Server cap at 2500 players

Classic Discussion
Prev 1 3 4 5 6 Next
Lol, op. Why are you stating that as if:

1. I didn't know that,
2. I would hate it?

20/11/2017 16:31Posted by Wîlliamx
I just proved that people against optional visual improvement "purists" are okay with game changing settings like increasing the player cap. But yes its a "hahaha" because new graphics wont affect the gameplay itself which an increased player cap will do.


OH MY GOD YOU GOT ME one person who could very well be NOT a "purist" in your definition of the word wanted something that would somehow proof all "purists" want that.

Well done, seems so legit. I see you are very proficient in the ways of science.
20/11/2017 09:10Posted by Pärts
Make it 10k at least. Or be ready with more than 30 servers on launch.
Let's face it, we are expecting a few mills to play at launch


Same person who bashes people for having differing views on new models and such, asks for changes of their own. Bollocks, you will sit and wait in queue like the "real vanilla" experience demands.
20/11/2017 06:44Posted by Alagner
I think a 3.5k cap would be a good idea since the world will be a lot smaller than Retail.

Retail world is bigger than vanilla technically , but for real most ppl on retail spending time in max level zones like Argus and Suramar.

And not questing in Stonelaton Mountains/Desolace/Northrend/Pandaria
21/11/2017 14:04Posted by Melicious
you will sit and wait in queue like the "real vanilla" experience demands.


Queues? Hahaha you do realize that those happened because blizzard totally wasn't prepared to have so many millions of players? They thought "if we can make 100k, that would make the investment worth it.".

So what you are saying is that you expect millions to join vanilla wow? I like you, buddy ^^.
20/11/2017 06:44Posted by Wîlliamx
Also no BG at release.


This is actually a good idea. They should postpone BG release by like 2-3 months, it would encourage people to participate in world pvp. And then a few months after the release, once the novelty wears off, introduce BGs for real.
The cap is what should be considered increasing indeed. It would be nice if the world felt alive while leveling alts.
21/11/2017 13:02Posted by Vunde
Lol, op. Why are you stating that as if:

1. I didn't know that,
2. I would hate it?

20/11/2017 16:31Posted by Wîlliamx
I just proved that people against optional visual improvement "purists" are okay with game changing settings like increasing the player cap. But yes its a "hahaha" because new graphics wont affect the gameplay itself which an increased player cap will do.


OH MY GOD YOU GOT ME one person who could very well be NOT a "purist" in your definition of the word wanted something that would somehow proof all "purists" want that.

Well done, seems so legit. I see you are very proficient in the ways of science.
You retail players get triggered so easily.
I think 2,5 or 3,5k is not enough. 10k etc is definitely to much. But maybe 4,5/5K could be good. If raid will be same 40m we need bigger servers now. It could be tested with ,,stress testing,, before realising.
Low player cap + battlemasters = RIP bgs

insane queues + bgs without the maximum number of players = classic vanilla exp?
I have a weird combination suggestion here. Keep the pop at 2.5-3.5k as a cap. Not because "that's how it was" but because IMO when you go above around 5k players, you hit all the same problems you see on retail now, caused by the XR tech.

When you have too many players, you won't know the ninjas, the abusers, and the just plain annoying people on your realm. It has a much higher chance to end up the kind of toxic community many of us left retail because of.

I prefer keeping the lower cap per realm, and having XR BGs included (they did arrive at the end of vanilla, but I don't personally think they stole anything from the game).

All IMO of course, but that's all we have here anyway is opinions.
Trying to level / quest or farm mats on a server with more than 4k people especially when everyone is leveling up at the same point in time is a frikkin ball ache.
Maybe 5k is ok when everyone is dispersed through the world but I still would vote for a 3.5k cap
A server cap at or as close to as the original would be best, some of us need to tame rare spawns and they actually were rare back then..
09/12/2017 20:47Posted by Rabidranger
A server cap at or as close to as the original would be best, some of us need to tame rare spawns and they actually were rare back then..


This.

I literally spent months on nostalrius & elysium trying to tame broken tooth. Even at off-peak times there was always at LEAST a handful of people camping the spawns.
Was just impossible.
I don't mind a bit of healthy competition for rare spawns and other stuff in the world such as mats etc but there gets a point where it just isn't even worth bothering or fun anymore.
The lower the pop cap, the more servers you need, the more risk you run of imbalanced servers / servers dying.
Population cap has a problem with initial launch rush. It's hard to predict how many people will continue playing from each 2500 batch of players on both factions. Maybe make you pick a realm at level 10-15 and not at start? Thus you can shard starting zones like crazy to survive the launch and have easier way with making realms with population cap and no sharding.
I see a lot of people talking about 10k cap and world pvp, but please realise that not everyone plays on PVP realms, and not everyone has played on Pservers where most are PVP by default.

Playing on an RP realm where you're un-flagged by default will, like it did even back during the release in 2005, make certain things impossible to do with a cap higher than the original cap. Things such as, taming for hunters, resource gathering, quest mobs, and so on.

Maybe increase it for PVP realms, but as far as PVE/RP realms go, they need to keep it at or around the original cap at launch.

As a hunter, i could barely tame my first animal because of pricks attacking everything in sight in the starting area and the surrounding areas.

Resource gathering? Not possible until you got to level 20+ but even then, in STV it was hard because that zone isn't that big, and with horde as well as alliance having quests in the same areas, it was hard even with the original cap to get stuff done as you couldn't simply attack people on-sight to get that resource node, or to kill that quest mob etc.

Imagine that with 10k players. Having to wait maybe hours before you're able to kill one quest mob, or find one resource node far enough away from other players to actually gather.

No thanks. I'll take input from people who actually played back in 2005 any day, over people who base their entire vanilla experience from their time playing on Pservers that are PVP by default, where they're pretty much emulating the final stages of vanilla.
Currently there's a private server with 5k ppl on at peak and i tell u there's not a single mob alive in westfall.
5k has to be the max cap if u wanna make it big.
3.5 max. Anything more than that would just be a total pain in the !@# when leveling. Yes private servers might have a higher cap but they also have countless threads on their forums about quest mobs being dead 100% of the time because the servers are overpopulated.
It's not just about lag or stability it's about "Is it fun to play on a server with a cap of 10k". These days there are things like phasing, different instances when there are to many people in one zone, ... All that didn't exist in classic. So if you want to quest in a starter zone with 100-200 other people getting all your quest items and killing all your quest mobs be my guest, but I'd rather play in a less saturated zone, not being forced to wait until most people have gone to sleep to be able to continue questing.
I'm probably in the purist camp, but a increased server caps is a change I'd be fine with and would probably endorse. I'd set it at 5-7k at launch and probably increase it over time.
10 k max then you wait for que 30 min-)

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum