I think we're going to see some more in north america, too.
I haven't seen the EU server populations yet.. how many were already full?
> both German servers full
Yeah I think we're going to see a few more new servers, not just one.
More realms = more servers = higher cost. They go for the minimal effort route and I think it's reasonable from a company-standpoint. They will react if there are too few realms, but they won't set up realms they don't need in 2 months.
Layers are essentially soft-realms. They're not separated by name, but they are indeed many other servers (machines) running those game worlds. So I don't think it's much difference in cost had they chosen to go that route. I think they're just really wanting to make sure these communities last on the servers by not having too many and interest dwindles and servers die.
This was highly needed, GJ BLIZZ
The problem is that,like most people, I've used up all 3 of my name reservation before this server was available
More realms = more servers = higher cost.
These arent traditional server blades. Hosting extra virtual space in the form of layers should be the same as hosting extra servers.
They go for the minimal effort route and I think it's reasonable from a company-standpoint. They will react if there are too few realms, but they won't set up realms they don't need in 2 months.
Layering probably requires more man-time to manage. Lets consider a world without layering where duplicate realms were launched in place of layers. These realms would be consistent and would only need to be merged when absolutely necessary. Tichondrius 1,2 and 3 are all individual servers. They exist without needing to be adjusted until their population gets so low that two or more of these realms needs to be merged to maintain a healthy playerbase. These server mergers will happen inevitably, with or without layering.
Layering will slowly need to be tuned based on the needs of the server. While Blizz says this is a smart system, we have all played the stress tests and seen beta footage... The layers arent working as intelligently as we were lead to believe. Eventually, if Blizz intends to squish these to 1 cohesive layer, they will slowly need to put layer caps on servers and dial them back based on the individual needs of the servers. Eventually these servers will still face attrition in their final layer and will need to be merged at a later date.
I cannot see a compelling argument to indicate that layers reduce the workload for Blizzard. If anything, I think layers could increase their workload.
A nice gesture, but they should've opened more than one
What you said. In the end there is always the option to merge realms.
More realms = more servers = higher cost. They go for the minimal effort route and I think it's reasonable from a company-standpoint. They will react if there are too few realms, but they won't set up realms they don't need in 2 months.
That's not how server architecture works nowadays. I'm certain they already have prepared the power to host more people if needed, having more or less servers or more or less layers or players per layer are just settings. The only issue is figuring out the number of people that are gonna play and how much they will stay around. And I think they haven't seen the picture properly
The nordic/scandinavian project have choosen Gehannas - https://nordicclassic.jinnis.se/