Note: I started this season in pure greens on my alt warrior before I mained him for PvE. I slowly worked my way up through the rankings, while picking up a few pieces of PvE gear on the side. Started a team with 3 alts on it, and we got up to 2032 in 5v5. The Armory
So, you are an excellent pvper, and your team works very well together.(Consider the guild you are from, it is not very surprising) Congratulations!
But using ONE to sample HUNDREDs is never the correct way in the grand scheme of things
Especially when the one sample is an alt wearing a bunch of BT gear. I also wonder how much your rise up the rank happened when you picked up some of that BT gear. That is a big thing that factors in. For the guilds raiding and clearing T5 and T6 they can get amazing gear that is very competitive with S1/S2 gear until they get more S2 gear. Especially in the case of a warrior.
Spell haste + 4pc t5 as a paladin pretty much annihilates any other choices for arena gear. Key is getting into a team where you won't be focused first (resto sham/hunter on my team)
HLs under 1.6s put out pretty insane HPS, factor in bloodlust and it literally isn't possible to outburst my healing.
Spell haste + 4pc t5 as a paladin pretty much annihilates any other choices for arena gear. Key is getting into a team where you won't be focused first (resto sham/hunter on my team)
HLs under 1.6s put out pretty insane HPS, factor in bloodlust and it literally isn't possible to outburst my healing.
That is why everyone is playing gib or mana burn teams these days. You need to either kill someone before the CS wears off or wait until the pally is OOM. Unless they nerf pallies more, games are going to be very "interesting" when pallies in BT gear start showing up in force.
The vast majority of arena teams do not take it seriously, don't build the proper team/spec, and don't stick to it long enough to be geared up. Yeah, 5% are above 1900, what % is actually attempting to be competitive? They're trying to inject a proper difficulty-related progression to PvP. We're not talking Illidan vs Kara geared raiders here. The difference between a team decked out in season X gear but with the previous seasons weapons is not huge when compared to those that do have the weapon, and is not going to come anywhere close to breaking you when you are below 1900. People aren't going to suddenly stop PvPing when they get can 5 pc + ranged, and have to settle for a slightly inferior weapon.
I know when you play somewhere near the top for a while, your perspective gets skewed and I know I have to often take a step back when considering PvE and the "average raider", but the arena is completely different since thus far you can do so much without trying. I mean, I took a shitty combo (rogue/pal) with a rogue using blue daggers and bonescythe a few weeks ago and got it to 1750. Two weeks ago I put together a 5v5 made of half-alts mostly without PvP gear and subbing in that badly geared rogue and we made 1900 in a week. We're constantly making HUGE mistakes and (me aside) have a long way to go with gear. So I end up baffled when people bring up how hard it is to get to 1900. I'm not saying just throwing the right classes together will get you there, but by the time your team that started at 1500 has played together a few months and has most of their armor, they definitely should be able to make a stab at 1900.
The number really does need to be scaled back for smaller BGs though.
I have 9800 hp, 340 resilience, 770 spell damage in my pvp set. I have close to 50k lifetime kills, did the grind to Commander. I use keybindings. I understand the limitations of my toon with 120 days /played. I know how to gear and spec for pve and pvp, and I k now how to play my toon. I am fully willing to admit there are a lot of people who are far, far better than me, but I don't think I suck.
And if you found people with similar gear/experience that synergized with a mage (say, a rogue/priest/mage 3v3), I bet you would easily break 1900. Is it wrong for the very best weapons to require people to take things seriously and make a proper team?
The fact that we can hold down #1 on a middle of the road BG while not being amazing players reinforces that thought at least to me.
Transfer to BG9.
All this talk of some TOTALLY FICTIONAL 1900 NUMBER THAT HAS NO BASIS IN REALITY being "easy for everyone who isn't a failed abortion" is pretty discouraging for.... 95% of the people who play wow, and probably 30% of the people who read this board.
With that being said, that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it, but I'll just defer back to the various people in my guild with 2k+ ratings, who are the best PvP'rs my server has to offer, and I listen to them when they talk about how gnarly that tier of arena is, and how it can come down to -one- screw up on the other teams behalf.
All that being said, 1900 is a number some guy pulled out of his ass. Unless someone has confirmed that THAT IS THE NUMBER TO END ALL NUMBERS people should stop getting hung up on what % of what BG's will never see some gear. The fact remains that YOU'RE GOOD AT WOW if you can get that rating. Skill > Gear, so go pat yourself on the back, but you're pulling an ostrich if you think that anyone that can't get 1900 (for example) sucks and should quit the game.
You are correct. So far this is fictional. And given how they handed out titles last season I think it would be a percentage anyway. So lets turn this into something useful. What percentage requirement would people be comfortable with?
For me it would have to be top 20% or so. Enough to weed out the "lose 10 games a week for great epics" crowd but not a prohibitive bar. If you are at the bottom end of that range, especially in the smaller brackets, it will take you ages anyway to get the weapons.
Originally Posted by probiscus
Transfer to BG9.
All this talk of some TOTALLY FICTIONAL 1900 NUMBER THAT HAS NO BASIS IN REALITY being "easy for everyone who isn't a failed abortion" is pretty discouraging for.... 95% of the people who play wow, and probably 30% of the people who read this board.
With that being said, that's your opinion, and you're entitled to it, but I'll just defer back to the various people in my guild with 2k+ ratings, who are the best PvP'rs my server has to offer, and I listen to them when they talk about how gnarly that tier of arena is, and how it can come down to -one- screw up on the other teams behalf.
All that being said, 1900 is a number some guy pulled out of his ass. Unless someone has confirmed that THAT IS THE NUMBER TO END ALL NUMBERS people should stop getting hung up on what % of what BG's will never see some gear. The fact remains that YOU'RE GOOD AT WOW if you can get that rating. Skill > Gear, so go pat yourself on the back, but you're pulling an ostrich if you think that anyone that can't get 1900 (for example) sucks and should quit the game.
You are correct. So far this is fictional. And given how they handed out titles last season I think it would be a percentage anyway. So lets turn this into something useful. What percentage requirement would people be comfortable with?
For me it would have to be top 20% or so. Enough to weed out the "lose 10 games a week for great epics" crowd but not a prohibitive bar. If you are at the bottom end of that range, especially in the smaller brackets, it will take you ages anyway to get the weapons.
But isn't it the existence of the bottom 80%, striving for an awesome weapon at an awe inspiring 300 point per week clip, that makes it possible for the number of teams in the top 20% to maintain their high ratings. What happens when you take away the incentives for those people to play? Fewer crappy teams at the bottom means fewer people to beat to boost the ratings of all the people who think they are good...
Could just make it easy and do "Requires Challenger / Rival / Duelist / Gladiator title to purchase".
That way anyone who had those titles at the end of the previous season would have access to the weapon, and it limits people from repeatedly joining teams of 1900+ rating to get the weapon.
As I said earlier, the problem mainly stems from frontloading. You get to transfer some points over. So you can get the weapons day 1 of the season. I don't think anybody would have complained if the 80% crowd got their weapons now. But they got them the day the season started, long before most guilds had access to equivalent raiding gear.
They could not allow you to transfer points, but then the ladders would be pretty dead at the end of the season. So its really about the lesser evil.
Originally Posted by Cwealm
But isn't it the existence of the bottom 80%, striving for an awesome weapon at an awe inspiring 300 point per week clip, that makes it possible for the number of teams in the top 20% to maintain their high ratings. What happens when you take away the incentives for those people to play? Fewer crappy teams at the bottom means fewer people to beat to boost the ratings of all the people who think they are good...
The problem is that currently 100% of arena population have access to weapons less than 5% of the raiding population has a chance to get. So Blizzards solution (a rating limitation) seems like a good option, within reason. Rating limitations match the PvE performance of the battlegroup.
I think what needs to be discussed is scope, not whether stupid artificial limitations (like AP that only effects mobs) should be used. The main issues I can see are:
- Why should 1900+ rating users (upto 20% of arena populations) have access to weapons less than 2% of the raiding community have access to?
- If Blizzard is intending to balance classes around 5v5 Arenas, why should those in 2v2 or 3v3 have the same level of access?
- Why should the restriction only apply to weapons?
These question the intent of arenas and everyone has a different interpretation.
- If Blizzard is intending to balance classes around 5v5 Arenas, why should those in 2v2 or 3v3 have the same level of access?
- Why should the restriction only apply to weapons?
These question the intent of arenas and everyone has a different interpretation.
No, the answer to these questions is obvious and has been stated many times. Apply a rating restriction to all items and watch arena completely collapse within weeks. And no, I am not exaggerating.
Also, where did you get the idea that classes are balanced around 5v5?
Yeah the clear answer to that is no one likes getting steamrolled for no rewards. I wouldn't go into AB or WSG and play against premades 35% of the time if I wasn't getting rewarded for it. No carror, no participation, simple as that. Even lesser carrot doesn't work, because this isn't about logic, it is about emotion and feeling like part of the system. Lesser rated players already know they won't be able to compete because their point intake is just too little, being told they can't even get the same gear will be the nail in the coffin.
No, the answer to these questions is obvious and has been stated many times. Apply a rating restriction to all items and watch arena completely collapse within weeks. And no, I am not exaggerating.
This. If it weren't for Merciless Gladiator's Spellblade, I would never have set foot in an arena. If they add a rating restriction I will never again do so (which would at least be a silver lining...).
Originally Posted by Aphyrax
Also, where did you get the idea that classes are balanced around 5v5?
Yeah the clear answer to that is no one likes getting steamrolled for no rewards. I wouldn't go into AB or WSG and play against premades 35% of the time if I wasn't getting rewarded for it. No carror, no participation, simple as that. Even lesser carrot doesn't work, because this isn't about logic, it is about emotion and feeling like part of the system. Lesser rated players already know they won't be able to compete because their point intake is just too little, being told they can't even get the same gear will be the nail in the coffin.
I absolutely agree and I have not heard a satisfactory counterargument to this. I don't think "they will happily wait 5 months until the next season" or "they will all increase their rating to above the threshold" are realistic. The key is "emotion and feeling like part of the system" above - the arena is one of the first parts of WoW where this is really true, and removing that threatens very negative consequences for it.
It's also completely false. Just as some classes dominate the smaller brackets, there are classes that in 5v5 only work in specific setups, or classes that pretty much are a must for all setups (paladin).
Could you provide a link please? There are currently 7 holy pallies for every druid (of any spec) on top 5v5 arena teams. The imbalance is obvious. However, druids do quite well in 2v2, and balancing 5v5 would most likely make druids way overpowered in that bracket. So I got the impression that the only thing that prevents druids from getting the buffs they obviously need in 5v5 is 2v2. The fact that at BlizzCon Blizzard commented on the increasing druid population in arenas (which is true for 2v2 but not at all for 5v5) supports this theory.
So, please, if you have an official, definite Blizzard statement that they will balance 5v5 over the other brackets, share it so that I can start dancing on the table.
They initially said that they were balanced for 5v5 and that the lower brackets were more for fun back during the start of arenas. That's why 5v5s are worth more points. It looks like they changed their minds though since at blizzcon they mentioned small scale hunter buffs and lock nerfs to balance low brackets without changing either class in 5v5.
So, please, if you have an official, definite Blizzard statement that they will balance 5v5 over the other brackets, share it so that I can start dancing on the table.
Liveblogging the BlizzCon WoW Class Panel - WOW Insider
Balance Criteria: "Every class should be competitive in PvP, but not be equal to another class in one on one PvP. Every class should have a spot in a 5v5 situation."
That's not balanced though. I've even talked to Aphyrax some on IM about the very matter. Druids and hunters can do well in 5v5, but only within specific setups. Same with rogues. Thus they have a spot. They just have to be in a situation that caters to it (example being shaman with hunters, or rogue as only melee in a caster gib team) Compare this to Paladin, who is basically a spot in every competitive 5v5 team out there. They both have spots, but they're not balanced.
As it stands now for melee, MHs are replaceable with raid loot, but there are very few OHs available in PvE. There isn't an OH sword upgrade between Aeonus in Black Morass [Latro's Shifting Sword] and Mother Shahraz in BT [Blade of Savagery]. That's really sad.
In PvP bad players with good weapons will still get wrecked, because they won't be able to accumulate enough points for a resilience set. And in PvE, bad players with s2 weapons still won't progress because of all the retard checks in each encounter. Yes, your raid needs to be geared to kill certain bosses, but many fights are just execution and not being a mouth breather.
I do think that there should be a far greater rewards for excelling in the game as opposed to being mediocre, whether that be PvP or PvE. I just haven't seen the travesty of hundreds of guilds clearing content far beyond their means, because their rogues / fury warriors had s2 arena weapons instead of having to wait for [Talon of Azshara] to drop. This won't change come s3 either.
This is exactly the reason that I'm PvP'ing, and what people seem to miss. PvP is a sideline for me, a fun 10-20 games a week with a buddy that over 5 weeks I got the OH that is missing in the itemisation.
If Blizz didn't have such awful itemization (at least for rogue OH weapons) then I'd just not care about PvP. If they implement a strategy where my ability to get the OH is limited, then they need to fix their itemization and provide an equivalent OH somewhere in SSC.
And before somebody tells me that I need to "just get more serious about arena", then I need to ask for Blizzard to provide me an arena item that "removes 450ms latency" from my Australian internet connection. I'm capped by ability (I'm not that great), and also by playing a melee class with a latency that's 10x worse than most of my opponents in the continental US.
Pewsey has heard about tact and discretion, but tends to regard them much as children view vegetables.
There are only two kinds of MMOs: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody plays. (inspired by Bjarne Stroustrup)
With PVE as my main/only interest in WoW, I simply dont wanna play arena for weapons. I don't like it, i'm not good at it, I have the wrong class and I don't have time for it. But being in a guild that will most likely kill Kael next lockout, it has until now been my ONLY chance of getting good/competitive weapons.
My only options have been to wait upto 50 weeks for Talon of Azhara (10% droprate, once a week, and at least 5 rolling on it), or i could level Blacksmithing. And even if i were to do any of these insanely timeconsuming/expensive grinds, guess what: I would still not have a good offhand...
So from my POV, id like the weapons to be out of my reach so I wouldn't have to worry about it. A less good and more timeconsuming alternative would be to keep the current system, tho then id still get the good loots.
Another possibility is to re-stat the weapons, id LOVE if the onehanders got -10 dps and maybe +50 resilence. Then they'd still be great for PVP but suckass for PVE so i could go do my own thing in PVE. Tbh there is absolutely NO good reasons for those weapons to be the superior PVE alternative for ~98% of the players. ESPECIALLY when all my other hard-earned PVE epics are INFERIOR to honor/arena blues and epics.
Will be interesting to see how they do this rating, but i suspect this: Put it too low and the availability of weapons will not really change, put it too high, and me and presumably many others will simply ditch arena(and my gut tells me blizzard doesnt want ~50% dropout from arena).
Whatever can be derived from the definition of what is trivial or easy, hopefully the least we know is never to treat casuals with contempt - I consider myself a fairly competent player but I know this is because I've played a while and have an interest in the game, and to start considering myself a good player based on internal characteristics is just pompous.
This thread also highlights the need for more sensible gear progression in the arena. You wouldn't run Karazhan 15 times to acquire one T6 item, so why should a casual player be doing arena 15 times a week to acquire one S6 item?
This. If it weren't for Merciless Gladiator's Spellblade, I would never have set foot in an arena. If they add a rating restriction I will never again do so (which would at least be a silver lining...).
As someone who plays only to arena/pvp, I dislike that this is the view most players have of the arenas. If someone doesn't like some aspect of the game, don't participate in it. I don't like to raid, so I accept that I'm at a slight disadvantage to the people in my BG with black temple loot.
The fact that such powerful items (relative to average progression) are obtainable by going in, losing 10 games and paying 40g a person to reform a team weekly definitely irks me. I like the idea of having the newest season weapons limited to a certain rating, though I think it would definitely have to scale to the specific battlegroups. A person who goes in with no intent to win will still be able to pick up an excellent weapon, but having a weapon from the newest season will carry some amount of prestige.
The main point of many people in favour of a rating limit to the PVP weapons is that the vast majority of people 'don't deserve them.' The issue here is that these 'scrubs' don't merit a decent weapon, or piece of gear.
What strikes me is how minimal a change this actually makes... One rogue with a 97 dps MH isn't going to cause your guild to progress artificially. Moreover, as has been pointed out, there are huge gaps in weapon itemisation. 2 Karazhan groups, farming it for a couple of months now have seen one Malachazeen drop. That didn't even drop for my raid group. At least Arena guarentees some form of character progression.
As for Arena, when yours is a relatively young realm, that began to reach maturity in time for the 'PVP patch' when all raiding ceased and the honour farm became the source of gear, there's a huge lack of developed guilds, because people saw no reason to stay... When the aforementioned realm, a harmless, low key, friendly place, happens to be in the same BG group as Forte, Last Resort, Curse and numerous other high achieving guilds, you aren't likely to progress highly. Osse mentioned earlier some ridiculously low number of players on our realm having over than 1900 rating. Not exactly unexpected.
As for Season 3, what interests me is whether they will add some of the more exciting new stats onto pvp gear. -Armour seems particulary fascinating, especially considering the massive buff caster armour values received. As for haste rating, I would assume that for burst dps and burst healing, haste could prove absolutely invaluable in Arenas. Surely that's not an advantage that should belong to BT/MH level gear alone?
08/07/07, 5:17 PM
Similar Threads
