Trying to "fix" Av - Page 2

Axelrod · 05/14/07, 9:36 PM

I thought about making a post about AV, but I guess someone else did it!

Anyway, my thoughts:

1. Horde starting point should be pulled back closer to the Frostwolf base. Horde always reach and cap Stonehearth graveyard before Alliance can even reach Field of Strife. On the other end of the stick, Horde always end up respawning at the cave when the first Horde GY is taken and the natural order of play in PUG AV's is to not even look south of the cave if you're Horde. Pulling the cave further south would fix all the problems mentioned above.

2. EOTS style capping.

3. Revamp resource driven events. Can't even finish capturing frostwolves before the game ends anymore. Cap a frostwolf stable similar to Arathi Basin style and just let the NPC's acquire their own resources over time. A display on top shows how long before frostwolf reinforcements come. Same case with capturing the mine and have that elite zerg show up as well.

4. Bombing runs. This is more experimental, but if we could capture a gryphon or wyvern roost and start bombing the main base, Halaa-style, I think it would be pretty cool.

5. Group queues. Battlegroups are here, let the group-only AV's commence.

6. Move Snowfall GY more towards the center of the field. Not fought over enough and it's in the Alliance natural path of advancement towards Galv.

AndrewCarr · 05/14/07, 10:50 PM

The reason I like AV but have grown bored with all the other BGs is because it offers some semblance of large scale PvP, akin to Tarren Mill raids. I'd like to see it returned to day long battles tbh and gain fun at the cost of honor farming.

Remove all the NPCs. This is PvP, not PvE. While NPCs can provide a nice random element to many encounters(i.e. getting 3 mobs to aggro someone in world pvp), this just barely happens. It clutters the instance and makes AV too much about fighting AI.

Raise the player cap immensely(if possible) and reintroduce group queueing.. 40v40 is alright, but the map can support so much more(not sure if the servers can). I'd think something along the lines of 200v200 would be better. This will give you the numbers to have large battles for the middle, large battles for the bases, the towers, etc. without it sucking up all the players in the instance. However, to avoid bottlenecking and creating huge field of strife slaughters(fun, but not too dynamic) cutting down on the choke points would be necessary.

The DB bridge, IB, etc., should all have multiple approaches like SP GY does. They shouldn't be equal. One should be all uphill, dismount players, make them jump off cliffs(a la SP), swim underwater, provide the defenders with a proximity buff, etc., but there should be alternatives.

For victory conditions, there might not even need to be one set condition. Maybe just have it like it is now with bonus honor(per LT, per Tower, etc.) but have those points be continual. Like we cap IB tower. 30mins later horde caps it(after defending it for 5mins) and gains points again, etc.

Shadowed · 05/15/07, 12:29 AM

It's mind boggling that people keep suggesting EoTS style so this needs to be explained more. First off, lets start by saying, pugs are idiots.

Arathi Basin was great because you needed skills and tatics to win, you could not leave a node unguarded or it would be taken, even with 1-2 guarding it still had a chance to be captured by a smart Rogue or abusing engineering items.

Eye of the Storm however requires no skill and you just need to know how to zerg, since the match can't be ended in 3m with a 4 cap you have no reason to really guard since it can't be "ninjaed" you just have to either zerg another one or go zerg to defend.

While in AB you could zerg to a victory it was far harder to be effective and you could still ninja nodes and had an actual reason to guard and call out. Pugs like EoTS better specifically because you don't have to think and the rest of your teammtaes can fail at PvP and still win.

EoTS in AV would be horrible and would just kill the battleground.

• Snowy · 05/15/07, 12:51 AM

The problem in AV is there's very little incentive to do PvP. Personally I love trying to defend the different towers, but what does it really accomplish in the end? Very little. I'm not advocating changing the NPCs back to AV 1.0 difficulty, but right now they're a pushover.

Kinv · 05/15/07, 1:35 AM

Originally Posted by Shadowed

It's mind boggling that people keep suggesting EoTS style so this needs to be explained more. First off, lets start by saying, pugs are idiots.

Arathi Basin was great because you needed skills and tatics to win, you could not leave a node unguarded or it would be taken, even with 1-2 guarding it still had a chance to be captured by a smart Rogue or abusing engineering items.

Eye of the Storm however requires no skill and you just need to know how to zerg, since the match can't be ended in 3m with a 4 cap you have no reason to really guard since it can't be "ninjaed" you just have to either zerg another one or go zerg to defend.

While in AB you could zerg to a victory it was far harder to be effective and you could still ninja nodes and had an actual reason to guard and call out. Pugs like EoTS better specifically because you don't have to think and the rest of your teammtaes can fail at PvP and still win.

EoTS in AV would be horrible and would just kill the battleground.

I dont know what AB you played... but playing grp v grp AB there wasn't any "ninja caps" because people weren't paying attention... AB was all who brought mages to AE on the flags, which team got the luckiest w/ the GY respawns to AE once and reset the cap timer, and once in awhile whos Rocket helm/MC cap lasted long enough to cap on 2 people. There was a massive reason that WSG was always the prefered BG for competitive play.

Ngita · 05/15/07, 2:21 AM

Originally Posted by Kinv

I dont know what AB you played... but playing grp v grp AB there wasn't any "ninja caps" because people weren't paying attention... AB was all who brought mages to AE on the flags, which team got the luckiest w/ the GY respawns to AE once and reset the cap timer, and once in awhile whos Rocket helm/MC cap lasted long enough to cap on 2 people. There was a massive reason that WSG was always the prefered BG for competitive play.

Considering we both play on Bloodlust I would have to disagree. Killing 1 person, fearing another before reinforcements arrived was definitly do-able as the delight of our team of 2 rogues capping the flag while Horde were distracted at that very same flag.

Running WSG meant the massive annoyance factor of Blackrock Horde tactics and we allways preferred to get the extra people and go to AB if possible. Just the difference between Alliance and Horde in the same BG.

The difference between AV and other battlegrounds? Pug AV gives you the chance to feel you made a difference. Where as AB and WSG superior communication,feedback and tactics are greater than individual skill, making AV queuable as a group would soon reduce it to mostly played by groups and give individual skill less meaning.

Shadowed · 05/15/07, 3:11 AM

Recklessness, kill 2 people.
Fear bomb
Sap/Blind
MC Cap
Rocket Helm

ect, like every class had a way to ninja from 1-2 people, and most groups only left 1-2 on things like Farm.

diotox · 05/15/07, 5:12 AM

They need to make it random which side of the map you have to fight for so alliance can see firsthand how ridiculous their base is to get into. The horde archers barely shoot anything, meanwhile all 8 archers at both dun baldar bunkers have a damn near full capacity to fire on anyone between halfway across the bridge, all the way up to the aid station flag. They just mow people down surprisingly fast, especially cloth. Then look at all the other random NPCs past the bridge. Mountaineer Boombellow standing right at the end of the bridge, the commander that walks between the 2 bunkers, corporal whateverhisnameis standing near the south bunker, the entire blacksmith area with those 4-5 NPCs, and then the actual flag guards. All this is pretty awful even with 0 alliance resistance. God forbid alliance actually leave anyone at all behind to play defense, particularly any skilled hunters or druids that sit there knocking people off the aid station flag all day while horde gets murdered by NPCs.

I really don't think there is any way to fix AV really. People want to grind the fastest honor possible, and there are no incentives to play defense, in fact playing defense is counterproductive. Maybe if they threw out diminishing returns on honor from kills, people might not mind having those stalemate zerg vs. zerg games with lots of kills rolling in. I don't know, but regardless, they need to bring PvP back into AV instead of the PvE zone that it is now.

sp00n · 05/15/07, 5:31 AM

Originally Posted by Snowy

The problem in AV is there's very little incentive to do PvP. Personally I love trying to defend the different towers, but what does it really accomplish in the end? Very little. I'm not advocating changing the NPCs back to AV 1.0 difficulty, but right now they're a pushover.

20 bonus honor and one less guard for your side / one more for the opposite faction.
I've found defending attacked towers to be one of the key points of an AV match.

The usual pug just cannot handle a stonehearth + 2 dun baldar pull.

Too bad too little people actually do this.

// edit

Maybe if they threw out diminishing returns on honor from kills, people might not mind having those stalemate zerg vs. zerg games with lots of kills rolling in.

Actually they already changed this from 4 kills/day to 10 kills/day.

Legend · 05/15/07, 5:31 AM

Originally Posted by AndrewCarr

I'd think something along the lines of 200v200 would be better.

Yes, I'd totally love to see Grid blocking the lower half of my screen...

Thelyna · 05/15/07, 5:45 AM

If they went that way I think they're be more likely to have multiple raid groups inside the one AV instance. Coordination would be a nightmare, not to mention the fact they're not going to spend that much time tooling around with an old, unbalanced and problematic battleground.

Moos3d · 05/15/07, 6:00 AM

I agree with the sentiment that one of the biggest problems is the lack of actual PvP. I usually stick to defending because until you're fighting war masters and Drek, there isn't really anything to heal. It's all standing around and fighting trivial NPCs and killing of the one or two horde who aren't on offense. As much as I don't want 5+ hour AVs again, atleast you were actually doing something when you were in them.

Drully · 05/15/07, 6:20 AM

Originally Posted by Ngita

Considering we both play on Bloodlust I would have to disagree. Killing 1 person, fearing another before reinforcements arrived was definitly do-able as the delight of our team of 2 rogues capping the flag while Horde were distracted at that very same flag.

In highly competetive ABs, it was all about the initial encounter at the blacksmith. The side that got it, won the AB in 90% of the cases. If you have good deff tactics, it is almost impossible to break the classic triangel. Our ususal set up was 4 3 2, with 6 deffers waiting mounted on epics at the crossing, and no more leaving the crossing, than are needed to support a attacked flag.
Even wih blind, sap fear or what ever you can not tap, because a mage or hunter will be there in no time interrupting.

This is the reason why I loved AB so much, it was a bigger arena fight (10 v 10) at the blacksmith, and you could be sure its over after 30 minutes, or so.
WS was a mess, the team with the most dudus won, or even worse, it toke 1h because of deff and hiding tactics...

back to topic:

Originally Posted by Monsanto

I like EoTS. Not because of the game itself, but because it's the best battleground to get in some good small-scale fights.

Anyways, concerning AV, you really have to specify what you are trying to fix. Is it afkers? Is it map imbalances?

There's always going to be a background level of afkers. This is because people need to grind honor for gear. For starters, that gets to you after a while. You need a break. But afking is a way to maximize your honor in your downtime, while you watch a movie or do laundry. Unethical? Probably, but that's how the world turns. Or some people might not even be taking a break, they might be doing that all the time without ever playing. Again, it's unethical but that's the way the world turns.

One observation of mine though, is that faction imbalances lead to more AFKers. I don't know if you guys remember the very old AVs with more guards. But in those days Horde used to win an overwhelming majority of the time. In those days, it was the alliance who were afking. The lake on the road to Stormpike was full of alliance fishing. There were still Horde afkers of course, but they were far fewer in numbers.

The modern AV hugely favors the alliance, and that observation is reversed. You probably have 10-15 horde on average that are afk in the tunnel, while the alliance have much fewer.

So my point is that faction imbalances engender even more afking. I think the historical beating that the Horde layed on the Alliance has been more than rectified, and now it's time to push for greater parity. Most of it is geography, natural chokepoints, and how you funnel unorganized masses of horde into a natural defense like the alliance have at Stormpike Graveyard.

Some of the ideas that immediately pop into my head:
-Change the location of the Iceblood Graveyard flag so the horde have to pass it on their way out. That creates a natural defense using unorganized players.
-Same for Frostwolf, though it's not nearly as bad here.
-Make the tower in the horde base dismount people again.
-Move the horde towers so they actually do something. As it stands, people get shot like twice on their way to the relief hut and that's it. Horde get pelted by numerous archers for 800 a hit (on cloth) and that lasts pretty much indefinitely.
-Move horde NPCs so that they aggro alliance as they rush the GY. It's pretty gay that I have to fight Lana Thunderbrew, the Stablemaster, etc. etc. while the alliance get a free run through our base.

Alternatively, you can just do the reverse to the alliance resources. Things like moving Lana Thunderbrew and her gang of 5 friends away from the path leading to the Aid Station. In fact, that might be a preferable option because fast games discourage AFKers as well.

I can sign that post with the exception of "-Make the tower in the horde base dismount people again." That was ridicolous, i remember deffing the horde castle with 10 deffers vs. 40 alliance players a whole night till they gave up...
Obviously alliance has a deff advantage right now, which should be fixed.
I also like the idea of switching sides, that would be perfect...

Zagzil · 05/15/07, 7:17 AM

Easiest way to fix AV:

1. Set up a ladder / ranking system (ala Arena)
2. Group-queue only
3. Give some tangible reward for leading the AV ladder to guilds

Making AV about guild vs. guild PvP would be pretty interesting, and at least some people would get some enjoyment out of it, rather than right now.

Randor · 05/15/07, 7:35 AM

1) set up a timer for WSG and AV: 30 minutes in WSG, 2 hours in AV. A tie gives half honor to both teams.

2) delete EotS. Combing worst elements of the other BGs.

3) For AV, set up certain things needed to summon bosses. For instance, you need to kill 1k of the opponent, own so many GYs, destroyed so many towers for the final bosses to even spawn. That would eliminate some of the rushing but with the time limit, prevent turtles.

4) Base honor given on participation. Doesn't have to be pure kills or whatnot (so healers and non-casters can share the wealth) but eliminate afkers and those standing/hiding (I'd implement a penalty if I could for those).

5) make AV 60-69 and 70 range.

6) introduce some new elements. Taking some hints from Nagrand would be a nice start.