Now you are reaching, looking for something to grab on. The are making Classic because it been requested since BC, pirate servers played a little part of it.
And there it is boys and girls.
** sigh **
I am going to bed.
Ill hand out prizes to the bingo winner in the morning.
1 Like
You honestly think private servers are making more then Blizzard?
1 Like
GN Brother. I’m out too
Yeah pretty much.
Would you rather have a rough start and queues to play when the game releases!?
Yes, actually. Rough starts are an accepted part of new mmo servers. Going out of your way to fix something by adding something else that is 1000 times worse is stupid. Did you know it is possible to “prove” in a lab that rat poison has anti carcinogenic properties? Amazing right? Unfortunately its poison so you shouldnt be gobbling it down like a deranged goblin unquestioningly in an effort to prevent cancer, who knew right?
Anyways, who is gonna be discouraged by the queues and rough start? the tourists. Why make drastic changes to appease tourists of the game who are not interested enough in playing it to put up with the rough start? If they are not interested in the game enough to put up with the rough start then they can just wait 1-2 days for the starting zones to die down then play it. Why do the people who are not interested in the game enough to put up server crashes on launch day or a 20-30 minute queue for the first few hours of the server being catered too? They are being catered to in a way that drastically impacts the game for the coming months for Everyone. They are making drastic changes that will last for weeks (months?) so a few… people… wont be inconvenienced in the first few days of release? The “rough start” argument is one of the most asinine arguments ever.
Would you rather play on a low pop server?
Yes actually, i have played on low pop servers before. The community is more involved and friendly and its less of a hassle to get things done out in the world. The people who want 10k players per server are the private server people who played with higher spawn rates. Blizzard doesnt want higher spawn rates, the community wants “no changes” and are terrified of dying in caves due to dynamic respawns, because that would ruin their life apparently, So we are getting 3-4 layers. Each “with the player population of of an individual server as they were back then” so 2.5k-3k people per layer. And blizzard is rolling the dice with each server hoping that a majority of the population is in fact just tourists who will drop the game by the first phase. What happens when on some servers they dont? you have 10k players all out in a game world designed for 3.5k players max. No dynamic respawns like private servers. That means you and 3-4 people of the same faction all are standing around waiting for the same group of 10 satires to start respawning so you can farm your felcloth. 4 people thats a little more than 2 kills for each player per respawn (assuming its distributed fairly) with respawns at 5-10 minites each, 5% chance per kill to get the item you want. 2 attempts per 5 minutes. Ah yes, that is the vanilla experience i look forward to most!
Also with 10k players on a server you may as well have cross server dungeon finder (which from a gameplay perspective is really the same thing as layering just with a different name if you think about it) because why should the tank or healer care if hes rude or ninja loots in the group if he has 9995 more players to choose from in future groups.
The layering and phaseing is one of the worst “technologies” to have ever been abused by mmo developers. They are antithetical to the mmo experience entirely and it blows me away that anyone with the audacity to claim to be interested in mmos would say they want them in their games. No you dont want them in your mmo games. You want to play a single player game with a related chat room open at the same time. Go do that and stop ruining mmos for the rest of us.
Would you rather have server merges?
Yes actually, there are literally 0 downsides to server merges from a players perspective besides the idea that you may have to change your name. That doesn’t affect me because i have some actual unique go to character names that are often not taken even on later term high pop servers. I couldn’t care any less for the people who think they are clever for naming their tauren warrior “milktank” and who think it would be the end of the world if they had to come up with something else because some other genius from another server already has the name and has higher priority.
damn i really wanted to enjoy playing this gnome mage but now i cant use the name “shortstuff”. I wish i was a night elf female hunter named “legolass” instead now.
How wishy washy can you be?
Thus ends my negative nelly rant. I will leave you all with this:
'https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=141&v=rrnw7XuGTJQ
2 Likes
I totally get that people don’t like the idea of layering. I myself would be happy if layering were not a thing. But its something we have to accept and improve prior to the live servers. While people can say they will accept queues, fighting over resources, and various other things. Blizzard sees it differently from a business standpoint and a design standpoint. The design standpoint being “does it replicate the vanilla experience” and “can we make it to where servers don’t die without use of CRZ and/or merging servers”.
Sharding was the initial answer until there was backlash from the community about it. Over time, there was also the concerns about servers dieing being presented. Thus we got Layering as the best answer to the majority of problems presented by the community.
As to how they will be using the layering system, here is what it looks like. They set the system up in servers that individually adjust in Kalimdor and Eastern Kingdoms. Layers will be set to hold a specific amount of players at any given time throughout those two instances. People will be queued behind a given layer when logging in until there is enough people to meet the minimum required threshhold for a new layer. Each layer pretty much acts like a server back in Vanilla. It just makes it to where you can interact with others on different layers and combine the economy to prevent the issues you would get with merging servers.
The numbers per layer can be adjusted over time as well. An interview that was given had Ion mention that as time goes on, they will look to increase the number of people in each layer until it is only one layer available. They are not that concerned about there being a large amount of people on a server by time the layering is set to a single layer. They just want the experience to feel authentic early on. It is not perfect, but its a pretty well thought out approach to meet the desires of both sides.
Layering, sharding, phasing, whatever.
It’s the same damn thing on a slightly different scale. All they did was hire some better PR guys to spin the same crap at us.
1 Like
There is a difference between them.
Layering: Divides massive amounts of players over set instances while allowing interaction with other layers in some manner and shared resources. Allows for increased player cap as each layer functions as a server.
Sharding: Zone specific to hold a set amount of players and has a lower server cap.
Phasing: Generally things change in the world based on a given event. Like having a town exist, event happens, and now it is on fire.
1 Like
Regardless of how you look at it it’s the same crap. People disappearing and reappearing all over the place. Not seeing the same people from day to day. Ways to abuse it at every turn.
Man I wanted something close to vanilla, now I’m honestly thinking p-servers are likely closer to actual vanilla than Acti-Blizzard is going to have it.
Your choice man. I just merely explained why and what layering is so people better understand it. If its not for you, then obviously don’t play. It will be gone by phase 2. But I will also say this which is not directed at you specifically. I honestly believe a lot of the people that are trying to push for layering to be gone even though there is no way Blizz is going to change there stance on this due to the business aspect of it. Majority of them are still going to play the game with or without layering.
I mean… it was for us, then Blizzard ruined Classic with layering. That’s sort of the complaint people have.
We want Classic to get away from all of Blizzard’s bad choices, not to experience them with less content available.
Frankly I’m torn on it.
Currently leaning toward just waiting for a p-server to pop up post Classic launch… that way they can pull the exact mob stat values, and boss mechanics…
Minus all that layering, addon restriction, and other new nonsense.
I prefer a few days of utter and total chaos, to keep the integrity of the game intact, more-so than the personal convenience that layering would offer.
Frankly, I have had more fun in a long time just waiting for Classic to release. I have found a guild to join, planned out leveling routes, researched into many things I did not know. I am just going to have fun playing it especially because I already have people to play it with. And at the same time not worry about the progress I make with them being for nothing with a C&D order which is gonna come out in even great force with the release of Classic.
Ehh I’ve been playing mostly on p-servers for various MMO’s for the last decade.
Some of them have been around that entire time. Longer in fact than many retail MMOs. Even spent a bit of time as a GM on one.
That was never going to happen because it made zero sense for Blizzard to do so. Their goal is to make as much money as possible, and they have far more potential to make money from players bouncing around the two than they ever would have selling a box.
They are giving us Classic, we gotta deal with tourists and some layering for a couple of months at most to get it. I think its gonna be ok.
It impossible to phase on the layer unless you go to someone else’s group.
Layering isn’t about personal convenience, and I think its why so many have an issue with it when they really shouldn’t. Layering is about trying to keep server populations at a healthy level once the initial rush dies down.
I’ll take the layering if it means my server isn’t dead in 3-6 months. Been through mergers before, they suck way more than some short term layering.
Sorry but as crazy as it sounds, personal convenience is about all I care about when buying a product.
That is the false dichotomy, for there are other options to keep server populations healthy, without layering, sharding, phasing, crz, etc. Locked layers or servers with the same name, and naming rights, prepared for merge in advance, is 2 options. Destroying the integrity of the game on day one should be the last resort, not the first one when there are other possibilities available that would maintain the integrity of the world.