I think that they are based on wrong goals. There are no ways for people to actually compete in BGs. There is no real "fun" aspect tied to your personal goal. It doesnt matter if you win or not. Simple thing could fix this. Make people have personal BG ratings that indicate their win/loss ratio in some form. So that there is even slight psychological measurement of your BG contribution. Eventually, this would lead into system where people have thousands of games won/lost and if you put your best effort in winning your games, you will win. Many many many times 1 good player in BGs can encourage others to try.
WoW BG Battleground is in no way tied to your personal performance outside of fast "Whos got most KB?" look. PvP is competition, but there are no motivating ways how people can compete in BGs. They dont have any reasons to do their best generally. Sure, winning means few extra honor points. It doesnt matter how you get your honor. You will get it eventually anyway. There should be some side kick what encourages players to perform as good as possible. Whos got most flags defended average per game on your server? Whos got most flags attacked on your server? Whos got most flag captures interupted? Anything what people can compare and compete with in form of armory etc would most likely do the trick and make people perform better.
Are there really any other competition outside of Arenas except gear (In personal level)?
WoW BG Battleground is in no way tied to your personal performance outside of fast "Whos got most KB?" look. PvP is competition, but there are no motivating ways how people can compete in BGs. They dont have any reasons to do their best generally. Sure, winning means few extra honor points. It doesnt matter how you get your honor. You will get it eventually anyway. There should be some side kick what encourages players to perform as good as possible. Whos got most flags defended average per game on your server? Whos got most flags attacked on your server? Whos got most flag captures interupted? Anything what people can compare and compete with in form of armory etc would most likely do the trick and make people perform better.
Are there really any other competition outside of Arenas except gear (In personal level)?
I agree with you that if people's actual ability to play in BGs were reflected in their armory you would probably have more people actually trying to achieve those objectives - but how could the game measure if you sat at the LM the whole game and defended the flag? It's not just flag capture interrupts - even sounding the alarm as you get swamped can save the point.
It's just not a feasible measure, and to record how many games an individual player won/lost is really only going to show if they pug or premade.. or whether the play the right BGs on the right faction in their battlegroup to be the habitual victor.
However, a lifetime killing blows as well as kills might do the trick - you can see a direct ratio there. (We all know warriors will have ratios way out of proportion to everyone else's but at least it will be something.)
I'm also interested to know, do people think sharing the honour of kills evenly between the whole team in a BG would lead to more AFKing, or more defending? I'm thinking primarily of AB/EotS here... I can't think of any reason to implement it in WSG, but the reason most people won't stay defense is because they ONLY receive the bonus honour and that's only a good amount if their team wins... thus they personally only suffer a loss to defend. If you got the same honour no matter where you were (or maybe, only within 20yards of a flag) I think people might be willing to play properly..
What if BG's had premade queue option where its all about winner? Winning team would grab all honor, based on the ladder system where your premade is based. Higher you go, better honor you get. If you loose, you get nothing but step down. Team ratings could be as simple as 1-10. Everyone starts from 5, if you loose games you drop by 1 slot and if you win you go up. Teams with ladder status of 10 would obviously gain best honor, but they would only face other 10 teams. Lets say teams with rating of 10 would gain triple honor from wins. And rating of 1 would gain equal to nonrated honor.
I think that would help with creating competitive matches, but would probably increase queue times significantly because you have to both get grouped with people of similar ranking and wait for an opposing team to form with a similar ranking.
Basically, any "try to create more even matches" scheme is going to increase queue times vs the current system unless you get more people playing BGs. And there are only a few ways you can do that:
1. Make them fun to play, so people will play for entertainment and not honor/rep.
2. Make the current honor grind more pleasant.
3. Make the theoretical BG rating system granular enough that people can take pride in their BG rankings, like people do with their Arena rankings.
I think 3 is a pretty massive undertaking, and without consistent teams (ala Arenas) rankings will be pretty variable and too often outside your control. 1 is easier said than done, and BGs inherently have all sorts of problems -- inconsistent team quality, potentially long queues, map imbalances, etc.
So personally, I think they should own up to the fact that the vast majority of people playing BGs are there grinding honor, and should focus on 2. Make individual performance matter more -- give fractions of honor for damage done and healing done with small bonuses for kills/objectives complete. Make sure that all games are guaranteed to finish in a given amount of time. Make sure that if you actively participate, you're not going to walk away with basically no honor. And merge high-queue battlegroups.
Battlegrounds are meant to promote team play. Back in the pre-TBC honor system, when the Honor rewards were on par with MC-AQ40 gear, there were always highly skilled, organized groups farming them. These included end-game raiding guilds, many of whom could benefit both in PvE and PvP from the rewards.
The problem now is that the rewards are terrible, relative to the effort. People are rightly focused on Heroics and Kara+, all of which yield better returns on your time investment. There's still interest in honor rewards, but not the kind of interest that leads to organizing efficient groups like in the old system.
That said, I see no reason to think one person or a small group can't have an impact. I spent a while solo-queueing for TBC BGs and keeping track of win-loss records and avg length of the match. I don't have statistically significant samples, I was just looking for trends over 20-40 matches whenever I tried a new tactic back in Season 1. I found that the following seemed to have an impact. (All as a Horde feral druid, please note.)
AV: Head directly for the SH Bunker, ignoring the fight at SH gy, and lead the Commander out of the bunker back past SH gy to kill. As soon as he dies, immediately head back to the bunker and kill the single archer that can interrupt flag capping, cap the flag, then help finish off the archers. I found this tactic alone shortened the length of winning matches by ~5 mins, significantly boosting Honor/time ratio.
AB: Guard the Blacksmith if your team takes it and everyone leaves. Alert your team of potential incomers as soon as you see them on the road heading to your area. I recall a small increase in the win/loss ratio from this tactic but no appreciable difference in the average length of the match.
EotS: If you can heal, do nothing but heal your frontline near the center flag. This alone resulted in a noticeable increase in win/loss ratio compared to games where I played in a more standard feral druid fashion. Caveat: healers are scarce in most of the BGs I've played in my Battlegroup. I tend to assume that's the case everywhere, but if it isn't I doubt this would have the same impact.
I also recall a very slight boost in win/loss ratio when I alternated front-line support with flag capping. I'd cap the flag and run back to a node, but I would hold on to the flag unless my team had solid control of the center. If not, I'd stay there with the flag and defend the node.
WSG: Nothing I did solo had an appreciable impact.
Drawback to all this? If you think 10 ABs in a row is boring, try 10 ABs in a row where you sit and guard the Blacksmith alone.
Going with a small group was more fun and yielded higher win/loss ratios than if I solo-queued the same BG, but matches were still long and and repetitive.
I absolutely love organised WSG/AB, it's easily my favourite part of the game, i HATE pug WSG/AB with a fiery passion. I think if they could put in more support for this then it would go a long way to alleviating peoples hatred of the 'grind'. Even when PVPing in a guild pre-made purely for honor, there was nothing we looked forward to more than seeing another pre-made against us, made the BG actually fun.
I'd like to see a rating system brought in where even bad pre-mades got more honor than PUGing (you would need to make it a rostered team so it's not quite as bad as 'trade channel pre-mades').
I sympathize with this sentiment: some of the best PvP I remember came in org vs org BGs.
There are still a few guilds out there that like to arrange organized matches, but it seems a dying trend. From the purely competitive angle, I don't find the BG ruleset as good as arena. If my team wanted to try and be the best, we'd all have to go out and skill up Engineering for the bombs and such. If they implemented the Arena ruleset for BGs (without the limit on 10-min cooldowns, perhaps), that would change.
I just don't know if it's worth it. It's hard to imagine them restructuring the reward system to generate enough interest in this without adversely affecting arenas and PvE progression.
I think a simple change that might encourage more team oriented play, if even to a small extent, would be to change the default sorting of the scoreboard. Specifically, throw the emphasis on KBs out the window. Have the sorting consider damage dealt and healing done when ranking people on the scoreboard. What I mean is, say we have 3 people in a BG, a warrior with 300k damage dealt, a paladin with 250k healing done, and a mage with 200k damage dealt. They'd be listed as 1) Warrior, 2) Paladin, 3) Mage, regardless of KBs. Part of the reason BGs are so horrible is because nobody wants to play the support role, and I can't say that I blame those people. Support gets no recognition or appreciation whatsoever for the most part, and healers should be able to get themselves high on the scoreboard in the default sorting so that everybody sees it, not just the poor healers that have their own scoreboards sorted by most healing done.
I thought about maybe sorting it by damage+healing done, but then I suspect every single game the top X slots would be warlocks, where X is the number of warlocks in the game, and that isn't any fun either.
It probably wouldn't change anything drastically, but for such an easy to implement change I think it would help BGs out a little bit, at least. The support role shouldn't be such an invisible, thankless job.
On another entirely different note, I feel that Blizzard does not do nearly enough to inform the playerbase about diminishing returns on honor from kills. The combat log certainly doesn't calculate the diminishing returns, and so many BGs are ruined by a contingent of people who "farm HKs", thinking they are getting good honor when in fact the people they are killing are giving them 0 honor and they don't even realize it. Yeah, I'm sure there are people that do this while being fully aware of the diminishing returns, but I bet a huge chunk of the population has no idea about diminishing returns. I'm blown away by the number of ABs I see where the node situation is 3 to 2 in either favor, and people are camping the starting graveyard, when if they had actually been playing to cap the nodes they could have 5 capped, gotten much better honor, and been on to the next game.
When it comes to tracking flag interupts, captures or defending flags. Thats what BGs are. Guy who captures the flag should be one who get credit for their team, not the one zerging after warlock who kites them to death or gives HK. That guy is the key to victory who reads game and interupts attacker from capturing flag, not the one running around like mindles zombie doing nothing constructive but zerging for KB e-peen meter. You lost 1 flag at AB? The guy who rush there and defends the flag and gets it back should get credit for the good work, not the one who didnt bother to interupt capture but zerged and lost the flag in first place.
I think that currently BGs dont credit team players at all. They dont credit the one who carries flag at WSG. They dont credit the one who retruns the flag... Atleast they arent given enough of credit if you want to count the scoreboard flags. It could be great competitive method on encouraging players to do BG objectives if they were tracked and shown at your Armory.
Would it be good to credit whole group around the flag at AB? Would it be good to credit everyone who damaged Flagcarrier 15sec prior to return? Would it be fair to credit Flag carrier healers? Maybe. Its all about selecting from many good options the most suitable and fair. Both work, using radius or only the one who captures. As long as it is related to encouraging the objectives, its only fine tuning after that.
Is there any harm in it? Is there real harm in it compared to the possible benefits it brings to BG gameplay styles? I really doubt that the minimal scenarios we can think of really are that big considering the good effect these little things could have on athmosphere that players have when fighting in BGs. Sad fact is that currently Bgs are just meaningles grindplaces for huge majority of players. There arent real fun factor in them, nothing but necesary grind for the epic items.
I blame the lack of credit for things that matter in BGs. Things that are even remotely tied to your eye for tactics and reading game. Do you open your BG map every 10sec to evaluate situation according to raid hitpoints? Do you calculate times that it takes from flag to another to make sure you can interupt possible attacks? Do you check if defender of some flag is in combat or not? I know many of us do, and some dont give a damn. Those who do play the BGs for the actual game should have some indicators of their contribution to the victory instead of just flash of BG screen where majority only check the KB list. We have armory, why not push the great feature even further?
Edit: Removed part about Win/Loss ratios to prevent detrail from the actual encouragement methods. Weight was meant to put on words "in some form".
Edit2: Im going to also add another example about pvp systems. Only because people seem to think that gear is only motivator that can create enjoyable PvP. I played Anarchy Online pre WoW. It had extremely competitive and brutal pvp system, and only reward from "small scale" pvp was rank. Nothing else, only title. Yet it was extremely addictive and competitive. AO didnt really have any better class balance than wow, but those classes that sucked in 1vs1, got huge credit for gaining higher titles than the "flavor of the month" classes.
Im not saying that WoW pvp should be such, Im merely pointing out that there are alternative motivators than just gear. World pvp there gave your own guild benefits in addition to your whole faction. And those bonuses were world wide no matter where you went. And you got pvp related area bonuses only at the world pvp areas. Anarchy Online had a lot of flaws, but I was extremely addicted to its pvp system, Specially the small pvp encounters. It didnt give you any actual rewards, but it was daily fun we fight every day. Most of the time it was just insane adrenaline rush.
There could be some other carrots on WoW than just gear.
No, I find arena PVP to be quite fun, even if it rewarded nothing. Why? Because the sides are balanced (in numbers and in skill) and there isn't a ridiculous amount of time spent traveling around on your mount (unlike the battlegrounds).
The battlegrounds are not entertaining for me because I have to a) group with morons, b) play against morons, and c) either zerg or be zerged due to team size differential caused by too large of a map.
The Washington Post helps perpetuate a common and pernicious misreading of the decision, referring to "the Supreme Court’s judgment that corporations have the same rights as people when it comes to political speech." What the Supreme Court actually said is that people do not lose their free speech rights when they organize as corporations, including nonprofit interest groups as well as businesses.
attlegrounds are meant to promote team play. Back in the pre-TBC honor system, when the Honor rewards were on par with MC-AQ40 gear, there were always highly skilled, organized groups farming them. These included end-game raiding guilds, many of whom could benefit both in PvE and PvP from the rewards.
There was many organized groups farming them, but they were far from highly skilled. Those PUG-stomping groups are part of the reason we have the deserter debuff nowadays after they were afk'ing out of any match that might be a challenge. That "many" people could benefit from the rewards seems a huge stretch to me given how few people every got rank 12+.
The problem now is that the rewards are terrible, relative to the effort.
And I don't think this is the problem, especially since the epic pieces are actually quite good. Prior to the 41 pt talent patch, the honor grind was so time-intensive that the average person didn't even care about how much honor they were raking in since the epic gear was so far out of reach (they DID care about rep though, which sort of put an emphasis on objectives) and they often just PvP'd for fun. On WSG weekend, especially pre-xserver BGs, people put guild groups together just to fight other guild groups because the games were close and you knew the people you were fighting. Now, if you want good, quick competition you just go to the arena. Even if there were no rewards, those same people would be doing the arena.
So really, I don't think it's so much of a "problem" that has changed BGs since their inception -- it's just that arenas are way more fun and better designed after Blizzard realized the problems with gear acquisition, grinds, rapid respawn, etc.
There was many organized groups farming them, but they were far from highly skilled. Those PUG-stomping groups are part of the reason we have the deserter debuff nowadays after they were afk'ing out of any match that might be a challenge. That "many" people could benefit from the rewards seems a huge stretch to me given how few people every got rank 12+.
Didn't say all org grps were highly skilled-- only that there were skilled org groups active on a regular basis. Taking large-pop servers as a reference, a skilled org group was a time-limited individual's best bet at farming honor before Battlegroups were implemented. Once Battlegroups went in, unskilled org grps with fast queues did fairly well queue-hopping for pugs to beat. Skilled org groups still had the edge, but they became less necessary, depending on your queues.
Both the rank 10 rewards and the BG faction rewards were pretty useful to a beginner raiding guild. It wasn't hard for a BWL guild to farm honor a few days a week and keep a WSG group near rank 8-10. If your faction was relatively sane about honor farming (didn't have too many 24-hour types), those folks could then do a relatively short push to rank 12.
I wouldn't call them hugely popular, but in my experience it was the presence of these groups that made BG PvP challenging and fun. These days, I can start an org group by advertising in /2. Trade during honor weekends, but they lack the consistency and skill of the old groups. Nobody wants to take time away from the raid schedule to do serious Battlegrounds. Why would they?
Nobody wants to take time away from the raid schedule to do serious Battlegrounds. Why would they?
Maybe i'm quoting you out of context, but i don't think so. While they might not take time away from raiding to do it, alot of people enjoy it enough to want to do it outside of raiding as part of a serious group vs group PVP scenario. When my old guild raided 5-6 days a week, there would still normally be a guild PVP group going before or after the raid, and they'd often try to organise games against other teams. Instead of levelling alts or doing some farming these people wanted to do some organised BGs, and they loved nothing more than fighting other teams.
Another thing to point out: You can entirely gear your character for PvE with PvE. You can entirely gear your character for BGs with BGs. You cannot entirely gear your character for Arenas with Arenas.
That post doesn't make much sense.
You had to do 5 mans to get gear for the10 man then that 10 man to get gear for the 25 mans why couldn't we just go kill mag in quest blues?
BG Gear shouldn't be based on honor alone. Maybe have a Halaa like system, where you need to turn in 200 Kill Tokens from AB for a Pair of Boots. Everyone who got the HK gets a token. Less Honor itself, more Kill Tokens or some other type of monetary unit that promotes actual interaction, teamwork.
Maybe you can't get a nice token from the Vendor until you have 20 WSG wins. Or 25 AV wins, but only those lasting less than 1 hour count. Or 5 2000-0 AB wins (Remember the AB Quests?). Some kind of challenge, make it fun, make it hard, whatever - just don't make it SO DAMN BORING @#$@#$.
You had to do 5 mans to get gear for the10 man then that 10 man to get gear for the 25 mans why couldn't we just go kill mag in quest blues?
Sure it does. To progress in PvE, you have to PvE. Just as I said.
and to have the best BG gear you have to arena.
But there's your mistake -- I wasn't talking about "the best". I'm talking about the ability to be seriously competitive. You can be seriously competitive in BGs wearing nothing but BG-earned gear (they have items for basically all slots). You can be seriously competitive in PvE with nothing but PvE gear, obviously. But that's not true for Arenas (you'd be missing resilience gear in over half your slots: bracers/boots/belt/trinket/trinket/ring/back/neck), and is the crux of my issue.
You had to do 5 mans to get gear for the10 man then that 10 man to get gear for the 25 mans why couldn't we just go kill mag in quest blues?
and to have the best BG gear you have to arena.
Next season I will have to grind 70k+ honor in the BGs for all the new gear so I can wear it in the arenas. When the new instance comes out the raiders that are up to it will just have to do that instance. We're not talking about the price of entry here, we're talking about the ongoing cost of doing business.
Next season I will have to grind 70k+ honor in the BGs for all the new gear so I can wear it in the arenas. When the new instance comes out the raiders that are up to it will just have to do that instance. We're not talking about the price of entry here, we're talking about the ongoing cost of doing business.
Along that line, has anyone confirmed on the PTR the status of the nerf to the honor gains? My brother was on the PTR and he was telling me there was a bug where their 30% reduction in honor was doubling up (into a 49% reduction) causes HKs to give out 0 honor if shared amount too many people. That and bonus honor is also reduced.
My brother did make it sound like a 30% reduction is their goal however. And I thought the 250 honor in WSG on WSG weekend was slow going even for 10 min games.
If this is indeed true, I'm really wondering just how long a typical PvPer is expected to grind BGs to get his/her Arena gear. AV is seen by many as the only realistic way to gain honor (on a per hour basis) and a further reduction in honor gains seems to just be setting up for more complaints.
They are lowering the amount of honor you get for killing commanders so you can't just go in, kill the first 6 and leave. So yes, its a nerf in the amount of honor/hour you can get. (You get the same total amount of honor, just it takes longer as you have to play the entire game). So basically the strategy changes from: "join game, kill commanders, leave" to "join game, if its close to ending, complete it, else leave"
I have been able to get about 7k a night if I 2box and arena-queue or Alt-F4 out of AV just as the first few commanders die. And if I get really motivated I start 3 or 4boxing with different characters in different BGs so I can join them with my main just as they are about to end (/afk with the alternate account to free up a BG slot) to get the token.
Now ask yourself, if someone has to go through this much trouble just so they are able to participate in high-end arenas, is that system truly functional and/or well-thought-out?
The Washington Post helps perpetuate a common and pernicious misreading of the decision, referring to "the Supreme Court’s judgment that corporations have the same rights as people when it comes to political speech." What the Supreme Court actually said is that people do not lose their free speech rights when they organize as corporations, including nonprofit interest groups as well as businesses.
while I agree that grinding honor is mind numbing it still beats raiding.
Something that greatly improves the honor grind: grabbing a friend along. Just 1 friend makes a world of difference both in fun and effectiveness.
also it's kinda hard for me to sympathise for the alliance zerg's queue times. People always say "I rolled here because my friends rolled alliance, I didn't know blah blah". Well friends don't let friends roll fruity night elves!
This way you won't end up with anyone defending a node/flag.
The offense already had their fun of killing people, how can we award defense a bit more?
Originally Posted by diotox
I think a simple change that might encourage more team oriented play, if even to a small extent, would be to change the default sorting of the scoreboard. Specifically, throw the emphasis on KBs out the window. Have the sorting consider damage dealt and healing done when ranking people on the scoreboard. What I mean is, say we have 3 people in a BG, a warrior with 300k damage dealt, a paladin with 250k healing done, and a mage with 200k damage dealt. They'd be listed as 1) Warrior, 2) Paladin, 3) Mage, regardless of KBs. Part of the reason BGs are so horrible is because nobody wants to play the support role, and I can't say that I blame those people. Support gets no recognition or appreciation whatsoever for the most part, and healers should be able to get themselves high on the scoreboard in the default sorting so that everybody sees it, not just the poor healers that have their own scoreboards sorted by most healing done.
I thought about maybe sorting it by damage+healing done, but then I suspect every single game the top X slots would be warlocks, where X is the number of warlocks in the game, and that isn't any fun either.
It probably wouldn't change anything drastically, but for such an easy to implement change I think it would help BGs out a little bit, at least. The support role shouldn't be such an invisible, thankless job.
On another entirely different note, I feel that Blizzard does not do nearly enough to inform the playerbase about diminishing returns on honor from kills. The combat log certainly doesn't calculate the diminishing returns, and so many BGs are ruined by a contingent of people who "farm HKs", thinking they are getting good honor when in fact the people they are killing are giving them 0 honor and they don't even realize it. Yeah, I'm sure there are people that do this while being fully aware of the diminishing returns, but I bet a huge chunk of the population has no idea about diminishing returns. I'm blown away by the number of ABs I see where the node situation is 3 to 2 in either favor, and people are camping the starting graveyard, when if they had actually been playing to cap the nodes they could have 5 capped, gotten much better honor, and been on to the next game.
Guild honor farming groups made battlegrounds way too easy. I like to play PUG battlegrounds now. (Well, queueing with a guild healer helps
Originally Posted by sadris
No, I find arena PVP to be quite fun, even if it rewarded nothing. Why? Because the sides are balanced (in numbers and in skill) and there isn't a ridiculous amount of time spent traveling around on your mount (unlike the battlegrounds).
The battlegrounds are not entertaining for me because I have to a) group with morons, b) play against morons, and c) either zerg or be zerged due to team size differential caused by too large of a map.
So I am 45k honor away from being done with the grind on my newly created alt. If you actually do the math it is quite ridiculous. You need 78k for the armor, 44k for both trinkets, and 15k more for the extra ring next season. At 700 honor/hour this is 200 hours in AV, or over 8 days. Is that really a good assignment of required time before one is able to participate in high end arenas? I know for sure it doesn't take 8 days to get the frozen shadoweave set crafted (which is a good approximation as to what is required in order to participate in BT). It just seems a bit harsh on alts (who aren't paladins or warriors) who want to PVP.
The Washington Post helps perpetuate a common and pernicious misreading of the decision, referring to "the Supreme Court’s judgment that corporations have the same rights as people when it comes to political speech." What the Supreme Court actually said is that people do not lose their free speech rights when they organize as corporations, including nonprofit interest groups as well as businesses.
Why do people keep bringing this up like its a problem? If the players don't enjoy battlegrounds then by all means, kill it. All the old 60 raid zones were tossed aside for the new 25-man raids, I really don't see why the battleground system hasn't been replaced entirely by arenas. The arena experienced is so much more refined, balanced, and altogether more fun that it has entirely killed my motivation to do BGs. That's not a bad thing if new content replaces the old. I'm not saying the battlegrounds should be erased from the game, but it shouldn't be a requirement for gear, in the same way MC->Naxx runs aren't required for gear that is useful in the new raids.
I think I have one reason why they would hesistate to entirely replace Battlegrounds with Arena: Warcraft.
The game is supposed to be a 1st person view continuation of the storyline from the original RTS Warcraft games. Whether people enjoy them or not, the only hope Blizzard has of making the WORLD of Warcraft at all parallel to the original Warcraft games (especially on care bear servers) is to organize mass pvp.
As to your last statement, I feel the comparison is a tad faulty. Of course old world zones aren't required to be able to raid the new 25-mans. That would be ludicrous seeing as they're all offering level 60 gear. Battlegrounds and Arena, however, are both level-70 PvP parts of the game, and one is notably more competitive and less forgiving than the other. Does that sound at all like how Naxx was much more competitive and less forgiving than Molten Core? It sure does to me, and before the expansion, no one had a snowball's chance in hell of seeing Naxx if they hadn't cleared BWL and had significant experience in AQ40.
My point is that there's a very tangible theme of less demanding parts of the game requiring time in order to participate effectively in more advanced parts of the game. I don't see why PvP should be any different.
My point is that there's a very tangible theme of less demanding parts of the game requiring time in order to participate effectively in more advanced parts of the game. I don't see why PvP should be any different.
My point is that the amount of time required to participate in PVP is large disproportionate in relation to the time required to participate in PVE. For PVE it takes 15 minutes with your credit card on eBay and 4 hours in front of the AH; for PVP it takes 8 days in AV.
The Washington Post helps perpetuate a common and pernicious misreading of the decision, referring to "the Supreme Court’s judgment that corporations have the same rights as people when it comes to political speech." What the Supreme Court actually said is that people do not lose their free speech rights when they organize as corporations, including nonprofit interest groups as well as businesses.
Battlegrounds and Arena, however, are both level-70 PvP parts of the game
Battlegrounds and Arena are fundamentally different games. Every bit as different as a Naxx raid and Arenas.
As I said in my OP -- I don't mind spending more time in Arenas to get PvP gear for all my slots. Even if it takes longer. Multiple seasons even. The problem is that I probably need to spend 150-200 hours of playtime in BGs to be competitive in Arenas. Lord help me if I want to PvP on my alt too.
I really hope Blizzard reconsiders for future seasons and either recognizes that BGs are largely honor grinds and speeds them up, or makes more arena pieces available.
09/08/07, 12:38 PM
.
Similar Threads
