View Poll Results: is Layering the better solution than over-spawn or not?

Voters
142. You may not vote on this poll
  • Layering

    78 54.93%
  • Dynamic Respawn

    64 45.07%
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
  1. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by huth View Post
    No, they cannot. Dynamic respawn can't reduce the load on your system from having everything chock-full with players.
    You are still thinking backwards. Both systems can make sure, that questing is bearable at the start of the classic. Yes, one of these systems can move load away from client/server but we are not sure, how much this will be needed.
    Last edited by ManiaCCC; 2019-06-07 at 01:34 PM.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by Tekkommo View Post
    Thanks.

    First one just looks like view distance.

    Second one does indeed look like sharding, is layering confirmed active on the beta or stress tests?

    Third is strange as well. From what they've explained Layering as, this is not meant to happen. This can't make it to live.
    Don't agree the first is View Distance but definitely agree that it can't make it to live in this condition.

    https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wo...tart/175660/88

    That was the Blizzard response I could find to the issue

  3. #63
    Quote Originally Posted by Tekkommo View Post
    Can you show me please.

    Is layering confirmed to be active in any of the stress tests?
    They're testing the system... just deal with it.

  4. #64
    The first was probably a respawns and view distance

    The second the croc was in barrens physically but it was in durotar. Happens on all the private servers as well and that specific quest for krons amulet is a big pain in the ass because of it
    Last edited by MardestyGSOG; 2019-06-07 at 01:47 PM.

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by In Ogres We Trust View Post
    They're testing the system... just deal with it.
    I am, thanks.

  6. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by ManiaCCC View Post
    You are still thinking backwards. Both systems can make sure, that questing is bearable at the start of the classic. Yes, one of these systems can move load away from client/server but we are not sure, how much this will be needed.
    That and making sure servers don't just die out a few weeks in are the main purposes of layering. If it isn't needed on day one, Blizzard opened to many servers.

    Making questing bearable is a side effect at most.

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by atenime45 View Post
    what is the problem if they choose to do it just like in vanilla? no layering at all, people want 100% original experience.
    2019 with layering is experience wise closer to 2004 than 2019 without layering. It has been explained, but if you do not listen ...

  8. #68
    When you say that the 10k pops aren't blizzlike at all (And I know they aren't) but does anyone have any idea what the server caps are going to be? Im hearing 2.5k and 3.5k as answers

  9. #69
    I am just hoping that they will stick to their word and have layering only in the spawning area and only for the first days after launch as they promised.
    Because layering is here to stay, and it can evolve into a problem for the community rather than a crisis management tool.

  10. #70
    Herald of the Titans Alex86el's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Greece-EU
    Posts
    2,583
    Dynamic respawn over layering any day.

    At least for the 1-10 zones.

  11. #71
    We have two options, layering or dead servers. I choose layering.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by Nestoras View Post
    I am just hoping that they will stick to their word and have layering only in the spawning area and only for the first days after launch as they promised.
    Because layering is here to stay, and it can evolve into a problem for the community rather than a crisis management tool.
    world bosses cant be done with layering active. theyve also said that its mostly for the low level zones, so like starting zones and then the few zones afterwards that everyone goes to after lvl 12, it seems entirely possible that for horde for example, when the initial surge plows through barrens, stonetalon, silverpine, hillsbrad, and maybe ashenvale and some of those zones has like 1k player per layer for a month or 2, then everyone spreads out, and there is no longer a ridiculous excess of new players in those early zones and now the population is still high but spread thinner, they can allow an increased layer cap at that point and then merge 2 layers.

    once we get past those zones, high pop isnt nearly the same problem, overpopulation doesnt have terrible effects after the bulk of the server reaches lvl 30ish

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Nestoras View Post
    Because layering is here to stay
    They literally said that it would be completely gone by phase 2 at the latest.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tommi View Post
    LFR saved raiding
    Quote Originally Posted by Haekke View Post
    LFR is not really easy. I would say it's a lot harder thant Mythic Dungeons
    get_a_load_of_this_guy_cam.jpg

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by MardestyGSOG View Post
    layering is a partition of a server which you and 3000ish other players are assigned to upon creating either your account or character(youre likely assigned a layer upon first character login, but your account will be assigned to that layer since you cant log onto multiple toons at once). you stay on this layer with all these players, consistently, so if you see xxlovestospooge at lvl 1 in valley of trials, you will also see him in the 20s in hillsbrad, because youre both on the same layer, which is continent wide, and then the opposite continent is a corresponding layer allowing you all to stay in essentially the same world but on different partitions.

    now, say youre both on layer 1, and xxlovestospooge has an old guildmate from retail who begins classic later on after layer 1 has been capped, guildmate creates an account and he is assigned to layer 2, because layer 1 has been filled and now all the spillover goes to a new layer, partition A is full then you begin assigning to partition B. guildmate messages xxlovestospooge and tells him hes starting the old guild up again, sends him an invite, and spooge accepts, spooge has now permanently moved to layer 2 and will not just freely hop back to layer 1, he can hop back by partying up with those on his friends list from layer 1, but will go back to layer 2 once the party disbands to be with his guild again. that guild to party thing is the extend of how dynamic layering is, so very little. its an extremely static approach with very little exploit potential.
    I figured you'd have understood it differently than from what it works.

    You don't get assigned like you described, there's no way to be stickied to a layer. The layer you receive is one that get's determined upon logging in to play, aka a play session (as the devs stated themselves in the interviews about layering). As in, each time you log in, the system will decide which layer you will be on for that play session, until you log off, ending the session. That's why people will attempt to relog if they are unhappy with their layer, because chances are they get assigned to a new one when they log in as population constantly fluctuates.

    The only way with layering to be somewhat stickied to one particular layer in a play session, is by having the first person in your guild log in to a particular layer. Because guilds will receive priority to stay in their layer (for obvious reasons), the system will attempt to make sure each guildmember gets put into the same layer as the first guildmember logged into, to make sure they can play together.
    The next one in the prios seem to be groups. The person who started a group on their layer, and all the people they invite into their groups/raids, will get prio to stay in the layer the group originated from. Again, this is to make sure they can play together. If someone leaves the group, the system will redetermine where to put the solo player, which could either be the same layer as before if it's not too full, or a new layer, depending on population at the time.
    The players who have least prio out of all in who gets to stay on their layer, are solo players. Those are free to shuffle around according to demand, and will be, as shown in the video here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lH_1kUAA0g

    This is what getting layered will look like in Classic. It's working as intended. And it sucks to experience, a lot. Feels very out of place, naturally, cause it never was in the older WoW's in the first place.

    If guilds were to be assigned for a particular layer indefinitely, aka literally stickied to a layer making it static, not dynamic, then we'd have the situation where say we started up with 4 layers, and a guild was formed on layer 4. The overall population dips, and the game only needs 2 layers now. Someone from the Layer 4 guild logs in, and poof, there's good old Layer 4 again, and he'd be all by himself or his guild. That can't happen. That's why instead of being stickied to a Layer, they'll only have prio over groups, and solo players. That's it. It can't work otherwise.

    As for server mortality, layering (aside from it being extremely harmful to the game, and completely inauthentic) only would adress that issue for the time it stays in the game, and the point where it gets removed. From that stage on, with no layering present anymore, we're back to square 1, where people once again can freely move around servers, and they have always done that in big ways or smaller ways, which ended up in having dead servers sooner or later anyway. It's completely unavoidable. People are people, and they do whatever the fuck they want. In my case, they decided to move off my once famous realm, Stormscale EU Alliance, once the MVPs on the realm left for other realms. The server died very quickly, just from that little fluctuation of specific players wanting to move somewhere else.

    Layering mostly benefits Blizzards business side, and screws over their longterm core audience that they initially tried to win over and make sure they come back, and stay in Classic for its longterm success. They sure sell it well to you folks though, confusing you in how it works, promising you it's nothing like sharding, and your favorite influencers (after having met Blizzard recently in person) suddenly change their whole mindset on sharding and layerings effects, selling it to you like a piece of warm bread.

    If they go through with it, we're in for a wild ride, there's no doubt. I definitely don't wanna be their PR staff when shit goes down, when people find out the game they waited and fought for for years is not like they remember, and changed in ways that echo retail very loud and clear (as its a modern solution originally used in different versions for retail).

    They have more resources, preperation and tech advancements than they ever had back then, they can flip up servers which can hold multiple realms worth of populations by themselves, they are able to see name reserves, their tech is stable... All of this were things they lacked back then, and have available to them now.
    Yet people act as if they wouldn't be able to handle it by letting Classic start up with normal, closed realms just as they have before, and are literally required to if they wanna have an authentic beginning for Classic, which they assured us they will provide. They have 1 chance to get it right. If they don't, they'll lose trust from their playerbase for good this time, and no matter what you guys think layering will solve oh so amazingly for you, you're gonna feel the effect of Blizzard's fuck up just as well.
    Last edited by Miena; 2019-06-08 at 03:46 PM.

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by anon5123 View Post
    They literally said that it would be completely gone by phase 2 at the latest.
    Sure. No point in running sever clusters when people become more scattered across the game world. Also when half of player quit cause classic is full of features that were genius back in days and are considered horrible game design today
    So ye, sharding. Layering. Whatever. To avoid server merges next month after launch

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Miena View Post
    I figured you'd have understood it differently than from what it works.

    You don't get assigned like you described, there's no way to be stickied to a layer. The layer you receive is one that get's determined upon logging in to play, aka a play session (as the devs stated themselves in the interviews about layering). As in, each time you log in, the system will decide which layer you will be on for that play session, until you log off, ending the session. That's why people will attempt to relog if they are unhappy with their layer, because chances are they get assigned to a new one when they log in as population constantly fluctuates.

    The only way with layering to be somewhat stickied to one particular layer in a play session, is by having the first person in your guild log in to a particular layer. Because guilds will receive priority to stay in their layer (for obvious reasons), the system will attempt to make sure each guildmember gets put into the same layer as the first guildmember logged into, to make sure they can play together.
    The next one in the prios seem to be groups. The person who started a group on their layer, and all the people they invite into their groups/raids, will get prio to stay in the layer the group originated from. Again, this is to make sure they can play together. If someone leaves the group, the system will redetermine where to put the solo player, which could either be the same layer as before if it's not too full, or a new layer, depending on population at the time.
    The players who have least prio out of all in who gets to stay on their layer, are solo players. Those are free to shuffle around according to demand, and will be, as shown in the video here:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8lH_1kUAA0g

    This is what getting layered will look like in Classic. It's working as intended. And it sucks to experience, a lot. Feels very out of place, naturally, cause it never was in the older WoW's in the first place.

    If guilds were to be assigned for a particular layer indefinitely, aka literally stickied to a layer making it static, not dynamic, then we'd have the situation where say we started up with 4 layers, and a guild was formed on layer 4. The overall population dips, and the game only needs 2 layers now. Someone from the Layer 4 guild logs in, and poof, there's good old Layer 4 again, and he'd be all by himself or his guild. That can't happen. That's why instead of being stickied to a Layer, they'll only have prio over groups, and solo players. That's it. It can't work otherwise.

    As for server mortality, layering (aside from it being extremely harmful to the game, and completely inauthentic) only would adress that issue for the time it stays in the game, and the point where it gets removed. From that stage on, with no layering present anymore, we're back to square 1, where people once again can freely move around servers, and they have always done that in big ways or smaller ways, which ended up in having dead servers sooner or later anyway. It's completely unavoidable. People are people, and they do whatever the fuck they want. In my case, they decided to move off my once famous realm, Stormscale EU Alliance, once the MVPs on the realm left for other realms. The server died very quickly, just from that little fluctuation of specific players wanting to move somewhere else.

    Layering mostly benefits Blizzards business side, and screws over their longterm core audience that they initially tried to win over and make sure they come back, and stay in Classic for its longterm success. They sure sell it well to you folks though, confusing you in how it works, promising you it's nothing like sharding, and your favorite influencers (after having met Blizzard recently in person) suddenly change their whole mindset on sharding and layerings effects, selling it to you like a piece of warm bread.

    If they go through with it, we're in for a wild ride, there's no doubt. I definitely don't wanna be their PR staff when shit goes down, when people find out the game they waited and fought for for years is not like they remember, and changed in ways that echo retail very loud and clear (as its a modern solution originally used in different versions for retail).

    They have more resources, preperation and tech advancements than they ever had back then, they can flip up servers which can hold multiple realms worth of populations by themselves, they are able to see name reserves, their tech is stable... All of this were things they lacked back then, and have available to them now.
    Yet people act as if they wouldn't be able to handle it by letting Classic start up with normal, closed realms just as they have before, and are literally required to if they wanna have an authentic beginning for Classic, which they assured us they will provide. They have 1 chance to get it right. If they don't, they'll lose trust from their playerbase for good this time, and no matter what you guys think layering will solve oh so amazingly for you, you're gonna feel the effect of Blizzard's fuck up just as well.
    First off: they’ve already stated that players will be tied to their layer except for when you join a guild/party. Secondly there is a blue post responding to a video showing that exact scenario saying that they’re aware of this problem and are working to fix it, so no it’s not as intended. What you’re describing is quite literally sharding as it exists in retail currently

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by swdan View Post
    Also when half of player quit
    Cope and seethe.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tommi View Post
    LFR saved raiding
    Quote Originally Posted by Haekke View Post
    LFR is not really easy. I would say it's a lot harder thant Mythic Dungeons
    get_a_load_of_this_guy_cam.jpg

  18. #78
    Those 2 are diffrent systems used to solve 2 totally diffrent issues, its like how do you like to travel 2 work, by car or pizza.

    Best would be to use both, layering for that problem and dynamic respawn to solve that problem

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by anon5123 View Post
    They literally said that it would be completely gone by phase 2 at the latest.
    They likely won't even have to do anything for that. Server population decline will achieve that on its own.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •