Layering in retail

Community General Discussion
1

If you follow classic news you probably have heard about layering. What if we could implement that to retail? Like what people enjoy the most in WoW in my opinion is the sense of community and colleting shiny stuff. To prove my point just look at artifact appearances and classic.

2 Likes
2

It’s already there.
It’s called sharding.

3 Likes
3

Yeah, the layering though is different. And i’d prefer that over what we currently have.

6 Likes
4

Layering in other MMOs is more player friendly than the sharding (even though that depends on how much do you mind the sharding).

It creates instances of zones only if there are many players, so when it is needed and it does not take chars from other realms.

2 Likes
5

I would love for layering to be in retail.

It’s an excellent idea for retail tbh.

7 Likes
6

In other words infinitely preferable to sharding.

5 Likes
7

As I heard it described for Classic, it is not sharding as we have it in retail.

  1. People from one realm are not mixed with people from another
  2. The entire continent is in one layer, so no more people appearing from or disappearing into thin air as they cross a sharding boundary.
8
  1. That’s called cross-realm, yet a completely different concept.
  2. Watch streams.
9

Layering is server based. The idea (in Classic) is to phase out layers as the numbers decline on servers (after the hype and initial interest dies down). This will avoid new servers needing to be made when all the original servers are full, that later end up as dead realms. I think it’s a clever idea.

Sharding is any realm, people all mixed together, they are either WM on or WM off shards (with the exception of RP realms)

If anyone missed the news on wowhead

3 Likes
10

Wont work on retail without massive server merges to balance out the faction imbalance on some servers

11

Wouldn’t it worsen the lags in invasions ? Blizzard can afford to keep 10k players on a single realm with layers because vanilla classes are less ressource consuming than live, but i fear there will be many issues should they simply apply classic layering to live.

12

This is honestly my biggest issue with sharding as it is right now. Going into and out of groups to suddenly find yourself surrounded by 15 players of the opposite faction sucks. Or doing 1v1 with someone who is losing and then is invited by a friend into another phase also sucks as they just disappear infront of you.
Layering is preferable.

1 Like
13

Emphasis on the ‘suddenly’ as well.

2 Likes
14

Layering is not Sharding.
They are different technologies.
The clue is in the fact that they are different words for different things.

1 Like
15

Yes, they are as different as kebab and döner.

1 Like
16

Never got the difference between those 2 anyway, taste like trash in both cases

17

So true it’s the same thing just worded differently as I call it same :poop: just a different looking packageing.

1 Like
18

AFAIK doner just means it spins while getting roasted. And kebab is the word for food.

1 Like
19

Döner = initially the Turkish name for the Syrian/Lebanese “Chawarma”, which is the meat made spinning in the oven for roasting.
Kebab = a Syrian/Lebanese dish consisting of meat prepared in a particular way.

If we want to go back to the origins, neither means what it refers to nowadays, namely the :burrito:, so let us stick to the current nomenclature, shall we ?
There’s no need to go any further in order to imply that layering and sharding are basically the same.

1 Like
20

Layering creates different “shards” of the realm, but you always remain in one layer.

For this to work on retail, they would have to merge a TON of realms (that currently are dead as a rock)

Now don’t get me wrong, I’d love this, because the milking from server transfers has gone far enough, they should just try to make one “megaserver” instead.

4 Likes