CM's have described it as a loose system that attempts to first match up players based on group composition and overall quality of gear, but that it quickly widens its search parameters if no "perfect" matches are available. The thinking being that it's better to solo-queue with a 4 minute wait and face a premade than to solo-queue for 40 minutes to wait for another pug that closely matches your own in group composition and gear quality.

Having started BGs at 70 and still quite new, I understand the sentiment to make them more friendly to new people. For that reason alone, Alterac Valley is actually the most friendly. True, it gives most honor, but the other battlegrounds are almost torture. Torture because it's equally matched: you see, I'm not very good, but I'm not terrible either. Even on a winning team in Warsong Gulch, for instance, it's really a case of 'lets get this over with'.

With AV, you can actually contribute quite significantly when you are undergeared. Several undergeared and less-skilled players can take down those one or two experienced and well geared players at a tower, flag or what not. Additionally, AV has some quite fun quests. The rewards are not necessarily significant, but prompted me to stick with it and began to enjoy AV.

But why is AV still so interesting, for someone like me, who really rides the middle of the pack skill/gear wise? In addition to the above, the map is not even. Each side requires a different strategy to achieve objectives. There tends to be complaints that it's 'unfair' (won't get into that, here), but truly it makes for an interesting game.

So, AV does not necessarily need a 'gear ramp up', because of the size and number of players. But to be competitive in WSG you certainly need the gear to contribute effectively. Even then, if you don't have top skills, you are going to loose rather nastily (begs the question, is a show of skill equal to fun?). I suppose WSG is a show of gear/skill and rather minimal strategy, whereas AV is the opposite.

Adding 'quests' may work, but with something like WSG an undergeared player would have no hope of capturing the flag, unless luck was on their side. Additionally, some classes are far better suited to such tasks. I agree in principle, but it needs a lot of thought for the objectives. If the rewards are significant enough, you then start downplaying the incentive to actually continue to compete in battlegrounds.

I wish that they would bring back the old AV, but with the current reinforcements system.

The epic battles of the old AV were amazing, they just needed some forced end if you never forced a breakthrough. I would love to have 1 hour AV games, instead of the 10 minute current ones or the 8-hour games of the old system.

New variants on battlegrounds would be nice, but I think the main problem is the simple fact that the way to maximize reward is not through win/loss ratio, or even number of wins, but through number of games player per hour, win or lose. The increased honor reward from daily quests sounds like a great idea.

I'm sorry to ask, but which old AV are you referring to? The one with Ice-Lord and the Alliance Tree (who's name escapes my mind at the moment) and "Mid-ground" fighting?

(Surely, I miss that..)

It sounds fun to me. It's PvP combat that I find fun - not running from one end of AV to the other, not clicking a flag or node, not standing around for 2-10 minutes "protecting" something that doesn't get attacked, and not downing tank & spank PVE mobs. One thing I like about arenas is that the goal is to kill the other guy - not to click a flag next to a stable and hope you don't get zerged.

If WSG becomes a de facto 10v10 deathmatch, I can't say that I'll mind. Interacting with an enemy player is infinitely more complex and fun than interacting with a flag post.

WSG on PTR has always been a FFA in the middle of the field with nobody going for the flag - people are trying out new specs and such. Plus often the queue times are very lopsided, with one side having to wait a very long time to even get a game, so they aren't going to be actively trying to end the game when the goal is to try out new specs. I wouldn't draw any conclusions about WSG kill-farming tendencies from what is going on on the PTR.

It depends on the class you play. Frag fests are nice for DPS classes. But not so for healers imho. If WSG turns into a frag fest I certainly will not play my healer in PvP anymore. If the game focuses on killing other people only and no more objectives - why play a supporter/healer at all? Don't you think that WoW will turn into just another UT?
I, for one, like team play and team tactics with objectives. Therefore I enjoy Enemy Territory:Quake Wars far more than UT. But yeah, ever player has a different concept of what is fun :-)

Was on the PTR last night during maintenance sure there was some spec testing going on but flags were ran resulting in two horde victories in under 20 minutes/game.

Can't say I agree with you, I personally enjoy zerg fests thoroughly on my disc priest, usually because I bring a friend along. There is nothing like tearing through the opponents ranks with a season 3 geared warrior, or perhaps crosshealing with a 400+ resilience disc priest, causing endless annoyance to the opponent.

I do see where your coming though, not everyone is into the same gameplay. But then again, WoW has lacked a place to do this kind of socially acceptable zerging ever since AV got changed.

The one thing that I've found in the all new AV, is that games which degenerate into a resource war tend to be immeasurably more fun than those where one side manages to out-zerg the other to the cap, kill and finish. Suddenly the dull robot grind becomes something quite different and those that were content to mindlessly pootle around the FoS are all suddenly trying to recap towers, fight for graveyards, still take down players wherever possible, even ninja mines and generally mix things up.

The downside is obviously that it lengthens the game by some ten minutes and this jars with the time v reward debate. Yet aside from that, I just feel that a resource war from the get go, with no insta-win would improve the BG no end. How about if Vann and Drek being killed just lopped off a fat chunk of resources? Ok, so you've killed one and now you've an advantage, but game's still not over. The decider might be a battle over the last standing tower or hell, a huge scrap in the FoS while trying to whittle down the last forty needed kills. Anything to provide some variation in the game's deciding factor. But Bgs need to encourage people to get involved, maybe do things on the map that they might not normally do.

Also, however innefectual some of the old gimicks were; Lok, Druids, Air Strikes and Wolfriders were FUN and AV suffers massively for their loss. Bring them back, but with a difference. Screw the gathering of crap to use them. Just make them available right from the get go as one use tactical toys. The gate opens and three people can go summon Lok (who immediately goes on a rampage instead of faffing around for twenty minutes) right off the
bat? Would be awesome!

Say you take a bunker, what would be more fun, Mulverick asking you to follow him back to base or just saying "I'll call you in a strike, where would you like me to bomb the crap out of?". Maybe having wolf riders or elementals defeated loses you resources, maybe them killing enemy players gains you some - it could be a trade off. Either way it would just be much more fun.

Whatever, but kill the sodding base to base zerg or switch the damn server off as seeing something as conceptually fantastic as AV turn into what it is today is a crying shame.

Arena.

Personally, I find it sickening that the thirst for good Arena performance via decent gear is making people lose sight of actually playing BGs according to their objectives.

It's too much metagaming for my taste to simply dissect AV down to a mechanical number such as "honor per hour". In fact, I consider it the complete opposite of honor.