The Truth About Layering

WoW Classic WoW Classic General Discussion
83

Layering is a great idea. I want it as it is the best solution to multiple major problems. There your thread is dead.

1 Like
84

OR, they’ve played on high population servers during release and can already see why not having a system like sharding is an awful idea. And it’s not detrimiental to your “classic experience” because there is no humanly way possible to memorize every single player you come across and remember if you see them again. If you just play the game, you’re most likely not even going to notice layering exists, which is why Blizzard should have just stayed quiet on the topic.

1 Like
85

No, layering has been proven to be a terrible system. It is a twisted, dark, gluttonous and disgusting evil which must not make it to Classic WoW

86

Here is an example, you can use either launch population or AQ40 gate opening.
Let me break this down. I will start this with I design data centers for major corporations and have deep understanding of how these should be designed( I have CCIE DC, multiple VMware and storage manufacturer certs). The crashes were caused by the high volume of players in one continent. Remember back in Vanilla each continent was it’s own server and the raids were located 1000’s of yards above Kalimdor in most cases. So this cause crashed and lag on client side since it was trying to display animations and details from 1000+ players at one time. Thus crashing clients and the server that was trying to run a one time event. Yes the realms ran fine when this same population was spread over 2 servers(each continent) and in different zones. That is the key to these issues. As for login queues, I knew multiple people that sat for 4 hours during the Shattered Hand opening event in a queue and missed 90% of the event, this is not enjoyable for anyone and is easily avoided by using modern technology called container programming. Container programming you say, I will give you the for dummies version. A container is a separate virtual machine that can be created and removed through automation requiring no intervention at all(this was not around 15 years ago and is what sharding and layering is based off of). So when you log on to a layer you are on a completely different layer than another player, thus increasing the resources for the server and in essence decreasing the overall load on one layers container. Since a character is only a reference in a database switch a character between layers is seemless as the orchestrator that sits in another container will just move the pointers to another layer/shard thus moving your character to a separate container. So, every layer decreases load, increases performance and therefore increases the end user experience.

87

How? It’s only in it’s beta phase? You understand that it’s not working as intended yet, right? Hence TESTING!

Seriously, what do you honestly think the beta is for?

88

Too late… eat the pie in front of you, not the one in your head.

89

Here’s an idea very quickly laid out:

Realm groups

You have a couple groups of realms which share a namepool. A group could be called “The Dragonflights”.

The Dragonflights realm group would consist of 3 realms (for example)

  • Red Drangonflight :red_circle:
  • Blue Dragonflight :large_blue_circle:
  • Bronze Dragonflight :hourglass_flowing_sand:

Each realm acts just like a normal realm. No shenanigans, except that the namepool is shared between all the realms in the group.

In case of emergency dropoffs ONLY, any realms in this group could be merged together without any naming conflicts.
This avoids PR BS because they aren’t technically merges as the realms were already grouped, and shared a namepool, connecting them in this way.

This appraoch would require manual monitoring on Blizzards part for the first weeks and months especially, because they should look to merge the realms asap when/if tourist dropoff starts happening bigly to reduce damage on the communites.

To do that they have to keep an eye on traffic on these realms to make the best choice as to which ones to merge together.

This would allow max authenticity while still addressing population issues down the road, it’s not just useful shortterm but also longterm and it greatly reduces the damage on the community because of very early merges where needed.
On the flipside it ill probably cost more money, and more effort, but the outcome is in my opinion absolutely worth it if authenticity is really their goal.

1 Like
90

What I love about this is a lot of people would be ok with sharding now.

Well damn if y’all hadn’t pissed and moaned so much about it we wouldn’t be getting layering.

1 Like
91

This causes more issues because there is no way out after a merge. If all of the sudden the server becomes over populated you are screwed.

92

But But #NOCHANGES…QQ. Guess what you made the bed now live with it

93

Yes - but they are turning off layering anyway. If they weren’t, then your argument makes sense.

1 Like
94

They are not turning off layering, they were turning off sharding. That is the misconception. You think if 3000 players are in Silithus and the server is not stable and crashing they are going to leave it on one layer… With a queue to get on the server…Guess what will be switched on.

95

They said there will be no more layering after phase 1.

96

I’m going to take the nil response from this as a “No, I don’t have any proof this ever happened. I just think it did and continue to believe it.”

Just confirming.

97

I think my worry is that it won’t be the case. And that the damage will be done to the economy with thousands of black lotus, devilsaur and other high value items stashed away by guilds.

Is there any reason why layering goes beyond level 10 or even level 20? Surely by then people have spread out enough not to conflict.

1 Like
98

If we follow the #NOCHANGE philosophy then we would have zero layering and zero sharding. So basically, Blizzard created this mess not the #NOCHANGE crowd.

1 Like
99

#IonPromised

100

Yes, because it won’t be.

101

Suggests learning to listen, but refuses to do so him/her self.

“Only applies to you all, listen to me speak for you!”

Sad day.

102

Go read what he said very carefully.

He said they were going to start consolidating layers in the first few weeks, not that there wouldn’t be any more layering after the first few weeks.