Hmmm… Seems like you’re not understanding “why” and “how” changes happen. Most people, Blizzard included, don’t “change for the hell of it.” They try new things to try to improve things. I’ve seen Blizzard add something only to remove it later when it proved to not work.
It also seems like you’re missing the differences between sharding and layering. This is new technology that might improve what sharding was supposed to do.
I do not post on forums, haven’t in over 8 years. I am the customer you lost with MoP blizzard . I played beta, I DO NOT SUPPORT any layering, phasing, sharding or whatever other word you use to describe the action of dividing a server population from itself. If you have not built servers that will handle the player load, then let us wait in que. If it’s so bad on one server offer free transfers. We have been here before, you have already released this game. We had issues we got through them! PLEASE I beg you don’t ruin your chance at redemption and my chance to relive the best gaming experience of my life. Thank you.
They claim it will be removed, but Blizzard has a bad history of lying with these features. Layering in this case can’t be removed if enough people don’t quit, so some realms will likely have layering for months if not longer.
No that’s not the issue. Say there’s hypothetically 100,000 people on your server day 1… so maybe theres 5,000 level 1’s in durotar on day 1 launch.
It would be absolutely impossible to even do anything.
But buy day 3, some of them will already be max level, some of them are mid level, some of them are low level… so the zones aren’t crowded.
This spreads out even more by the end of the month, and then they can remove layering.
There will probably be more people playing day 1 classic than there were playing day 1 vanilla when it came out.
That far in, the need for layering won’t exist.
It’s only being used because at launch everyone is going to be online as much as possible, and all in the the starting zones. As time goes on, people level at different rates, log on at different rates, and take different routes through leveling, so they won’t need it.
I don’t think you’re comprehending how awful of an experience thousands of people in northshire abbey would be.
Despite your personal feelings, Blizzard wants people to actually be able to log on and play the game, not have so many people stuck in one zone that even if everyone was in a full group of 5, they can’t even kill a single mob.
That’s not what layering is for. They would have kept sharding if it was just to ease questing. It’s so a server can hypothetically survive the massive wave of tourists(since they refuse to use a separate subscription) without the server dying. And to minimize how many servers they need.
I think they’re going about in an absolutely stupid and lazy way that is toxic and laughable when we were promised an “authentic” classic experience, but oh well.
Layering in Classic is proof that the phrase “As authentic as possible” is completely meaningless.
This topic is so frustrating. Were TALKING about MILLIONS of people that want to play Classic. Even if its only 500 THOUSAND, or even if its less? How many are going to try to log in the very second it launches?? I cant even fathom.
If they were to have a queue to log in, it would be DAYS LONG. Why is this hard to comprehend?
Authentic is ridiculous, not every single Vanilla player logged in the same moment back in the day. There was a steady stream as word spread, Im sure you can imagine this? Plus we crashed constantly.
I think everyone that plays WoW or loves Classic knows launch day is coming up.
The log in servers and the world servers are going to be slammed hard and Blizz is doing their best to make millions of people have a good experience all at the same time.
Anti layering people just sound selfish, entitled and frankly, ignorant.
If you did any kind of research/studying on how servers work you would be embarrassed how naive you are being.
I cant tell you how happy I am this is weeks away from being a moot point.
oh dear
Ah so you’re one of those. Cool.
People that demand something they have no idea what they are insisting on, are acting like its their privilege, better? to have it. Its like pleasing a toddler.
This
Not unless they attribute too little amounts of servers
layering is here to stay im sure
lol I seriously give up.
Ill play this last time, ok so for fun lets say 40 servers.
2 months from now their pops have dwindled, and some servers are actually getting deserted. What has blizz done in the past? Merge.
Ok they Merge, major rearranging had to be done so both merged factions fit on the new servers. Oh yeah, my name is already taken, allll my names are already taken. wtf i hate blizzard now, how dumb is this , why did they screw this up so badly? I can hear it now.
So, my server name changed, my name changed, there are a ton of people I have never met, I need a new guild, I feel like an orphan, my game experience has been unsettling and insecure.
This is what you want.
or.simply.layer. till the dust settles.
It’s way too easy to turn the tables on this argument. Look at the opposite side of it.
We have layering allowing for servers with possibly unlimited populations. What happens when the servers don’t dwindle down to an authentic population? Transfers? Queues? Who knows?
The point is both sides have positives and negatives. Give me the option that is true to the original game.
Within the first day, over 200,000 players created World of Warcraft accounts. By 5:00 p.m. PST, over 100,000 were playing the game concurrently. Dec 1, 2004
Those are tiny numbers.
And! we crashed on and off for days/weeks/months
https://www.digitaltrends.com/gaming/world-of-warcraft-shatters-sales-record/
they dont like doing merges, thats why they have layers now to handle that problem
classic needs to be cost effective, this is more important than no changes
if the numbers dont decline then they keep layers, simple
How noble of you to look after the shareholders bottom line. Might even call it Knightly.
thank you
/10
At this point ‘noise’ is a good word choice.