Sharding use will grow, don't start it at all

Let's say S = the sharding threshold whereby a new shard is created if adding another player to an existing shard would exceed S. It doesn't matter what S actually is for the moment. It is simply the largest population you allow before splitting.

There are 2 reasons you might justify sharding in a starter area:

    resource contention (quests and mobs to satisfy them)
    player population load (sheer player count in a given area)


Whichever reason it is (and most would tell you it is quest mob contention), the plain fact is: anywhere else in the game world where that same type of issue would likely and regularly crop up, would warrant the same sharding treatment given that is why it was justified for the starter areas in the first place.

If new shard creation occurs at S+1 players in the starter areas, then it follows that Blizzard would also justify this happening in other parts of Azeroth that exhibit the same limits:

- if due to mob contention reasons, then anywhere else in Azeroth where an S+1 player bottleneck for mob or other finite required resources occurs, is grounds for that to also be sharded.

- if due to player population load reasons, then anywhere else in Azeroth where an S+1 local concentration of players occurs, is grounds for that to also be sharded.

The problem should be clear by now ... and the shard threshold S is the culprit.

This is the important point to grasp: If S = 100, then resource contention or population load > 100 anywhere quite literally justifies sharding as well. Remember, the starter areas with 2,000 to 3,000 players all at once may need 20 or 30 shard copies of size S, but even other areas that would have only 200 to 300 players would still warrant 2 or 3 shard copies of size S for the exact same justification. Whatever you pick S as, you have to be consistent and also split other places that exceed S for the same sort of resource contention of population load reasons.

This is very similar to the use of /pickzone in Everquest TLP servers. It isn't just Greater Faydark, Crushbone or Blackburrow (initial big hunting zones) that have many copies; zones all the way through max level like Lower Guk and Solusek B and Permafrost have many copies going as well, since they all generally split at the same max player value S. The fact that the lower-level places have more copies doesn't preclude the upper-level places from having > 1 copy.

---------------------
tl;dr

It does not matter that starting areas need 20 copies and some other area would warrant only 2 for the same sharding threshold limit S; that other area still warrants the split into those 2 copies according to the same rules that you used to split the starting area into 20. Are you not going to follow the same logic and split all these other cases too - and if you don't, why did you have to do it to the starting areas?

This is why I do not believe Blizzard will stop at starter areas.

No sharding at all is best, otherwise Blizzard will have to employ it in other places that suffer from the conditions they say cause the need for it even more than starter areas do, based on their simple mathematical claims. Otherwise it is pretty blatant hypocrisy to omit it in those other areas that scream even more loudly for it. Any area exceeding S even once would have to split to be consistent.
Well put post OP.

I'd like to bring the point of how sharding works though. I'll admit I am not well-learned on the topic but I would think that Blizzard might be looking at it more like this.

S is the same value as you say for what it requires for sharding to occur but then A would be the amount each shard would then carry from then on. Then you have D, which would be the amount for the area to get bellow for sharding to cancel out.

So say S = 2,000, D = 500 and A = 100.
This would mean that the beginning zone would be split into 20 shards once it breaks the 2,000 number. And said sharding will remain until population drops to under 500. From that point the 6 shards become the main server again.

I don't know I feel like I am overlooking a lot and rambling.

Edit: My point is I would think that they would require a much higher number that actually threatens the server stability of the zone. Not so much as the resource point. But instead of just going from a dramatic 99 around you to 1,999 it'd be reduced instead of suddenly flooding you.
Even though I see why starting areas really are unique:

- everyone spawns in 1 of 6 starting areas literally at creation, and creation will be nigh-simultaneous as fast as the login server will allow it

- The quest area is quite confined by normal zone size standards

- The number and sequence of quests is limited and specific, so everyone's forced linearity will exacerbate the apparent contention

I still don't like sharding just on the principle that classic didn't do it.

And if the orc/troll starting area is sharded enough to comfortably let players quests within them with relatively little waiting lines for mob kills or item drops, then that means the sharding is around 100-200 at most per shard.

So if you feed 10-20 starter area shards into a single Durotar, you will see people screaming that they cannot get anything done there either without some sharding copies (less copies than the starter areas have, but still more than 1). There are only so many quest givers people can head to right out of the starting area.

Even if you look at the overcrowding as an incentive for industrious nascent groups to form really early and try to hopscotch over the poor folks trying to all vie for the initial soloable breadcrumb quests, there isn't much jumping you can do very early - you still have only so many quests and hubs you can succeed at that early in the game.

My point is: sharding will be screamed for by some in other places once they know it was given into for the starting areas, regardless of Blizzard stating (if they even do) the very specific reasons that only starter areas suffer from.

I want to preventatively stifle those screams by simply saying no to all cases and not allowing the slippery slope to get traction in the first place.

P.S. - The absolute server caps, player/server affinity and login queues in true Classic WoW were themselves a very valid game play system. Taken together, they are every bit as "classic" in behavior as class mechanics and mob AI. Effectively changing that to rely on selective sharding instead of outright login queues and server caps (i.e. "if you can login, you can do anything you want in a single zone copy with everyone else") changes the game just as if you were changing some other class or mob behavior, imo.

My .02