Welcome to Crestfall Gaming

Register now to Crestfall Gaming. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Vengyr

Quest item respawns

63 posts in this topic

I believe most of the people voicing for a reduced spawn-timer are talking about those "unique" quest-gameobject that would otherwise "block" the players in a queue around them (not really a queue...is it?).

 

As you say, "collect 10 sacks" type of quest shouldn't have instant-respawn-times...maybe lower than "blizzlike" (dynamic may be good)...or maybe "more" spawn-points around (just for a short period, at launch?).

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, mrmr said:

I believe most of the people voicing for a reduced spawn-timer are talking about those "unique" quest-gameobject that would otherwise "block" the players in a queue around them (not really a queue...is it?).

 

As you say, "collect 10 sacks" type of quest shouldn't have instant-respawn-times...maybe lower than "blizzlike" (dynamic may be good)...or maybe "more" spawn-points around (just for a short period, at launch?).

Obviously.

I'd even agree that collecting those sacks with large respawn holds some thoughtput as you try to go to less contested type of spawn spots, or even monitor several of those if possible. That might be not the fun gameplay, but it involves brains so I am all up for it.

Camping one spot and spamclicking is not, noone will persuade me otherwise.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

didnt Mark Kern post something about this question in Discord? who has the screenshot of that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14. Januar 2017 at 2:10 PM, mrmr said:

Understand you can't re-create vanilla with the double-intended population for the game-world.

Infact, Azeroth was aimed at 3.0k/3.5k players, NOT 6k....and seems like "our" realms will have a 6k cap.

 

Most probably those "timers" were fine tuned for such a population....also considering that not everyone would follow a quest-guide.

 

So, yeah, 500 player in a starting zone VS 1000 players makes a HUGE difference...also considering how players now DO NOT wander around looking at the landscape, but quest no-stop.

Maybe, as a short addition to the expected population cap: I remember the team saying, that as soon as the population online reaches around 5000 people and shows the impulse to grow even further (it's mainly the impulse that matters - in economics/math you would talk about the gradient of a curve), they will bring up a new server to counteract the growing population.

So it is kind of problematic to argue with 6000 ppl, because the server team does use the space from 5000 to 6000 to react in time on this growth. Therefore a 6000-player-online-scenario as well as the beginning of queues might not even be reached once. And so, maybe the highest stable online numbers to expect are between 4500 and 5000.

I know, it's not that big of a thing, but i sometimes get the feeling, that we for the sake of simplicity overlook this aspect when discussing :).

 

Greetings

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Polyphem said:

 maybe the highest stable online numbers to expect are between 4500 and 5000.

Doesn't change the fact that a number like that would represent kinda the double of the "average populated" blizzard server.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, mrmr said:

Doesn't change the fact that a number like that would represent kinda the double of the "average populated" blizzard server.

It slightly alterates it. But from a general point of view it doesn't turn your statement upside down, yes :). But that was, as stated by me, not even my intention.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This main issue will be in the game for the first 2-3 days, then the population will spread out so there won't be delays anymore.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 14. 1. 2017 at 4:23 PM, loeth said:

When verbosing about blizzlike bullshit, please be specific if you mean either blizzlike experience (which means dynaimc respawns in case of pop > pop_blizz) or blizzlike resource densities.

I mean 1x XP rates and no custom NPCs.

... that's what it used to mean back in my day and I'm sticking to it!

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Xaverius said:

I mean 1x XP rates and no custom NPCs.

... that's what it used to mean back in my day and I'm sticking to it!

"Now get off my lawn you gnome !"

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry to necro but this was one of the big posts that came up searching for dynamic respawn.

Without a very very strong dynamic respawn for quest mobs especially the 0/1 named ones, you will have hundreds of people standing on top of each other tab spamming an instant cast. The best way to level will be to do no actual quests and just grind. That isn't blizzlike. That isn't fun.

There is no point talking about classic server max population because that population was spread out and top heavy at 60. The first 3 days of cf will have that entire population doing the same 15 quests, it isn't even comparable.

For orc horde sarkoth, the burning blade dude, the human captain dude, the island troll dude, bristleboar guys.. you are just tab spamming hoping to get a tag instead of actually enjoying the leveling process. The centaur quest and troll skulls quest in the first 7 levels are difficult normally, but with 3000 people they will be the best quests because you can walk up, take the item, and leave, because every single mob within 2 zones will be instantly slaughtered.

It would be nice if questing was the fastest way to 60, but without crazy dynamic respawn for the first 30 levels.. it isn't. It shouldn't come down to " no big deal I'll just take 3 days off work grind 20 hours sleep 5 grind 20 then I will be ahead of the curve!"

Don't even get me started on mining and herbalism.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

17 minutes ago, Ssaya said:

Sorry to necro but this was one of the big posts that came up searching for dynamic respawn.

Without a very very strong dynamic respawn for quest mobs especially the 0/1 named ones, you will have hundreds of people standing on top of each other tab spamming an instant cast. The best way to level will be to do no actual quests and just grind. That isn't blizzlike. That isn't fun.

There is no point talking about classic server max population because that population was spread out and top heavy at 60. The first 3 days of cf will have that entire population doing the same 15 quests, it isn't even comparable.

For orc horde sarkoth, the burning blade dude, the human captain dude, the island troll dude, bristleboar guys.. you are just tab spamming hoping to get a tag instead of actually enjoying the leveling process. The centaur quest and troll skulls quest in the first 7 levels are difficult normally, but with 3000 people they will be the best quests because you can walk up, take the item, and leave, because every single mob within 2 zones will be instantly slaughtered.

It would be nice if questing was the fastest way to 60, but without crazy dynamic respawn for the first 30 levels.. it isn't. It shouldn't come down to " no big deal I'll just take 3 days off work grind 20 hours sleep 5 grind 20 then I will be ahead of the curve!"

Don't even get me started on mining and herbalism.

dont ask me why but id actually prefer having to wait for respawns, even for sarkoth

also you can just wait a week after release and itll be alot easier if you really care that much

Edited by Aquane
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

On 1/14/2017 at 6:10 AM, mrmr said:

Understand you can't re-create vanilla with the double-intended population for the game-world.

Infact, Azeroth was aimed at 3.0k/3.5k players, NOT 6k....and seems like "our" realms will have a 6k cap.

 

Most probably those "timers" were fine tuned for such a population....also considering that not everyone would follow a quest-guide.

 

So, yeah, 500 player in a starting zone VS 1000 players makes a HUGE difference...also considering how players now DO NOT wander around looking at the landscape, but quest no-stop.

you gotta dig even deeper then this..... when they intended on 3-3.5k people on a server, they always  assumed those people would stagger in a few at a time 15 or so an hour spread out over 6 starting zones..... not  "SERVER IS LIVE 1000 spawn into mulgor"

Edited by Xaywynn
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Oh, I remember doing A Refugee's Quandary quest in Dun Morog with like 20 people per item spot. We all stood in a circle and waited to show one another who's the fastest gun in the West mouse-cliker in Dun Morogh. If your ping is less than ideal - you're out of luck pal, prepare to stand there and stare at the ground for an hour at least. These little moments can be fun too... but they aren't, really.

Edited by Shady_Lizard
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0