Silverpine Forest
User avatar
Posts: 409
Likes: 127
Undead
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Could you image what a clusterfuck this would have been without layering?









Threads I've derailed: 0
Flame wars I've started: 0
Threads I've started that mentioned other posters by name: 0
Accounts I've created for the sole purpose of mocking other posters: 0

My reputation is clean.
Mulgore
User avatar
US Grobbulus
Posts: 85
Likes: 40
Tauren
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

I just cannot understand how people could be so against such a major quality of life improvement.

   Selexin
User avatar
Posts: 21
Likes: 2
Horde
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

The problem is that they didn't release enough servers at the start, people all got clustered in the same ones.

Had they released 20 servers for America and 20 for Europe, the population would have been better and wouldn't have needed layering.

Also, layering will result in even more resources in the AH, since each layer double the number of resources in the wild, resulting in an incredible drop in prices.

Ashenvale
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1022
Likes: 778
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Neoh wrote:
1 year ago
Also, layering will result in even more resources in the AH, since each layer double the number of resources in the wild, resulting in an incredible drop in prices.
You're only accounting for one half of the supply and demand equation there. Yes, as layers increase the amount of resources available and farmed increases. This increases supply. But the layers only increase as the amount of players increases, which also increases demand. Which kind of results in a bit of a wash in the supply and demand equation.

   Hunter Black Monarch Kall Stfuppercut Edaewen Selexin
User avatar
Posts: 21
Likes: 2
Horde
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Pippina wrote:
1 year ago
But the layers only increase as the amount of players increases, which also increases demand.
The thing is, there is always more supply than demand, especially early on, gathering professions are always more popular than crafting ones, which is why I don't account for the other half.

And I was more answering to whether we need layering or not.
Take 2 servers with 10k constant people on it.
One serv has layering and the other doesn't.
The economy will be way healthier on the one who doesn't since the prices won't drop as much because of limited quantity.

I do think layering was needed for the release, but in the long run? Eeeeehh...

Mulgore
User avatar
US Grobbulus
Posts: 85
Likes: 40
Tauren
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Neoh wrote:
1 year ago
The problem is that they didn't release enough servers at the start, people all got clustered in the same ones.

Had they released 20 servers for America and 20 for Europe, the population would have been better and wouldn't have needed layering.

Also, layering will result in even more resources in the AH, since each layer double the number of resources in the wild, resulting in an incredible drop in prices.
But what about two months from now? If those populations dwindled, they'd be forced to do a lot more work condensing things.

User avatar
Posts: 21
Likes: 2
Horde
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Steerclear wrote:
1 year ago
But what about two months from now? If those populations dwindled, they'd be forced to do a lot more work condensing things.
Well, opening servers in a panic all of a sudden isn't better, people are still trying to get on the more popular choices.

I think it's easier to fuse some empty servers together than it is to try to convince players to leave the one they are currently on.

Darnassus
User avatar
Posts: 59
Likes: 26
Night Elf
Hunter
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Pippina wrote:
1 year ago
Neoh wrote:
1 year ago
Also, layering will result in even more resources in the AH, since each layer double the number of resources in the wild, resulting in an incredible drop in prices.
You're only accounting for one half of the supply and demand equation there. Yes, as layers increase the amount of resources available and farmed increases. This increases supply. But the layers only increase as the amount of players increases, which also increases demand. Which kind of results in a bit of a wash in the supply and demand equation.
This is a true statement. Finally that one course from university comes in handy! :biggrin:

   Selexin

[ Golemagg | Alliance | Hunter | Lucas ]
Ashenvale
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1022
Likes: 778
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Hunter wrote:
1 year ago
This is a true statement. Finally that one course from university comes in handy! :biggrin:
> going to university

I barely made it out of high school :lol:

   Edaewen
Deadwind Pass
User avatar
US Grobbulus
Posts: 229
Likes: 124
Orc
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

I've been in que since launch.... still trying to login

<Surge>
Grobbulus - RPPvP
User avatar
Posts: 21
Likes: 2
Horde
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Stupeed wrote:
1 year ago
I've been in que since launch.... still trying to login
Yeah, the layering doesn't solve the full realm problem 8)

Ashenvale
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1022
Likes: 778
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

I'm here with you guys. I can't get into Fairbanks, stuck with a 15k queue. Just dicking around now on the lowest pop server I can get into with an alt just to get my UI and stuff set up.. figure if I can't get into my real server, at least I can get my client set up where I want it to be.

Silverpine Forest
User avatar
Posts: 409
Likes: 127
Undead
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

The good news is that once everyone left the n00b towns, we spread out quite a bit... I didn't see 30+ players gangbanging a single questgiver outside of Deathknell. However, the zones were still well-populated enough that nobody had trouble finding help with quests like Melrache or the Agamand Family Crypts. I think Blizzard got the math correct on this one.

Pippina wrote:
1 year ago
You're only accounting for one half of the supply and demand equation there. Yes, as layers increase the amount of resources available and farmed increases. This increases supply. But the layers only increase as the amount of players increases, which also increases demand. Which kind of results in a bit of a wash in the supply and demand equation.
Except that the alternative choice wasn't fewer people spread out over fewer layers. The alternative was the SAME number of people spread out over fewer/no layers. Layering increases the number of resource nodes without changing the number of players.

Threads I've derailed: 0
Flame wars I've started: 0
Threads I've started that mentioned other posters by name: 0
Accounts I've created for the sole purpose of mocking other posters: 0

My reputation is clean.
Ashenvale
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1022
Likes: 778
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Black Monarch wrote:
1 year ago
Except that the alternative choice wasn't fewer people spread out over fewer layers. The alternative was the SAME number of people spread out over fewer/no layers. Layering increases the number of resource nodes without changing the number of players.
I must be too sleep deprived at this point to understand how this makes sense.

On a vanilla server, you'd have 1x amount of players and 1y amount of resources.

If you had a huge Classic server with 15x amount of players, but put them on a single layer, now you have 15x players and 1y amount of resources.

So instead, they are aiming for 15x players and 15y amount of resources. Which equals out to the same ratio of people to resources as the original game. Roughly.

layering doesn't ruin the supply to demand ratio, it keeps it sane. 15x players to 1y of resources would make everything artificially extremely expensive and adding layers restores it to proper ratios.

I'm delirious from lack of sleep right now. Tell me what I'm missing. Srs. Maybe I'll understand when I wake up.

Rogue Combat
User avatar
Posts: 117
Likes: 40
Alliance
Rogue
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Steerclear wrote:
1 year ago
I just cannot understand how people could be so against such a major quality of life improvement.
Because it impacts world pvp and the economy.
The faster the shitfest that is layering is removed, the better.

Rogue Combat
User avatar
Posts: 117
Likes: 40
Alliance
Rogue
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Pippina wrote:
1 year ago
Neoh wrote:
1 year ago
Also, layering will result in even more resources in the AH, since each layer double the number of resources in the wild, resulting in an incredible drop in prices.
You're only accounting for one half of the supply and demand equation there. Yes, as layers increase the amount of resources available and farmed increases. This increases supply. But the layers only increase as the amount of players increases, which also increases demand. Which kind of results in a bit of a wash in the supply and demand equation.
Not necessarily.
Lets say we have 3k online on a server.
Thats 2 layers. Thus 2 times as many resources.
But you don't have a full 2 server populations.

Furthermore. Thats not how vanilla worked.
In vanilla a server with 600 people online generated just as many resources as a server with 1800 people online.

Mulgore
User avatar
US Grobbulus
Posts: 85
Likes: 40
Tauren
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

We cannot compare Classic to Vanilla anymore. It's not the same game. It fundamentally cannot ever be the same game. Knowledge, skill, playerbase, and countless other variables have changed too much over time. You cannot go back to 2004, so embrace the meme that says, "Modern problems require modern solutions." The numbers do not lie. If we did not have layering, no one would be able to play the game at all. You'd have to speed your way to another place with a friend and just grind mobs above your level. Skipping entire blocks of quests. You can do that now if you wish, but that's not what the game is.

Warlock Affliction
User avatar
US Kirtonos
Posts: 471
Likes: 227
Horde
Warlock
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Steerclear wrote:
1 year ago
If we did not have layering, no one would be able to play the game at all.
Why? How did Vanilla do it then because they didnt have layering?
If they were against or didnt want to use layering they would just create more servers with like 5k max or less on the server like vanilla...

Image Image
Image Image
| Nýxt - Affliction Warlock | Kirtonos PVP | Level 60 | =-|-= | Awkaran - Resto Druid | Kirtonos PVP | Level 27 |
Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Layering does nothing special. Other similar tools could have accomplished the same thing with less cons. Layering presents a whole host of issues that could have been avoided.

g0bledyg00k wrote:
9 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
Ashenvale
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1022
Likes: 778
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Nyxt wrote:
1 year ago
Steerclear wrote:
1 year ago
If we did not have layering, no one would be able to play the game at all.
Why? How did Vanilla do it then because they didnt have layering?
If they were against or didnt want to use layering they would just create more servers with like 5k max or less on the server like vanilla...
Blizzard didn't expect most of the population on their servers to quit after a month in Vanilla. Layering, mega servers, and their expectation to remove layering before the end of phase 1 all points to them expecting the Classic server populations to collapse very quickly. It looks like they're expecting a majority of players to be tourists who will bounce in a few weeks. Their solution to their expected player collapse issue is to extremely overpopulate the servers at the beginning, and let the servers collapse down to a healthy size organically. Their actions and statements all point to them preferring up front pain for long term gain. They hope that this will result in the healthiest servers later on down the road.

They also don't want to have to merge servers. If they gave us flat vanilla-sized servers, Blizzard expects all the servers to be unplayably small within a short period of time.

I'm not even saying all of this is the correct way to go, and it really does appear like Blizz is being flooded with far more players than they expected. But this is why the servers are set up the way they are right now.

Rogue Subtlety
User avatar
US Grobbulus
Posts: 366
Likes: 189
Night Elf
Hunter
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

They made the right decision, you're deluding yourself if you think otherwise.

Also Pippina is correct on the supply and demand math above.

Telvaine - Night Elf Hunter
Raikan - Night Elf Druid
Keatts- Human Rogue

Grobbulus - US
Felwood
User avatar
EU Razorgore
Posts: 110
Likes: 59
Undead
Warlock
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

I think layering is one of the biggest reasons we are having fucked up queues at the moment.

Blizzard logic: "People are going to leave the servers after a couple of weeks, so we don't need to create a lot of servers. We will just put everybody on a couple of servers with layers and remove the layers when the people have left." Result: FAR too few servers to accommodate all players. If they had just ditched layering out with the garbage (where it belongs) we might actually have had a decent amount of servers to launch with, because they would've needed to actually have those servers.

   Stfuppercut Pippina
Rogue Subtlety
User avatar
US Grobbulus
Posts: 366
Likes: 189
Night Elf
Hunter
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

morbidmike wrote:
1 year ago
I think layering is one of the biggest reasons we are having fucked up queues at the moment.

Blizzard logic: "People are going to leave the servers after a couple of weeks, so we don't need to create a lot of servers. We will just put everybody on a couple of servers with layers and remove the layers when the people have left." Result: FAR too few servers to accommodate all players. If they had just ditched layering out with the garbage (where it belongs) we might actually have had a decent amount of servers to launch with, because they would've needed to actually have those servers.
Many of which would be low population within weeks as the initial tourist rush wears off, resulting in a bunch of dead realms. We're playing the long game here.

Telvaine - Night Elf Hunter
Raikan - Night Elf Druid
Keatts- Human Rogue

Grobbulus - US
Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Telvaine wrote:
1 year ago
Many of which would be low population within weeks as the initial tourist rush wears off, resulting in a bunch of dead realms. We're playing the long game here.
Which results in server merges to save dying realms. A solution that will inevitably need to be used anyways. Servers will always decline in population over time and will eventually need to be merged, as they always have. Conversely, now servers have 16k player queues and realm pops are 2-4X what they should be by phase 2, forcing many players to lose incentive to play and will simply walk away from the game. This in turn bleeds potential players and loses people that may have stuck it out. Really unfortunate. We could have accomplished the same thing without layering and without massive queues AND could have had an easier time transitioning into phase 2 using less technology and more common sense.

g0bledyg00k wrote:
9 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
Rogue Combat
User avatar
Posts: 117
Likes: 40
Alliance
Rogue
1 year ago (1.13.2)
 •  Unread

Telvaine wrote:
1 year ago
morbidmike wrote:
1 year ago
I think layering is one of the biggest reasons we are having fucked up queues at the moment.

Blizzard logic: "People are going to leave the servers after a couple of weeks, so we don't need to create a lot of servers. We will just put everybody on a couple of servers with layers and remove the layers when the people have left." Result: FAR too few servers to accommodate all players. If they had just ditched layering out with the garbage (where it belongs) we might actually have had a decent amount of servers to launch with, because they would've needed to actually have those servers.
Many of which would be low population within weeks as the initial tourist rush wears off, resulting in a bunch of dead realms. We're playing the long game here.
Could have just sharded 1 to 20.
Minimal world PvP impact.
No impact on high end rare resources.

Similar topics
to 'This is why we needed layering'
Posts ViewsLast post

Latest Blue Posts

View all
  • Screenshot of the Month

    View gallery