Vanilla wow had sharding

Classic Discussion
Hello,

I see a lot of complaints about sharding, where people say WoW classic should not use it at all. Many of the posts I've read on the topic demonstrates ignorance on what sharding actually is. Let's try to have a constructive discussion instead.

My argument is that sharding in itself as a technology is not bad, but the current implementation of it is.

What is sharding?
Sharding means to break up data into multiple partitions, with each partition being held on a different server or "shard" (or blade, when using a blade server). The purpose of sharding is to spread the load. It also creates some redundancy, since if one shard goes down, players on the other shards might still be able to play.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shard_(database_architecture)

What's the difference between phasing, cross-realm-zones and sharding?
Phasing is simply the technology Blizzard has been using in later expansions to change the world during quest progression. We can all agree that WoW Classic should not use phasing, since vanilla wow did not.

Cross realm zones (CRZ) is the technology used to populate under populated areas, by letting players from different realms play on the same shard. I think we all agree that WoW Classic shouldn't use CRZ, since seeing someone with your own name would break the vanilla immersion.

Sharding is, as I said above, simply a method of spreading out the population on different servers/shards to reduce load. This can be implemented in a multitude of ways. I think we're all in agreement that the current implementation in modern wow, where players suddenly appear or disappear around you, is a poor implementation to use for WoW Class. The purpose of this thread is to discuss how they should implement it.

Vanilla WOW used sharding
Each continent was on a separate blade (aka shard) - Kalimdor and Eastern Kingdoms. Instances ran on a third blade while chat and some databases was handled by the forth blade. In other words, vanilla wow had four shards per server.

As an example, the Instance shard could go down, preventing you from entering any dungeons or bgs. Some times when you tried to exit a dungeon, you'd get the message "World server down", which kept you locked inside the dungeon until the world server came back up.

This means people spamming #NOSHARDS etc don't understand sharding and are arguing for a non-Blizzlike experience, since Vanilla wow DID use shards.

Sharding in itself is not a problem. What I believe we all want is a seamless implementation of sharding that's invisible to the player, while keeping the realm lag free.
Sweet mother of mercy.
https://clips.twitch.tv/UnusualComfortableStrawberryKappa

Watch that.

You are an idiot for making this post and thinking people don't know just how bad sharding actually is.
03/11/2018 14:11Posted by Kagemoth
https://clips.twitch.tv/UnusualComfortableStrawberryKappa

Watch that.

You are an idiot for making this post and thinking people don't know just how bad sharding actually is.


That doesn't prove sharding in itself is wrong, it shows that the current implementation of sharding is bad.

You missed the point of my thread. My point is, sharding in itself is not the issue, it's the current implementation.
OP looks just as out of touch as Blizzard.
Goodness god. This comes across as a desperate attempt to shill. This is either the troll post of the century or you're purposefully conflating systems to make a dishonest argument about sharding.

Sorry, no, players were never instanced within subzones. If I went to the barrens everyone was there, no one was invisible. You are just as painfully out of touch and tone deaf as modern Blizzard.
03/11/2018 14:06Posted by Billain
Vanilla WOW used sharding
Each continent was on a separate blade (aka shard) - Kalimdor and Eastern Kingdoms. Instances ran on a third blade while chat and some databases was handled by the forth blade. In other words, vanilla wow had four shards per server.

As an example, the Instance shard could go down, preventing you from entering any dungeons or bgs. Some times when you tried to exit a dungeon, you'd get the message "World server down", which kept you locked inside the dungeon until the world server came back up.


This has absolutely nothing to do with the kind of sharding we have in modern WoW and the Classic demo.
I'm downvoting you via forum post because no button exists
03/11/2018 14:15Posted by Meibhín
Goodness god. This comes across as a desperate attempt to shill. This is either the troll post of the century or you're purposefully conflating systems to make a dishonest argument about sharding.

Sorry, no, players were never instanced within subzones. If I went to the barrens everyone was there, no one was invisible.

Maybe finish reading my post before posting.

I wrote: "Sharding in itself is not a problem. What I believe we all want is a seamless implementation of sharding that's invisible to the player, while keeping the realm lag free."

It's the current implementation of sharding that's bad, not sharding in itself.
03/11/2018 14:16Posted by Yathrin
03/11/2018 14:06Posted by Billain
Vanilla WOW used sharding
Each continent was on a separate blade (aka shard) - Kalimdor and Eastern Kingdoms. Instances ran on a third blade while chat and some databases was handled by the forth blade. In other words, vanilla wow had four shards per server.

As an example, the Instance shard could go down, preventing you from entering any dungeons or bgs. Some times when you tried to exit a dungeon, you'd get the message "World server down", which kept you locked inside the dungeon until the world server came back up.


This has absolutely nothing to do with the kind of sharding we have in modern WoW and the Classic demo.

I'm not arguing for the current implementation of it.
03/11/2018 14:11Posted by Kagemoth
https://clips.twitch.tv/UnusualComfortableStrawberryKappa

Watch that.

You are an idiot for making this post and thinking people don't know just how bad sharding actually is.


It is a shame... Instead of expanding your argument using some valid points, you just call the OP an idiot for taking the time to provide insights and information on the various technologies used by Blizzard.

Well done!
Yes, let's have a constructive discussion. Sharding is the splitting of players into alternative, temporary versions of the same zone, to prevent over-crowding. It enables thousands of players to be in the same starting zone of the same server. There are several things wrong with that though:

- Having 10,000 players on the same zone will necessitate sharding further down the line for that realm, reducing the chance of any community being formed.
- Sharding at all makes players disappear in to thin air as soon as they group, duel, or interact with other players.
- Zone PvP is completely destroyed by sharding, as different groups can and will be placed into different shards.
- If you log out while playing with a group (due to disconnect, network issue) and you log back in, you could easily be kicked out of your group as well as the version of the zone you were in. Even if your group didn't uninvite you!
- and so on...

So yes, if sharding was actually not breaking immersion, it could be applied. Unfortunately, it does. Therefore, I don't think it has a place in Classic WoW.
03/11/2018 14:20Posted by Billain
I'm not arguing for the current implementation of it.


Then what's the point?
The players don't care about using different shards for different continents or dungeon instances, because it doesn't affect them.
They care about the open world experience.
03/11/2018 14:11Posted by Kagemoth
You are an idiot


Only a very specific kind of person would reply to what OP wrote the way you did. Kudos for willing to make it obvious to everybody, but I don't think you'll have a very gratifying experience in Classic with that approach to life.
03/11/2018 14:23Posted by Mailan
Yes, let's have a constructive discussion. Sharding is the splitting of players into alternative, temporary versions of the same zone, to prevent over-crowding. It enables thousands of players to be in the same starting zone of the same server. There are several things wrong with that though:

- Having 10,000 players on the same zone will necessitate sharding further down the line for that realm, reducing the chance of any community being formed.
- Sharding at all makes players disappear in to thin air as soon as they group, duel, or interact with other players.
- Zone PvP is completely destroyed by sharding, as different groups can and will be placed into different shards.
- If you log out while playing with a group (due to disconnect, network issue) and you log back in, you could easily be kicked out of your group as well as the version of the zone you were in. Even if your group didn't uninvite you!
- and so on...

So yes, if sharding was actually not breaking immersion, it could be applied. Unfortunately, it does. Therefore, it has no place in Classic WoW.

You are not describing sharding, you are describing Blizzards current implementation of sharding in modern WoW.

I dislike how sharding works now in Wow, so I think we're both in agreement.

I think some sharding technology is necessary (as I said in my original post, even vanilla wow had sharding, and so did Ultima Online etc). The big issue is HOW it's implemented currently. That's why I wanted to make this thread, to provide constructive feedback on how the sharding works.
03/11/2018 14:06Posted by Billain
Hello,

I see a lot of complaints about sharding, where people say WoW classic should not use it at all. Many of the posts I've read on the topic demonstrates ignorance on what sharding actually is. Let's try to have a constructive discussion instead.

My argument is that sharding in itself as a technology is not bad, but the current implementation of it is.

What is sharding?
Sharding means to break up data into multiple partitions, with each partition being held on a different server or "shard" (or blade, when using a blade server). The purpose of sharding is to spread the load. It also creates some redundancy, since if one shard goes down, players on the other shards might still be able to play.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shard_(database_architecture)

What's the difference between phasing, cross-realm-zones and sharding?
Phasing is simply the technology Blizzard has been using in later expansions to change the world during quest progression. We can all agree that WoW Classic should not use phasing, since vanilla wow did not.

Cross realm zones (CRZ) is the technology used to populate under populated areas, by letting players from different realms play on the same shard. I think we all agree that WoW Classic shouldn't use CRZ, since seeing someone with your own name would break the vanilla immersion.

Sharding is, as I said above, simply a method of spreading out the population on different servers/shards to reduce load. This can be implemented in a multitude of ways.

Vanilla WOW used sharding
Each continent was on a separate blade (aka shard) - Kalimdor and Eastern Kingdoms. Instances ran on a third blade while chat and some databases was handled by the forth blade. In other words, vanilla wow had four shards per server.

As an example, the Instance shard could go down, preventing you from entering any dungeons or bgs. Some times when you tried to exit a dungeon, you'd get the message "World server down", which kept you locked inside the dungeon until the world server came back up.

This means people spamming #NOSHARDS etc don't understand sharding and are arguing for a non-Blizzlike experience, since Vanilla wow DID use shards.

Sharding in itself is not a problem. What I believe we all want is a seamless implementation of sharding that's invisible to the player, while keeping the realm lag free.
Nice post Billain. Thanks for taking the time to explain.

Didn't know they were already actually sharding back then.
03/11/2018 14:24Posted by Yathrin
03/11/2018 14:20Posted by Billain
I'm not arguing for the current implementation of it.


Then what's the point?
The players don't care about using different shards for different continents or dungeon instances, because it doesn't affect them.
They care about the open world experience.


To discussing how blizzard SHOULD implement sharding. Should they do it like they did in vanilla? I doubt they will, even if the majority argued for it. I played vanilla since release day and I could barely play the first week or so because the lag and disconnects were so severe.
03/11/2018 14:30Posted by Billain
03/11/2018 14:24Posted by Yathrin
...

Then what's the point?
The players don't care about using different shards for different continents or dungeon instances, because it doesn't affect them.
They care about the open world experience.


To discussing how blizzard SHOULD implement sharding. Should they do it like they did in vanilla? I doubt they will, even if the majority argued for it. I played vanilla since release day and I could barely play the first week or so because the lag and disconnects were so severe.


That was early 2005.

If a private server can get 10k+ concurrent users WITHOUT lag then a multi billion dollar corporation has NO EXCUSES at all.
03/11/2018 14:32Posted by Solaris

That was early 2005.

If a private server can get 10k+ concurrent users WITHOUT lag then a multi billion dollar corporation has NO EXCUSES at all.

Private servers use sharding. You can test this yourself by going between Duskwood and STV. You will see players suddenly pop up right next to you. Also, some times when you try to loot herb/mine nodes, they disappear.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum