https://eu.forums.blizzard.com/en/wow/t ... ming/69910Blizzard Entertainment
Due to extremely high demand, we will be establishing the following new WoW Classic realm at approximately 20:00 CEST (19:00 BST) on Wednesday, August 14:
Gehennas – PvP – English
Name reservation dissapointment Vol. 2.
They announce a better sounding server, AFTER everyone already has their 3 names...
gg
Time to level up the delete skills ready for version 2 head implosion.
How may people are turning Shazzrah into a ghost town for a better name?
Ygethmor - Undead Warlock (EU Judgement)
Hellebron - Orc Rogue (EU Judgement)
Ugh, this is kind of annoying. Do I stick with Shazzrah and just hope for the best?
I've already wrestled all my troops to roll on Shazzrah, so I'm in the same boat just hoping everyone else moves, haha. I guess Blizzard should have foreseen this... wouldn't be the first time they've completely underestimated expected people on launch day.
Blizzard are complete fudging tools. Utter morons
Ten Storms EU Alliance
Finnigan - Dwarf Hunter Lvl 30
Portalmaster - Gnome Mage Lvl 19
Shaelur - Dwarf Paladin Lvl 22
Shaelus - Night Elf Druid Lvl 50
By the stench of https://classic.wowhead.com/quest=432/t ... ted-troggs, I say ! One more wormhole to scout for that https://classic.wowhead.com/npc=16375/sewage-slime Nymis and his spineless https://classic.wowhead.com/item=6530/nightcrawlers !!
A nice gesture, but they should've opened more than one
Troll 
Protection 
WarriorEU PvE - Pyrewood Village -
Horde
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.
Good on them but seems a little late as people don't get that 4th character.
It's also the better name and was one of the test server names, I guess they're running out of names, Lashlayer next 
You think you do, but you don’t
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?
Shazz and Golemag are full as well as both German servers
https://i.imgur.com/Dr3d9ZT.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/Ks1KapE.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/lFGd6OY.jpg
https://i.imgur.com/2mUTj0n.jpg
> both German servers full
Yeah I think we're going to see a few more new servers, not just one.
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.
The problem is that,like most people, I've used up all 3 of my name reservation before this server was available
These arent traditional server blades. Hosting extra virtual space in the form of layers should be the same as hosting extra servers.
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.
2000 IQg0bledyg00k wrote: ↑4 years agoNever making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
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 properlyNukez wrote: ↑4 years agoMore 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.
Troll Protection WarriorEU PvE - Pyrewood Village -
Horde
The nordic/scandinavian project have choosen Gehannas - http://nordicclassic.jinnis.se/
<FIKA>
