When and on what server. I was trying to do research into how they handled names, and couldn’t find any example of an actual merge, just people claiming it would happen, and later that it did.
I fail to see how merging servers that enjoyed a persistent and relatively stable population is worse than randomizing entire server-sized populations constantly and then merging them anyway.
4 Likes
I think layering is a good idea.
Maybe something along this line but also show the current number of layers and their respective populations. If you choose a high-pop layer you could be placed into a queue and have to wait to get in, or select a low-pop layer and login immediately.
Also, for those already logged in and playing on a layer that might be approaching capacity, spin up a new layer and prompt a random selection of players and give them the option of joining the new layer. Add an small, short-term incentive/reward such as movement speed increases, or xp increases for a short duration of 30 mins or so.
speak for yourself.
anybody with common sense and who played at expansion launch realize layering/sharding/wathever variation you want is required.
Anybody with common sense who played vanilla know that layering/sharding/whatever crap they want to call it is detrimental to the Classic game experience (even for a limited amount of time).
Seriously, all I can think of those who defend these horrible systems either:
- Don’t know any better and never experienced the old world before.
- They are retail trolls.
1 Like
holds hands up and approaches slowly.
I don’t remember reading or hearing that.
sure, because we don’t have a documented history ( every expension launch) of starting zone being unplayable due to overcrowdness…
I guess your Pserver have never been popular enough to experience it.
Interesting advice… hey, can you point me to the large scale MMOs you’ve built and currently manage? I only ask to see those so I can check your bonafides in terms of game development over large scale, heavily populated, game server management. See, when you make statements like your original one, where you claim to know what it takes to manage a persistent game world across multiple servers, it is beneficial to anyone who wants to take you seriously to verify you actually know something about the topic.
Guess what? Layering (sharding 2.0) is not the only solution to those problems.
Like they mentioned above, static layers/subrealms are a better approach.
guess what? I’m gonna go ahead and assume blizz dev know more about their 15-years old architecture than you do and that’s why they choose layering… probably have a lot of overlap with the current sharding technology they have, reducing dev cost (which is a good thing for a project that’ll loose 80% of it’s playerbase after 3 month, as they predict).
I knew it, you are but a retail troll.
As a Canadian I fully support layering, specifically for January and February. It’s pretty much a necessity.
1 Like
It was the forums that proposed it, not Blizzard, and it was around a year ago.
1 Like
can I dismiss anything you say because you’re a blind fanatical classic zealot then?
On the retail forums, sure!
oh, so the truth depend on which echo chamber we’re currently in.
how convenient.
Not at all. It was partially a joke but since you are taking it seriously I will clarify. If you have retail as your main interest and think retail is great then I trust you when you speak about retail, but not as much about classic. If you have classic as your main interest and you think classic is great then I trust you when you speak about classic, but not as much about retail.
I don’t see how this can even be argued. Regardless Classic zealots shouldn’t be on the retail forums talking about how retail is bad and retail trolls shouldn’t be on here talking about how classic will be bad.
For the record, I am fine with layering. Also could you share a link for Blizz believing 80% of the population will quit? I am not saying you are incorrect I just haven’t seen where this came from and would like to read up on it.
Sharding only the starting zones was previously suggested…
That’s not a better idea, and layering was created as (at least in theory) an improvement over sharding which the tech already existed for. People don’t like sharding because people fade in and out of view. You can be surrounded by players and then for no detectable reason you are suddenly alone. You could walk towards a node of copper only to see it disappear when you get close enough to mine it.
You can argue that they should use sharding instead of layering, but you can’t objectively say that it is a better solution. I think it is a vastly inferior solution personally.