a large influx of players initially which will drop off quickly, sharding was mentioned as one way to deal with that.

We know they are being vague. That is the point.

I question their motives for being vague.

Blizzard wouldn’t be intentionally vague, while choosing specific words in order to lead players into thinking they “promised” something that they never promised, so as to later be able to claim “We never ‘promised’ anything, or even gave any limits to the use of sharding”, would they?

If they have not “committed to anything really beyond some vague statements about launch”, where are all those “Blizzard promises” that those desiring the convenience of reduced competition from all those obstacles in their way want us to take as “Gospel”?

They have said there won’t be phasing and there won’t be sharding and that the extend of sharding will be specifically to address very legitimate issues.

Certainly something worth asking about but hardly cause to cry that blizzard will be sharding everything and noone will every see another player in the world.

IMO, the opinion of someone that wants to see Classic made as far from vanilla as possible is worth less than nothing.

More than someone who wants a time machine, unless you have a flux capacitor handy you can loan to blizzard?

Far less actually.

Ah… so you have maybe at least the drawing of a flux reactor?

[Cife-bloodhoof]

While I agree that it would be a game-breaking experience, I still know there’s an easy alternative of just waiting a week or two. I know “just” is a big word for a game you wait such a long time for, but it’s that or play a “broken” game.

[Mogar-stormrage (Mogar)]

Especially when Ion gave an example of Classic being exactly that: a time machine.

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

Especially when Ion gave an example of Classic being exactly that: a time machine.

Weren’t the exact word time capsule and museum experience?

[Fesz-cenarius]

While I agree that it would be a game-breaking experience, I still know there’s an easy alternative of just waiting a week or two. I know “just” is a big word for a game you wait such a long time for, but it’s that or play a “broken” game.

First, show me any official Blizzard statement that it would only be “a week or two”.

Secondly, those who cannot handle competition can just as easily wait that “week or two” rather than asking those who have, for over a decade, been requesting a truer Classic experience to wait.

[Ziryus-doomhammer (Ziryus)]

While I agree that it would be a game-breaking experience, I still know there’s an easy alternative of just waiting a week or two. I know “just” is a big word for a game you wait such a long time for, but it’s that or play a “broken” game.

First, show me any official Blizzard statement that it would only be “a week or two”.

Secondly, those who cannot handle competition can just as easily wait that “week or two” rather than asking those who have, for over a decade, been requesting a truer Classic experience to wait.

Now show me anywhere blizzard has said that sharding will reduce competition beyond what it was in vanilla.

[Fesz-cenarius]

While I agree that it would be a game-breaking experience, I still know there’s an easy alternative of just waiting a week or two. I know “just” is a big word for a game you wait such a long time for, but it’s that or play a “broken” game.

First, show me any official Blizzard statement that it would only be “a week or two”.

Secondly, those who cannot handle competition can just as easily wait that “week or two” rather than asking those who have, for over a decade, been requesting a truer Classic experience to wait.

Now show me anywhere blizzard has said that sharding will reduce competition beyond what it was in vanilla.

Show me anywhere blizzard has said that sharding will not reduce competition beyond what it was in vanilla.

With Classic not having been released yet, we do not yet know. We CAN, however, use retail to make a guess since retail and Classic will be likely using the same “cloud based servers”. I have not purchased BFA, so I cannot speak for those areas. During Legion, though, even in capitol cities, I never once saw anywhere near the numbers of people I saw a single area during vanilla. That includes Legion launch day, as well as the launch of Broken Shore and Argus.

I know those areas were well populated, but most of those players were in different shards. I never once was in a shard in which I saw anywhere near the numbers of people I regularly saw in vanilla.

[anon33533570]

Ehh I don’t even care anymore. Seems like nothing makes you happy and I feel sorry for you.

[Stealrecon-barthilas]

Unless the game:

• Runs at 300 ms and has no OCE servers
• Is locked 20 fps
• Is locked in 4:3
• Is riddled with bots that make the economy function (lol nost).
• Has flyhacks and tMorph
• Clicking to move crashes me to desktop
• People can kill me outside of my render range
• oh and I’m 10 years old.

Its not a true classic experience.

Can somebody get me a photo of bush in the whitehouse? #nochange

This ‘true classic experence’ #nochange appeals to is completely subjective and arbitrary.

If they just make more servers, then merge them later, this is effectively the same as sharding. Well worse because of the delay before the merge. It’s like they got stuck in a mutually exclusive shard from you for X time until Blizzard merges the servers. Which could in effect, span many zones.

#Bringbackourbots!
#tMorphdidnothingwrong
#Flyhack=goodhack
#nobots=crapeconomy
#Nostwasfuntobot

I kinda hope for a crap load of players in all popular starting zones (read: where all the ‘hardcore’ #nochange players will be) and that it’s a complete mess. So I can speed level my Tauren druid to the sweet tears of twitch streamers in peace. They forget that everybody knows the skips and grind spots they want to use, but they will learn.

/moo.

[Stimpäk-proudmoore]

While I am against sharding being permanently in the game I do agree with their proposal of having it in for the launch as to help with the player overload that is likely to occur.

Reason why I’m against it is that having no sharding makes grouping up and socializing (maybe even making new friends in the game) possible in contrast to the modern state of wow in which nobody ever talks.

[Cife-bloodhoof]

First, show me any official Blizzard statement that it would only be “a week or two”.

Show you? What Blizzard officially said? Why do you automatically think what I believe or say has to have anything to do with what Blizzard said? Why do you hold what Blizzard says in such high authority?

A “couple weeks” is pretty average for a new game to overcome it’s server instability after launch. I personally believe the hype for Classic is overblown and there will be a steep drop off of players in these first couple weeks when they realize it’s not for them. I also believe that once there’s no need for sharding, they’ll stop it.

[Matcauthon-steamwheedle-cartel (Matcauthon)]

Most people believe we will see that steep drop off.

As for your comment about them realizing they don’t need sharding- the modern tech has issues with 100 people in an area.
Devs go out of their way to shut down city raids. War mode incursions on live have tendency to lag a bit.

So forgive me if I don’t put any faith in blizzard turning off sharding.