Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

WoW Europe: Account creation now disabled.

Last response: in Video Games
Share
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 11, 2005 6:56:16 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Blizzard just disabled the account creation process for Europe, because of
the system load. No new accounts can currently be made (and today is the
release day).

http://forums-en.wow-europe.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-gene...

M.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 11, 2005 6:56:17 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

stay strong my friends. One way or another, in a few days you will be
joined with us in joy and harmony in the lands of Azeroth and milk and honey
shall flow forth and we shall feast upon the ewes and the sheep and the ...

Xanex....UndeadRogueazon, not helping, is it? I know. I feel your pain.



"Michael Vondung" <mvondung@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:14qioofawkc3z.3nhdd0g4bo3i.dlg@40tude.net...
> Blizzard just disabled the account creation process for Europe, because of
> the system load. No new accounts can currently be made (and today is the
> release day).
>
> http://forums-en.wow-europe.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-gene...
>
> M.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 11, 2005 6:56:17 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <14qioofawkc3z.3nhdd0g4bo3i.dlg@40tude.net>,
Michael Vondung <mvondung@gmail.com> wrote:

> Blizzard just disabled the account creation process for Europe, because of
> the system load. No new accounts can currently be made (and today is the
> release day).

ROFL! Ok, I was willing to shrug off "we had no idea this many people
would sign-up" on Nov 23, and cut them some slack while they caught up.

....But not being prepared for *ANY* amount of load for the 2nd launch,
almost 3 months later just shows a lack of... well... it's Not Too
Smart(tm).

Sorry to hear it. Trust that they'll get things up & going soon... If
you shrug off this initial frustration, you'll be in a good frame of
mind to enjoy a wonderful game...

--
Nabuu, Tauren druid on Dethecus.
Also occasionally (rarely): Chum, Gnome warlock on Bronzebeard
<http://www.ManyFriends.com/WoW/PhotoAlbum/&gt;
Aka "Misc"
If you don't remove your pants, I won't get your email.
Related resources
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 11, 2005 6:56:17 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Good grief!
Freezing account creation on the very day the game is released - what a
fiasco!

Not that Blizzard cares much, nor their customers.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 11, 2005 6:56:17 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

QUOTE ***Hopefully a smart European will sue them and WoW fanbois like
yourself will get a clue. It's only because of fanbois like
yourself that Blizzard gets to release without planning properly****

You have no idea what is going on behind the scenes so why dont you do
us all a favor and STFU.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 11, 2005 6:56:18 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

<mike_noren2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
news:1108150421.618124.23780@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
> Good grief!
> Freezing account creation on the very day the game is released - what a
> fiasco!
>
> Not that Blizzard cares much, nor their customers.

It's hardly a fiasco. So you have to wait a day or two longer to play. The
tsunami in the Indian Ocean was a fiasco.

It's good strategy on Blizzard's part, actually...make something people
want, but make it so they can't all get it at the same time and
boom...interest in getting it increases even more.

--
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
Thoisar, 12th level Night Elf Druid, Hellscream
Putrescence, 11th level Undead Warlock, Hellscream
Stumpie, 13th level Dwarf Hunter, Ner'zhul
Widdershins, 10th level Orc Hunter, Hellscream
EQ:
Berdache, 12th level Iksar Shaman, Firiona Vie
Berdache, 4th level Froglok Cleric, Zek
February 11, 2005 7:54:25 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
On 2005-02-11, Nabuu <Nabuu@*YOUR-PANTS*ManyFriends.com> wrote:
> In article <14qioofawkc3z.3nhdd0g4bo3i.dlg@40tude.net>,
> Michael Vondung <mvondung@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Blizzard just disabled the account creation process for Europe, because of
>> the system load. No new accounts can currently be made (and today is the
>> release day).
>
> ROFL! Ok, I was willing to shrug off "we had no idea this many people
> would sign-up" on Nov 23, and cut them some slack while they caught up.
>
> ...But not being prepared for *ANY* amount of load for the 2nd launch,
> almost 3 months later just shows a lack of... well... it's Not Too
> Smart(tm).

That's my impression. One of the customer reps on the forums even
said its "impossible" to patch everyone without resorting to
their closed source bit torrent clone. Every MMO out there
figured out how to do that by preloading.

They're just not smart enough to figure these things out.
February 11, 2005 11:17:30 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
On 2005-02-11, Firian <G.Booth@usm.edu> wrote:
><mike_noren2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1108150421.618124.23780@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>> Good grief!
>> Freezing account creation on the very day the game is released - what a
>> fiasco!
>>
>> Not that Blizzard cares much, nor their customers.
>
> It's hardly a fiasco. So you have to wait a day or two longer to play. The
> tsunami in the Indian Ocean was a fiasco.
>
> It's good strategy on Blizzard's part, actually...make something people
> want, but make it so they can't all get it at the same time and
> boom...interest in getting it increases even more.
>

Hopefully a smart European will sue them and WoW fanbois like
yourself will get a clue. It's only because of fanbois like
yourself that Blizzard gets to release without planning properly.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 11, 2005 11:17:31 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd0q4nc.14bc.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
> ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
> On 2005-02-11, Firian <G.Booth@usm.edu> wrote:
>>
>> It's hardly a fiasco. So you have to wait a day or two longer to play.
>> The
>> tsunami in the Indian Ocean was a fiasco.
>>
>> It's good strategy on Blizzard's part, actually...make something people
>> want, but make it so they can't all get it at the same time and
>> boom...interest in getting it increases even more.
>
> Hopefully a smart European will sue them and WoW fanbois like
> yourself will get a clue. It's only because of fanbois like
> yourself that Blizzard gets to release without planning properly.

LOL, so I'm a fanboi. Interesting. Not entirely sure how 'a smart European'
suing Blizzard would, as you so eloquently (*cough cough*) put it, make me
'get a clue'. A clue on what, exactly? That WoW is a game I like to play
occasionally, along with EverQuest? Or a clue that you're pretty much a dumb
ass? I think I already have a clue on the latter one.

--
<><><><><><><><><><><><>
Thoisar, 12th level Night Elf Druid, Hellscream
Putrescence, 11th level Undead Warlock, Hellscream
Stumpie, 13th level Dwarf Hunter, Ner'zhul
Widdershins, 10th level Orc Hunter, Hellscream
EQ:
Berdache, 12th level Iksar Shaman, Firiona Vie
Berdache, 4th level Froglok Cleric, Zek
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 11, 2005 11:32:41 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg Firian <G.Booth@usm.edu> wrote:

>It's hardly a fiasco. So you have to wait a day or two longer to play. The
>tsunami in the Indian Ocean was a fiasco.

No, the tsunami was a tragedy. This qualifies as a fiasco, in
my book.

>It's good strategy on Blizzard's part, actually...make something people
>want, but make it so they can't all get it at the same time and
>boom...interest in getting it increases even more.

Or interest in trying it dies out completely. I know that's
my reaction - if they couldn't even make the system work
on the day they released the game, I'm not going to trust
them much after they say everything is fine.

Fair or not, accurate or not, I'd bet lots of people see
it the same way.

Pete
February 11, 2005 11:48:53 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Peter Meilinger" <mellnger@bu.edu> wrote in message
news:cuj4p9$4dd$1@news3.bu.edu...
> In comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg Firian <G.Booth@usm.edu> wrote:
was a fiasco.
>
> No, the tsunami was a tragedy. This qualifies as a fiasco, in
> my book.
>
Damn you beat me to it.

> >It's good strategy on Blizzard's part, actually...make something people
> >want, but make it so they can't all get it at the same time and
> >boom...interest in getting it increases even more.
>
> Or interest in trying it dies out completely. I know that's
> my reaction - if they couldn't even make the system work
> on the day they released the game, I'm not going to trust
> them much after they say everything is fine.
>
> Fair or not, accurate or not, I'd bet lots of people see
> it the same way.

As far as this being a major issue I have to say it really isn't. Yes it's
very annoying and maybe even upsetting but it is only the account creation
servers that are down. Why should blizzard pay for a larger capacity server
or bandwidth for a server which is only going to get used very sparingly
after the next 2 weeks. Feel free to call me a fanboy if you like but the
launch of half-life had people stating that Valve was going to go out of
business on the back of poor server status at launch and after the first 3
days it wasn't an issue anymore.

Now after that sensible start I hope I get to log in soon as the DT's are
starting to kick in


--
No sig' 'cause I'm not that smart
February 11, 2005 11:59:26 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
On 2005-02-11, Saucey <johnmcdougall@BOLTBLUE.SPAMTRAP.com> wrote:

> As far as this being a major issue I have to say it really isn't. Yes it's
> very annoying and maybe even upsetting but it is only the account creation
> servers that are down.

Famous last words. Has it occured to you that Blizzard has lied
numerous times now?

During OB: We're very glad we're experiencing lag. This means we
can beter plan for launch.

During Launch: We'll have these issues solved soon, please bear
with us. Here are four days free.

One week after launch: We've disabled guilds on the high
population servers. Please disperse to the low population
servers.

A month after a launch: We're having login server issues. We'll
have this fixed momentarily.

One month and a half after launch: We'll have the login server
issues fixed soon.

Plenty of lies in between. If Blizzard tells the European players
they will have things fixed soon and they have nothing to worry
about then Blizzard is lying. You paid for the game and yet they
disabled activation of the product knowing very well how many
units they shipped.

Blizzard lies.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 11, 2005 11:59:27 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <slrnd0q75v.14fe.shadows@helena.whitefang.com>,
shadows <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote:

> ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
> On 2005-02-11, Saucey <johnmcdougall@BOLTBLUE.SPAMTRAP.com> wrote:
>
> > As far as this being a major issue I have to say it really isn't. Yes it's
> > very annoying and maybe even upsetting but it is only the account creation
> > servers that are down.

> Famous last words.

Are you saying that Blizzard is "going down"?

Care to make a wager?

I'll bet you a dollar and a public apology (this newsgroup will suffice)
that, two years from today, Blizzard is still going strong, and WoW is
many times bigger than it is now.

Offer stands for 30 days.

--
Nabuu, Tauren druid on Dethecus.
Also occasionally (rarely): Chum, Gnome warlock on Bronzebeard
<http://www.ManyFriends.com/WoW/PhotoAlbum/&gt;
Aka "Misc"
If you don't remove your pants, I won't get your email.
February 12, 2005 1:35:34 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-02-11, Nabuu <Nabuu@*YOUR-PANTS*ManyFriends.com> wrote:
> In article <slrnd0q75v.14fe.shadows@helena.whitefang.com>,
> shadows <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote:
>
>> ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
>> On 2005-02-11, Saucey <johnmcdougall@BOLTBLUE.SPAMTRAP.com> wrote:
>>
>> > As far as this being a major issue I have to say it really isn't. Yes it's
>> > very annoying and maybe even upsetting but it is only the account creation
>> > servers that are down.
>
>> Famous last words.
>
> Are you saying that Blizzard is "going down"?

No. I'm saying its YOUR famous last words. Everytime you act
positively when a company screws you you're just asking for more
screwing over.

> I'll bet you a dollar and a public apology (this newsgroup will suffice)
> that, two years from today, Blizzard is still going strong, and WoW is
> many times bigger than it is now.
>
> Offer stands for 30 days.

I have no doubt they will with 600k units sold in the US already.

Man you WoW fanbois are worse than the Troika fanbois.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 12, 2005 2:16:21 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Peter Meilinger <mellnger@bu.edu> writes:

> Or interest in trying it dies out completely. I know that's
> my reaction - if they couldn't even make the system work
> on the day they released the game, I'm not going to trust
> them much after they say everything is fine.

I was able to create an account at 15:00 CET with no problems - when
does the day end for you?
February 12, 2005 3:19:09 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-02-11, Firian <G.Booth@usm.edu> wrote:
> "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnd0q75v.14fe.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
>>
>> Plenty of lies in between. If Blizzard tells the European players
>> they will have things fixed soon and they have nothing to worry
>> about then Blizzard is lying. You paid for the game and yet they
>> disabled activation of the product knowing very well how many
>> units they shipped.
>>
>> Blizzard lies.
>
> You know, I've never understood why, if someone is so against something,
> they'd bother to be in a newsgroup devoted to it.

I post on comp.sys.ibm.pc.games not the wow newsgroup. Check all
my posts if you want. Now when you get a clue feel free to argue
rationaly.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 12, 2005 3:19:10 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
news:slrnd0qisd.14qu.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
> On 2005-02-11, Firian <G.Booth@usm.edu> wrote:
> > "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
> > news:slrnd0q75v.14fe.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
> >>
> >> Plenty of lies in between. If Blizzard tells the European players
> >> they will have things fixed soon and they have nothing to worry
> >> about then Blizzard is lying. You paid for the game and yet they
> >> disabled activation of the product knowing very well how many
> >> units they shipped.
> >>
> >> Blizzard lies.
> >
> > You know, I've never understood why, if someone is so against something,
> > they'd bother to be in a newsgroup devoted to it.
>
> I post on comp.sys.ibm.pc.games not the wow newsgroup. Check all

Hey, look! Posts! From you! In alt.games.warcraft!
http://tinyurl.com/6cy4m !

> my posts if you want. Now when you get a clue feel free to argue
> rationaly.

Good job of killing the cross-post. Now he won't see your response and it'll
look like you got the last word in. Is this the only way you can 'win'
arguments? Sorry, sorry, that was kind of rude, wasn't it? Let me try again...

WOW!!1! Great technique!! I'm gonna try that too!
*plonk*

RelMark

(No, I don't expect you to care what I think about you -- I'm just
a lurker after all -- but I've seen little of interest from you
recently and your rants are growing a bit tiresome, so...)
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 12, 2005 5:01:45 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <slrnd0q75v.14fe.shadows@helena.whitefang.com>,
shadows <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote:

> ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
> On 2005-02-11, Saucey <johnmcdougall@BOLTBLUE.SPAMTRAP.com> wrote:
>
> > As far as this being a major issue I have to say it really isn't. Yes it's
> > very annoying and maybe even upsetting but it is only the account creation
> > servers that are down.
>
> Famous last words. Has it occured to you that Blizzard has lied
> numerous times now?
>
> During OB: We're very glad we're experiencing lag. This means we
> can beter plan for launch.
>
> During Launch: We'll have these issues solved soon, please bear
> with us. Here are four days free.
>
> One week after launch: We've disabled guilds on the high
> population servers. Please disperse to the low population
> servers.
>
> A month after a launch: We're having login server issues. We'll
> have this fixed momentarily.
>
> One month and a half after launch: We'll have the login server
> issues fixed soon.
>
> Plenty of lies in between. If Blizzard tells the European players
> they will have things fixed soon and they have nothing to worry
> about then Blizzard is lying. You paid for the game and yet they
> disabled activation of the product knowing very well how many
> units they shipped.
>
> Blizzard lies.
>

I don't know about lying, but they need to take a serious look at the
people who build and maintain the servers. They *knew* there would be a
massive spike when the opened the doors in Europe, and to pull this
again...someone high up in their chain of command needs to be fired, or
demoted.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 12, 2005 11:15:19 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 11 Feb 2005 23:16:21 +0100, Tor Iver Wilhelmsen wrote:

> I was able to create an account at 15:00 CET with no problems - when
> does the day end for you?

Well, account creation was down from 3:30pm to nearly midnight, on the same
Friday the game had been released. That's bound to upset people who had to
go long ways or pay extra to get a copy of the game so that they could play
right on the first day.

M.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 12, 2005 1:22:16 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Nabuu wrote:
> In article <slrnd0q75v.14fe.shadows@helena.whitefang.com>,
> shadows <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote:
>>["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
>>On 2005-02-11, Saucey <johnmcdougall@BOLTBLUE.SPAMTRAP.com> wrote:
>>>As far as this being a major issue I have to say it really isn't. Yes it's
>>>very annoying and maybe even upsetting but it is only the account creation
>>>servers that are down.
>>
>>Famous last words.
>
> Are you saying that Blizzard is "going down"?
>
> Care to make a wager?

Actually, I think he was predicting that far more _servers_ would be
going down in the near future. And based on the US/Australia/NZ launch,
you'd be a blithering idiot if you wagered against _that_ proposition.

Cheers!
David...
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 12, 2005 10:34:23 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

RelMark wrote:
> "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnd0qisd.14qu.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
>>I post on comp.sys.ibm.pc.games not the wow newsgroup. Check all
>
> Hey, look! Posts! From you! In alt.games.warcraft!
> http://tinyurl.com/6cy4m !

lol.. that link brings up two posts, both of them using the Followup-To
header to drag a crossposted discussion AWAY from alt.games.warcraft.

Please, in future, if you get to the point of adding links to Usenet
posts to support your flames, make sure that the links actually SUPPORT
your flames.

Cheers!
David...
February 12, 2005 10:43:59 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-02-12, RelMark <bsmith77@dreamscape.com> wrote:
> "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
> news:slrnd0qisd.14qu.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
>> On 2005-02-11, Firian <G.Booth@usm.edu> wrote:
>> > "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
>> > news:slrnd0q75v.14fe.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
>> >>
>> >> Plenty of lies in between. If Blizzard tells the European players
>> >> they will have things fixed soon and they have nothing to worry
>> >> about then Blizzard is lying. You paid for the game and yet they
>> >> disabled activation of the product knowing very well how many
>> >> units they shipped.
>> >>
>> >> Blizzard lies.
>> >
>> > You know, I've never understood why, if someone is so against something,
>> > they'd bother to be in a newsgroup devoted to it.
>>
>> I post on comp.sys.ibm.pc.games not the wow newsgroup. Check all
>
> Hey, look! Posts! From you! In alt.games.warcraft!
> http://tinyurl.com/6cy4m !

Followups set to the rpg group. You're only half right.

> (No, I don't expect you to care what I think about you -- I'm just
> a lurker after all -- but I've seen little of interest from you
> recently and your rants are growing a bit tiresome, so...)

It's Usenet. You can't stop me from posting or moderate me
insofar as I'm not blatantly destructive. I'm discussing RPGs in
the RPG group. Please read EVERYTHING on usenet EXCEPT my
posts. That should solve your problem.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 12, 2005 10:48:17 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"Firian" <G.Booth@usm.edu> once tried to test me with:

><mike_noren2002@yahoo.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:1108150421.618124.23780@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>> Good grief!
>> Freezing account creation on the very day the game is released - what
>> a fiasco!
>>
>> Not that Blizzard cares much, nor their customers.
>
> It's hardly a fiasco. So you have to wait a day or two longer to play.
> The tsunami in the Indian Ocean was a fiasco.
>
> It's good strategy on Blizzard's part, actually...make something
> people want, but make it so they can't all get it at the same time and
> boom...interest in getting it increases even more.

Get a frickin' CLUE.

If they couldn't handle the load they shouldn't have released the game.
It's THAT SIMPLE.

This is just making Blizzard look like incompetent crack monkeys.

--

Knight37

The gene pool could use a little chlorine.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 12, 2005 11:01:04 PM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <Nabuu-522BD5.08451311022005@individual.net>, Nabuu wrote:
> ROFL! Ok, I was willing to shrug off "we had no idea this many people
> would sign-up" on Nov 23, and cut them some slack while they caught up.
>
> ...But not being prepared for *ANY* amount of load for the 2nd launch,
> almost 3 months later just shows a lack of... well... it's Not Too
> Smart(tm).

Here's how MMORPG companies should handle launch.

1. Put a soft limit on the number of characters that can be created on each
server. When a server is at the soft limit, you can only create a character
on that server if you receive an invitation from someone already on the
server.

2. The servers should be divided into groups that share the player
namespace. E.g., if you launch with 20 servers, group them as 5 groups of 4
severs. If someone makes a character on one server in a group, that locks
out that name on the other servers in that group. The idea here is that
this makes it easy to balance the server populations by offering character
transfers between the servers in a group. As you bring more servers online,
you add them to the most crowded groups.

3. When things have settled down, you can break up the server groups and
remove the name restrictions.

--
--Tim Smith
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 13, 2005 6:36:01 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> once tried to test me with:

> In article <Nabuu-522BD5.08451311022005@individual.net>, Nabuu wrote:
>> ROFL! Ok, I was willing to shrug off "we had no idea this many
>> people would sign-up" on Nov 23, and cut them some slack while they
>> caught up.
>>
>> ...But not being prepared for *ANY* amount of load for the 2nd
>> launch, almost 3 months later just shows a lack of... well... it's
>> Not Too Smart(tm).
>
> Here's how MMORPG companies should handle launch.
>
> 1. Put a soft limit on the number of characters that can be created on
> each server. When a server is at the soft limit, you can only create
> a character on that server if you receive an invitation from someone
> already on the server.

I think this is an excellent idea, except for the fact that they may have
n servers and a soft-limit of y on each one, but have way more than n times
y people trying to create accounts. In that case, they just fubared the
launch, they should have either had more capacity or limited the number of
boxes on the shelves.

> 2. The servers should be divided into groups that share the player
> namespace. E.g., if you launch with 20 servers, group them as 5
> groups of 4 severs. If someone makes a character on one server in a
> group, that locks out that name on the other servers in that group.
> The idea here is that this makes it easy to balance the server
> populations by offering character transfers between the servers in a
> group. As you bring more servers online, you add them to the most
> crowded groups.
>
> 3. When things have settled down, you can break up the server groups
> and remove the name restrictions.

I don't think the names are the issue with regard to moving characters. I'd
gladly suffer a name change if I could move to a server that never had lag
but still had a high enough population that it was easy to find groups.

--

Knight37

The gene pool could use a little chlorine.
February 13, 2005 8:43:03 AM

Archived from groups: alt.games.warcraft,comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
On 2005-02-12, Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> In article <Nabuu-522BD5.08451311022005@individual.net>, Nabuu wrote:
>> ROFL! Ok, I was willing to shrug off "we had no idea this many people
>> would sign-up" on Nov 23, and cut them some slack while they caught up.
>>
>> ...But not being prepared for *ANY* amount of load for the 2nd launch,
>> almost 3 months later just shows a lack of... well... it's Not Too
>> Smart(tm).
>
> Here's how MMORPG companies should handle launch.
>
> 1. Put a soft limit on the number of characters that can be created on each
> server. When a server is at the soft limit, you can only create a character
> on that server if you receive an invitation from someone already on the
> server.

This isn't some free service from google that should be
organically grown. I want to create a character, login, and
play. Afterall I'm paying for the service.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 13, 2005 9:41:47 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

shadows wrote:
> ["Followup-To:" header set to comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg.]
> On 2005-02-12, Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>>1. Put a soft limit on the number of characters that can be created on each
>>server. When a server is at the soft limit, you can only create a character
>>on that server if you receive an invitation from someone already on the
>>server.
>
> This isn't some free service from google that should be
> organically grown. I want to create a character, login, and
> play. Afterall I'm paying for the service.

And what part of his suggestion would prevent you from creating a
character, logging in, and playing? Read it again, paying attention to
the "on that server" clause.

Cheers!
David...
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 13, 2005 9:41:48 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

David Carson <david@eldergothSPAMTRAP.com> once tried to test me with:

> And what part of his suggestion would prevent you from creating a
> character, logging in, and playing? Read it again, paying attention to
> the "on that server" clause.

The part where they didn't create enough servers to handle the load, so
when the music stops, SOMEONE is going to be left without a chair.

--

Knight37

The gene pool could use a little chlorine.
February 13, 2005 9:41:49 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-02-13, Knight37 <knight37m@email.com> wrote:
> David Carson <david@eldergothSPAMTRAP.com> once tried to test me with:
>
>> And what part of his suggestion would prevent you from creating a
>> character, logging in, and playing? Read it again, paying attention to
>> the "on that server" clause.
>
> The part where they didn't create enough servers to handle the load, so
> when the music stops, SOMEONE is going to be left without a chair.
>

Yes. What happens when all servers hit the soft limit?

Also why the inconvenience? As it stands right now every MMO on
the planet has been able to handle the load and deliver patches
directly to the customer. Blizzard has done neither.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 14, 2005 5:47:44 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

In article <slrnd0uvt9.1a18.shadows@helena.whitefang.com>, shadows wrote:
> Yes. What happens when all servers hit the soft limit?

They'd raise the soft limit on the lowest population servers. The idea
behind the soft limit is to get new players onto the lowest population
servers, unless they already have friends on a higher population server and
want to play with those friends.

> Also why the inconvenience? As it stands right now every MMO on the planet
> has been able to handle the load and deliver patches directly to the
> customer. Blizzard has done neither.

No other MMORPG has had as high a fraction of their players online at once
as WoW. DAoC peaks at about 10% of their players online, down from 20% a
few months ago. On Everquest, they were proud enough to hit 100k online
(about 25% of accounts) that they did a game-wide broadcast announcing it.

WoW is getting around 33% of accounts online at once.

The peak loads on WoW work out to about 2800 players per server. If that
was evenly distributed among the server, I'd expect them to have no problem
with the load. That's why my soft limit and name reservation in server
groups system would have been good for them.

--
--Tim Smith
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 14, 2005 11:43:28 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

Knight37 wrote:
> David Carson <david@eldergothSPAMTRAP.com> once tried to test me with:
>>And what part of his suggestion would prevent you from creating a
>>character, logging in, and playing? Read it again, paying attention to
>>the "on that server" clause.
>
> The part where they didn't create enough servers to handle the load, so
> when the music stops, SOMEONE is going to be left without a chair.

Well if they don't buy enough servers, that's obviously going to be a
problem with or without his suggestion, which deals with the fair and
efficient distribution of players within those servers. A task which
Blizzard has failed pretty spectacularly at. So again, what part of his
suggestion would prevent you from creating a character, logging in, and
playing?

Cheers!
David...
February 14, 2005 12:10:22 PM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

On 2005-02-14, Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
> In article <slrnd0uvt9.1a18.shadows@helena.whitefang.com>, shadows wrote:
>> Yes. What happens when all servers hit the soft limit?
>
> They'd raise the soft limit on the lowest population servers. The idea
> behind the soft limit is to get new players onto the lowest population
> servers, unless they already have friends on a higher population server and
> want to play with those friends.

I suppose. Then again guilds sometimes come in hundreds of
players so this may not work.
Anonymous
a b Ý World of Warcraft
February 15, 2005 2:49:38 AM

Archived from groups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.games.rpg (More info?)

"David Carson" <david@eldergothSPAMTRAP.com> wrote in message
news:420dbf9f$0$90916$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com...
> RelMark wrote:
> > "shadows" <shadows@whitefang.com> wrote in message
> > news:slrnd0qisd.14qu.shadows@helena.whitefang.com...
> >>I post on comp.sys.ibm.pc.games not the wow newsgroup. Check all
> >
> > Hey, look! Posts! From you! In alt.games.warcraft!
> > http://tinyurl.com/6cy4m !
>
> lol.. that link brings up two posts, both of them using the Followup-To
> header to drag a crossposted discussion AWAY from alt.games.warcraft.

I wouldn't have phrased it quite that way, but yes.
Nonetheless, they're still posts to agw, which he said he doesn't post to.
</nitpicking>

> Please, in future, if you get to the point of adding links to Usenet
> posts to support your flames, make sure that the links actually SUPPORT
> your flames.

Hrm. The link supported the point I *thought* I was making...

I fear I don't have much of an aptitude for this; I usually end up feeling
rather foolish on the rare occasions that I indulge in posts of this sort.

RelMark
!