> 1 < new battle gorund? yay.... we need an overhaul on ATLEAST 5. How many new instances do we keep getting? We got 9 non-raid instances from BC and only 1New BG that wasnt original at all. And now we get ONLY 1 NEW BG. And whats it about??? TURTLING!!!!! F*CK YES! "but let's go kill some birds. I'm psyched." off-note my prediction of this BG is that it will grant more honor than AV in relatively the same amount of time it takes to win a EotS or AB (which just makes in an easier grind, cause thats all we need >.> )
Yes lets throw 10 new battlegrounds in wotlk.. lets spread the population out so thin that theres never enough people queued for any of the battles.
Right now I can go to any battle master in the evenings or weekends and see around 5 or so battlegrounds running (1-2 Av's) and about twice as many in the weeks nominated battle ground.
Blizzard talked about battle grounds and arenas, how they design them, why there are only 5 etc in last years blizzcon (videos on youtube if you care to look) and I bet you have no idea that EoS battle ground was designed to have the flag (that is now in center of the map) on a floating rock that circled the map.. but after play testing it was decided to be taken out.
Blizzard have done the numbers, crunched the data they know wether its productive or counter-productive at add 1,2 or 3 new battle grounds. More is not always better.
Please just think before posting, goes along with the flying mounts in azeroth.. if ppl thought about it for just a few seconds they would realise why it cant happen.
That looks amazing, unlike the 2 flamers before me i see the feel of wotlk, it's not supposed to be a happy battlefield, did you want fireworks and massive sword falling on everyone? It looks like it totally fits the warcraft 3 story, i cant wait for it. WoTLK truely promices to revive this game if only for as long as BC did, i'm just suprised only one class was introduced.
how can you say that that is amazing and then say war is stale. i mean blizzard is clearly ripping off ideas from war because they feel threatened. if this wotlk battleground amazes you, how can war not amaze you even more...unless you're just a rampaging fanboi.
> 1 < new battle gorund? yay.... we need an overhaul on ATLEAST 5. How many new instances do we keep getting? We got 9 non-raid instances from BC and only 1New BG that wasnt original at all. And now we get ONLY 1 NEW BG. And whats it about??? TURTLING!!!!! F*CK YES! "but let's go kill some birds. I'm psyched." off-note my prediction of this BG is that it will grant more honor than AV in relatively the same amount of time it takes to win a EotS or AB (which just makes in an easier grind, cause thats all we need >.> )
Yes lets throw 10 new battlegrounds in wotlk.. lets spread the population out so thin that theres never enough people queued for any of the battles.
Right now I can go to any battle master in the evenings or weekends and see around 5 or so battlegrounds running (1-2 Av's) and about twice as many in the weeks nominated battle ground.
Blizzard talked about battle grounds and arenas, how they design them, why there are only 5 etc in last years blizzcon (videos on youtube if you care to look) and I bet you have no idea that EoS battle ground was designed to have the flag (that is now in center of the map) on a floating rock that circled the map.. but after play testing it was decided to be taken out.
Blizzard have done the numbers, crunched the data they know wether its productive or counter-productive at add 1,2 or 3 new battle grounds. More is not always better.
Please just think before posting, goes along with the flying mounts in azeroth.. if ppl thought about it for just a few seconds they would realise why it cant happen.
BTW we get 1 new battle ground and revamped AV.
if blizzard were scientologist's you would be seriously fucked. stop worshiping a games company .
I'd rather have people spread out over more battlegrounds so I don't have to waste ~5 or, for AV, usually 8-10 minutes of my life waiting to get in. Also, trying to twink PvP when there were alot of twinks had some queues which lasted TWENTY MINUTES. 20 minutes to get in a 15 minute or less game, if it was quick...pretty sad.
-------------------------------------- A human and an Elf get captured by Skaven. The rat-men are getting ready to shoot the first hostage with Dwarf-made guns when he yells, "Earthquake!" The naturally nervous Skaven run and hide from the imaginary threat. He escapes. The Skaven regroup and bring out the Elf. Being very smart, the Elf has figured out what to do. When the Skaven get ready to shoot, the Elf, in order to scare them, yells, "Fire!"
> 1 < new battle gorund? yay.... we need an overhaul on ATLEAST 5. How many new instances do we keep getting? We got 9 non-raid instances from BC and only 1New BG that wasnt original at all. And now we get ONLY 1 NEW BG. And whats it about??? TURTLING!!!!! F*CK YES! "but let's go kill some birds. I'm psyched." off-note my prediction of this BG is that it will grant more honor than AV in relatively the same amount of time it takes to win a EotS or AB (which just makes in an easier grind, cause thats all we need >.> )
Yes lets throw 10 new battlegrounds in wotlk.. lets spread the population out so thin that theres never enough people queued for any of the battles.
Right now I can go to any battle master in the evenings or weekends and see around 5 or so battlegrounds running (1-2 Av's) and about twice as many in the weeks nominated battle ground.
Blizzard talked about battle grounds and arenas, how they design them, why there are only 5 etc in last years blizzcon (videos on youtube if you care to look) and I bet you have no idea that EoS battle ground was designed to have the flag (that is now in center of the map) on a floating rock that circled the map.. but after play testing it was decided to be taken out.
Blizzard have done the numbers, crunched the data they know wether its productive or counter-productive at add 1,2 or 3 new battle grounds. More is not always better.
Please just think before posting, goes along with the flying mounts in azeroth.. if ppl thought about it for just a few seconds they would realise why it cant happen.
BTW we get 1 new battle ground and revamped AV.
if blizzard were scientologist's you would be seriously fucked. stop worshiping a games company .
Ill worship Blizzard.. you can carry on worshiping your false god of WAR.
I'd rather have people spread out over more battlegrounds so I don't have to waste ~5 or, for AV, usually 8-10 minutes of my life waiting to get in. Also, trying to twink PvP when there were alot of twinks had some queues which lasted TWENTY MINUTES. 20 minutes to get in a 15 minute or less game, if it was quick...pretty sad.
Are you saying more battlegorund will make the queue times shorter?
I'd rather have people spread out over more battlegrounds so I don't have to waste ~5 or, for AV, usually 8-10 minutes of my life waiting to get in. Also, trying to twink PvP when there were alot of twinks had some queues which lasted TWENTY MINUTES. 20 minutes to get in a 15 minute or less game, if it was quick...pretty sad.
Are you saying more battlegorund will make the queue times shorter?
Obviously, it offers more variety. More people waiting to get into a BG = longer queue times, just like your favorite ride at the amusement park. OR is it calculated by some ultra scientific and absolutely complicated system that only the math gods, Blizzard, could concoct? Sorry.
-------------------------------------- A human and an Elf get captured by Skaven. The rat-men are getting ready to shoot the first hostage with Dwarf-made guns when he yells, "Earthquake!" The naturally nervous Skaven run and hide from the imaginary threat. He escapes. The Skaven regroup and bring out the Elf. Being very smart, the Elf has figured out what to do. When the Skaven get ready to shoot, the Elf, in order to scare them, yells, "Fire!"
I'd rather have people spread out over more battlegrounds so I don't have to waste ~5 or, for AV, usually 8-10 minutes of my life waiting to get in. Also, trying to twink PvP when there were alot of twinks had some queues which lasted TWENTY MINUTES. 20 minutes to get in a 15 minute or less game, if it was quick...pretty sad.
Are you saying more battlegorund will make the queue times shorter?
Obviously, it offers more variety. More people waiting to get into a BG = longer queue times, just like your favorite ride at the amusement park. OR is it calculated by some ultra scientific and absolutely complicated system that only the math gods, Blizzard, could concoct? Sorry.
For that to happen the number of players would have to increase to compensate. what I was saying is that if there is a fix number of players say 100 its easier and faster for them to get a game if there are 5 battle grounds than if there were 10.
Lets say 100 people go to the amusement park... the rollercoster cant run unless there are 50 people in the queue, the tea cups cant run unless there are 20 people, the log flume cant run unless there are 30, the merry go round cant run unless there are 20 and the vomit rocket can run unless there are 30 people.
so thats 5 rides.. all of them cant run at the same time, theres not enough people, and it my even be the case that theres not enough people queued for either ride so none of the rides will run.
ok so lets only give them the roller coster, the tea cups and then vomit rocket.. there now all 3 can run at the same time and much less likely to be in a situation where none can run.
First of all, looks darkish but then again i guess they are trying to put in more true Warcraft into it, also the feeling of D-day i suppose, nice catch, well it's blizzard so it's going to be enjoyable atleast for the first many hours.
Second thing....
What are all the WAR fanboi zombies doing in here anyway? They keep talking about people trolling the WAR forums with negative stuff, yet they walk in here and do it a few times more?.... Jesus balls....
I'd rather have people spread out over more battlegrounds so I don't have to waste ~5 or, for AV, usually 8-10 minutes of my life waiting to get in. Also, trying to twink PvP when there were alot of twinks had some queues which lasted TWENTY MINUTES. 20 minutes to get in a 15 minute or less game, if it was quick...pretty sad.
Are you saying more battlegorund will make the queue times shorter?
Obviously, it offers more variety. More people waiting to get into a BG = longer queue times, just like your favorite ride at the amusement park. OR is it calculated by some ultra scientific and absolutely complicated system that only the math gods, Blizzard, could concoct? Sorry.
For that to happen the number of players would have to increase to compensate. what I was saying is that if there is a fix number of players say 100 its easier and faster for them to get a game if there are 5 battle grounds than if there were 10.
Lets say 100 people go to the amusement park... the rollercoster cant run unless there are 50 people in the queue, the tea cups cant run unless there are 20 people, the log flume cant run unless there are 30, the merry go round cant run unless there are 20 and the vomit rocket can run unless there are 30 people.
so thats 5 rides.. all of them cant run at the same time, theres not enough people, and it my even be the case that theres not enough people queued for either ride so none of the rides will run.
ok so lets only give them the roller coster, the tea cups and then vomit rocket.. there now all 3 can run at the same time and much less likely to be in a situation where none can run.
Hope ya got all that.
This is so funny because you're the fanboi of a game with over 10 million subs, yet you're talking about "not enough people". Move to a more populated server if you're in the sticks. The point is, why do all of them have to run? If I have a steel roller coaster and a wooden one, I want to ride the steel one. I wouldn't care less if the wooden was running or not.
People have the same mentality, they will flock to the battlegrounds that are more fun. HOWEVER, when the steel roller coaster gets overpopulated, wouldn't it be NICE to have the wooden one which is still a roller coaster but with less people?
Hope ya got all that.
-------------------------------------- A human and an Elf get captured by Skaven. The rat-men are getting ready to shoot the first hostage with Dwarf-made guns when he yells, "Earthquake!" The naturally nervous Skaven run and hide from the imaginary threat. He escapes. The Skaven regroup and bring out the Elf. Being very smart, the Elf has figured out what to do. When the Skaven get ready to shoot, the Elf, in order to scare them, yells, "Fire!"
I'd rather have people spread out over more battlegrounds so I don't have to waste ~5 or, for AV, usually 8-10 minutes of my life waiting to get in. Also, trying to twink PvP when there were alot of twinks had some queues which lasted TWENTY MINUTES. 20 minutes to get in a 15 minute or less game, if it was quick...pretty sad.
Are you saying more battlegorund will make the queue times shorter?
Obviously, it offers more variety. More people waiting to get into a BG = longer queue times, just like your favorite ride at the amusement park. OR is it calculated by some ultra scientific and absolutely complicated system that only the math gods, Blizzard, could concoct? Sorry.
For that to happen the number of players would have to increase to compensate. what I was saying is that if there is a fix number of players say 100 its easier and faster for them to get a game if there are 5 battle grounds than if there were 10.
Lets say 100 people go to the amusement park... the rollercoster cant run unless there are 50 people in the queue, the tea cups cant run unless there are 20 people, the log flume cant run unless there are 30, the merry go round cant run unless there are 20 and the vomit rocket can run unless there are 30 people.
so thats 5 rides.. all of them cant run at the same time, theres not enough people, and it my even be the case that theres not enough people queued for either ride so none of the rides will run.
ok so lets only give them the roller coster, the tea cups and then vomit rocket.. there now all 3 can run at the same time and much less likely to be in a situation where none can run.
Hope ya got all that.
This is so funny because you're the fanboi of a game with over 10 million subs, yet you're talking about "not enough people". Move to a more populated server if you're in the sticks. The point is, why do all of them have to run? If I have a steel roller coaster and a wooden one, I want to ride the steel one. I wouldn't care less if the wooden was running or not.
People have the same mentality, they will flock to the battlegrounds that are more fun. HOWEVER, when the steel roller coaster gets overpopulated, wouldn't it be NICE to have the wooden one which is still a roller coaster but with less people?
Hope ya got all that.
Hum you still not getting what I was trying to say. so lets leave it there.
This is so funny because you're the fanboi of a game with over 10 million subs, yet you're talking about "not enough people". Move to a more populated server if you're in the sticks. The point is, why do all of them have to run? If I have a steel roller coaster and a wooden one, I want to ride the steel one. I wouldn't care less if the wooden was running or not. People have the same mentality, they will flock to the battlegrounds that are more fun. HOWEVER, when the steel roller coaster gets overpopulated, wouldn't it be NICE to have the wooden one which is still a roller coaster but with less people? Hope ya got all that.
Empty BGs just doesen't make more sense than full ones.
Also, internet is not made out of series of tubes that get clogged when more people are using it, the same thing goes for BGs.
WAR didn't invent assault style maps and nore did DAOC.....
Everyone copies ideas off eachother otherwise we wouldn't any of the good games or products we do now. also it's pretty easy to see this as a natural progression from the old battlegrounds.
Though I do agree atm this battleground just looks bad.
---------------------------------------- Talking about SWG much?
They are hardly copying WAR. If that was the case it would be something more meaningfull than just for loot/gear. For thoes that still want to play WoW and have fun with it though, it looks good. Its there for more gear/item grind and thats fine, thats what WoW is about and some people enjoy that even if its not my cup of tea. So yea, for the WoW fans looks like you guys are getting some decent new content.
it's just like all the other korean mmo grind fests.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
WAR didn't invent assault style maps and nore did DAOC.....
Everyone copies ideas off eachother otherwise we wouldn't any of the good games or products we do now. also it's pretty easy to see this as a natural progression from the old battlegrounds.
Though I do agree atm this battleground just looks bad.
That may be true, however it doesn't prove others wrong in spirit and I think you and a few others know that deep inside. I think it is pretty damn obvious that this is supposed to compete with WAR. There are a lot of natural routes of progressions from the old battlegrounds, this was just one of them.
IMO it probably will be bad simply because it was created to as an answer to WAR, and essentially they tried to fit all of WAR into a single BG. Itll help them with retention and sales, but it will actually suck in practice.
___________________ Sadly, I see storm clouds on the horizon. A faint stench of Vanguard is in the air.-Kien
WAR didn't invent assault style maps and nore did DAOC.....
Everyone copies ideas off eachother otherwise we wouldn't any of the good games or products we do now. also it's pretty easy to see this as a natural progression from the old battlegrounds.
Though I do agree atm this battleground just looks bad.
That may be true, however it doesn't prove others wrong in spirit and I think you and a few others know that deep inside. I think it is pretty damn obvious that this is supposed to compete with WAR. There are a lot of natural routes of progressions from the old battlegrounds, this was just one of them.
IMO it probably will be bad simply because it was created to as an answer to WAR, and essentially they tried to fit all of WAR into a single BG. Itll help them with retention and sales, but it will actually suck in practice.
Well, there is now also a complete open world PvP zone with Siege combat and the AV BG is completely revamped. That's already 3 major changes to PvP.
Interesting: what will happen in the non instanced Wintergrasp open Pvp zone when 200 vs 200 would go to battle? Because non instanced means everyone can join.
With an average server population of 3000 playing at prime time, this is a real possiblity as everthing is concentrated there.
It will only depend on Blizzard to put up the appropriate rewards and the open world PvP zone will be as highly played as the BG's these days.
A complete set of gear and timed based buffs together with a few titles and I think a lot of hardcore PvP people will happely stay, because 2 new arena's are also included.
Today every 6 months there is a gear update in Wow applied to (new) raid, BG, Arena and crafting. It would be very easy to Blizzard to cover the same update for Wintergrasp and their new siege and air combat systems.
All this will result in a lot of people trying out both games, but most will stick with the characters they created for years and combat they are used to.
All this will result in a lot of people trying out both games, but most will stick with the characters they created for years and combat they are used to.
WAR didn't invent assault style maps and nore did DAOC.....
Everyone copies ideas off eachother otherwise we wouldn't any of the good games or products we do now. also it's pretty easy to see this as a natural progression from the old battlegrounds.
Though I do agree atm this battleground just looks bad.
That may be true, however it doesn't prove others wrong in spirit and I think you and a few others know that deep inside. I think it is pretty damn obvious that this is supposed to compete with WAR. There are a lot of natural routes of progressions from the old battlegrounds, this was just one of them.
IMO it probably will be bad simply because it was created to as an answer to WAR, and essentially they tried to fit all of WAR into a single BG. Itll help them with retention and sales, but it will actually suck in practice.
I honestly dont know how people see this as a rip from the WAR concept of tiered combat, the only similarities are the words "Tier" and "Four". The first thing that comes to my mind when I see this battleground is an assault map using walls and gates to pace the combat depending on how well the players are doing so they dont just run all the way to the end to win the game (Which im guessing they saw from AV).
Originally posted by Tergeron I honestly dont know how people see this as a rip from the WAR concept of tiered combat, the only similarities are the words "Tier" and "Four".
Those aren't the only similarities
I see it as a counter-move by Blizzard because:
1) Timing
2) They've been touting world PvP an awful lot, really pushing LW
3) The nature of the BG in question, as I said there before there are other maps they could have gone with.
4) The "dark" atmosphere of that BG
I don't any of this is a coincidence, and am shocked people don't believe there is a connection.
___________________ Sadly, I see storm clouds on the horizon. A faint stench of Vanguard is in the air.-Kien
I honestly dont know how people see this as a rip from the WAR concept of tiered combat, the only similarities are the words "Tier" and "Four".
Those aren't the only similarities
I see it as a counter-move by Blizzard because:
1) Timing
2) They've been touting world PvP an awful lot, really pushing LW
3) The nature of the BG in question, as I said there before there are other maps they could have gone with.
4) The "dark" atmosphere of that BG
I don't any of this is a coincidence, and am shocked people don't believe there is a connection.
1) LK is not a response to WAR, blizzard said it themselves that they wanted to get an expansion out every year if possible. Unless you are suggesting they were somehow threatened about a game that didnt have any media hype at all.
2) People have been ASKING for world pvp ever since BG's became the staple of WOW's pvp content, they wanted a reason to attend world pvp. You can see how blizzard was testing the waters of world PVP in BC with the capture areas in Hellfire, The flag run in Zangarmarsh and the Spirit towers in the Bone Wastes.
When you look at it this way Lake Wintergrasp is the natural evolution of world pvp blizzard is trying to get, they want to mix PVE and PVP as much as possible to make the benefits worthwhile. Lake Wintersgrasp is what people have been asking for since Vanilla WOW, that doesnt nessasarly mean it was added to compete with WAR.
3) Again, "Tier" and "Four" come to mind, AV is closer to WAR pvp then this new map is. And what are these other maps you speak of?
4) "John look at this game, how are we EVER going to beat THAT! JUST LOOK AT IT, THE SUN ISNT SHINING" "Add some fog and include dry patches in the grass! AND ADD PALM TREES, THATS DARK"
Originally posted by Tergeron 1) LK is not a response to WAR
LW= Lake Wintergrasp.
2) People have been ASKING for world pvp ever since BG's became the staple of WOW's pvp content
Asking for Blizzard to return it, more like My point was that they are pushing the world PvP aspects an awful lot, suddenly. They didn't push this hard with BC.
they want to mix PVE and PVP as much as possible to make the benefits worthwhile.
Which makes it all the more odd, because this is exactly what they have been doing since, oh, Silithus? Why the big deal now?
3) Again, "Tier" and "Four" come to mind, AV is closer to WAR pvp then this new map is. And what are these other maps you speak of?
The entire system is WAR in a can, sorry. Right down to the keeps. As for other maps, I have made oodles of long winded posts about them in here. Don't even try to suggest that this was the only option they could have went with.
___________________ Sadly, I see storm clouds on the horizon. A faint stench of Vanguard is in the air.-Kien
2) People have been ASKING for world pvp ever since BG's became the staple of WOW's pvp content
Asking for Blizzard to return it, more like My point was that they are pushing the world PvP aspects an awful lot, suddenly. They didn't push this hard with BC.
they want to mix PVE and PVP as much as possible to make the benefits worthwhile.
Which makes it all the more odd, because this is exactly what they have been doing since, oh, Silithus? Why the big deal now?
3) Again, "Tier" and "Four" come to mind, AV is closer to WAR pvp then this new map is. And what are these other maps you speak of?
The entire system is WAR in a can, sorry. Right down to the keeps. As for other maps, I have made oodles of long winded posts about them in here. Don't even try to suggest that this was the only option they could have went with.
Obviously you're right so after this post Im just going to stop, but first lets clear up a few things.
The point still stands, LK is not being built to compete with WAR, the same as how LK is not built around Wintersgrasp. This is why timing is irrelevent.
They didnt push BC world pvp because they were busy with Arenas, at the time people were also asking for competitive PVP designed around group combat, thats why you dont see the rest of the zones having those pvp features I mentioned.
It isnt a big deal, they are telling us what the incentives are for attending World PVP combat, which is the main reason world pvp has been so lack luster, a severe lack of significant reward, making sure the rewards are varied helps get more people into the combat so it isnt a wasteland like silithus turned into. What exactly are the benefits of wintergrasp combat then?
War in a can, right down to its keep*. WAR is a glorified AV, WAR has glorified Hellfire pvp battlegrounds, WAR has glorified Spirit Towers. The BG has similarities to what WAR has, ITS BEEN RIPPED. Also I'd like to see some of these ideas blizzard came up with as options to pick for battlegrounds since you didnt bother to throw any links my way.
Let's not argue that much. WoW is a great game. However, as it looks right now WAR will be a better option for fantasy MMO PvPers while WoW will continue to be the king when it comes to PvE.
WAR might of course crash and burn and all that but as a beta tester I believe you will be pleasantly surprised at launch by what you see and feel.
And as information to the poster above: 90+% of the PvP in WoW is instanced. 90+% of the PvP in WAR is open world whatever way you try to skin the cat. WoW is designed with PvE in mind. WAR is designed with PvP in mind.
Comments
Yes lets throw 10 new battlegrounds in wotlk.. lets spread the population out so thin that theres never enough people queued for any of the battles.
Right now I can go to any battle master in the evenings or weekends and see around 5 or so battlegrounds running (1-2 Av's) and about twice as many in the weeks nominated battle ground.
Blizzard talked about battle grounds and arenas, how they design them, why there are only 5 etc in last years blizzcon (videos on youtube if you care to look) and I bet you have no idea that EoS battle ground was designed to have the flag (that is now in center of the map) on a floating rock that circled the map.. but after play testing it was decided to be taken out.
Blizzard have done the numbers, crunched the data they know wether its productive or counter-productive at add 1,2 or 3 new battle grounds. More is not always better.
Please just think before posting, goes along with the flying mounts in azeroth.. if ppl thought about it for just a few seconds they would realise why it cant happen.
BTW we get 1 new battle ground and revamped AV.
how can you say that that is amazing and then say war is stale. i mean blizzard is clearly ripping off ideas from war because they feel threatened. if this wotlk battleground amazes you, how can war not amaze you even more...unless you're just a rampaging fanboi.
Yes lets throw 10 new battlegrounds in wotlk.. lets spread the population out so thin that theres never enough people queued for any of the battles.
Right now I can go to any battle master in the evenings or weekends and see around 5 or so battlegrounds running (1-2 Av's) and about twice as many in the weeks nominated battle ground.
Blizzard talked about battle grounds and arenas, how they design them, why there are only 5 etc in last years blizzcon (videos on youtube if you care to look) and I bet you have no idea that EoS battle ground was designed to have the flag (that is now in center of the map) on a floating rock that circled the map.. but after play testing it was decided to be taken out.
Blizzard have done the numbers, crunched the data they know wether its productive or counter-productive at add 1,2 or 3 new battle grounds. More is not always better.
Please just think before posting, goes along with the flying mounts in azeroth.. if ppl thought about it for just a few seconds they would realise why it cant happen.
BTW we get 1 new battle ground and revamped AV.
if blizzard were scientologist's you would be seriously fucked. stop worshiping a games company .
I'd rather have people spread out over more battlegrounds so I don't have to waste ~5 or, for AV, usually 8-10 minutes of my life waiting to get in. Also, trying to twink PvP when there were alot of twinks had some queues which lasted TWENTY MINUTES. 20 minutes to get in a 15 minute or less game, if it was quick...pretty sad.
--------------------------------------
A human and an Elf get captured by Skaven. The rat-men are getting ready to shoot the first hostage with Dwarf-made guns when he yells, "Earthquake!" The naturally nervous Skaven run and hide from the imaginary threat. He escapes. The Skaven regroup and bring out the Elf. Being very smart, the Elf has figured out what to do. When the Skaven get ready to shoot, the Elf, in order to scare them, yells, "Fire!"
Order of the White Border.
Yes lets throw 10 new battlegrounds in wotlk.. lets spread the population out so thin that theres never enough people queued for any of the battles.
Right now I can go to any battle master in the evenings or weekends and see around 5 or so battlegrounds running (1-2 Av's) and about twice as many in the weeks nominated battle ground.
Blizzard talked about battle grounds and arenas, how they design them, why there are only 5 etc in last years blizzcon (videos on youtube if you care to look) and I bet you have no idea that EoS battle ground was designed to have the flag (that is now in center of the map) on a floating rock that circled the map.. but after play testing it was decided to be taken out.
Blizzard have done the numbers, crunched the data they know wether its productive or counter-productive at add 1,2 or 3 new battle grounds. More is not always better.
Please just think before posting, goes along with the flying mounts in azeroth.. if ppl thought about it for just a few seconds they would realise why it cant happen.
BTW we get 1 new battle ground and revamped AV.
if blizzard were scientologist's you would be seriously fucked. stop worshiping a games company .
Ill worship Blizzard.. you can carry on worshiping your false god of WAR.
Are you saying more battlegorund will make the queue times shorter?
Are you saying more battlegorund will make the queue times shorter?
Obviously, it offers more variety. More people waiting to get into a BG = longer queue times, just like your favorite ride at the amusement park. OR is it calculated by some ultra scientific and absolutely complicated system that only the math gods, Blizzard, could concoct? Sorry.
--------------------------------------
A human and an Elf get captured by Skaven. The rat-men are getting ready to shoot the first hostage with Dwarf-made guns when he yells, "Earthquake!" The naturally nervous Skaven run and hide from the imaginary threat. He escapes. The Skaven regroup and bring out the Elf. Being very smart, the Elf has figured out what to do. When the Skaven get ready to shoot, the Elf, in order to scare them, yells, "Fire!"
Order of the White Border.
Are you saying more battlegorund will make the queue times shorter?
Obviously, it offers more variety. More people waiting to get into a BG = longer queue times, just like your favorite ride at the amusement park. OR is it calculated by some ultra scientific and absolutely complicated system that only the math gods, Blizzard, could concoct? Sorry.
For that to happen the number of players would have to increase to compensate. what I was saying is that if there is a fix number of players say 100 its easier and faster for them to get a game if there are 5 battle grounds than if there were 10.
Lets say 100 people go to the amusement park... the rollercoster cant run unless there are 50 people in the queue, the tea cups cant run unless there are 20 people, the log flume cant run unless there are 30, the merry go round cant run unless there are 20 and the vomit rocket can run unless there are 30 people.
so thats 5 rides.. all of them cant run at the same time, theres not enough people, and it my even be the case that theres not enough people queued for either ride so none of the rides will run.
ok so lets only give them the roller coster, the tea cups and then vomit rocket.. there now all 3 can run at the same time and much less likely to be in a situation where none can run.
Hope ya got all that.
First of all, looks darkish but then again i guess they are trying to put in more true Warcraft into it, also the feeling of D-day i suppose, nice catch, well it's blizzard so it's going to be enjoyable atleast for the first many hours.
Second thing....
What are all the WAR fanboi zombies doing in here anyway? They keep talking about people trolling the WAR forums with negative stuff, yet they walk in here and do it a few times more?.... Jesus balls....
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
Are you saying more battlegorund will make the queue times shorter?
Obviously, it offers more variety. More people waiting to get into a BG = longer queue times, just like your favorite ride at the amusement park. OR is it calculated by some ultra scientific and absolutely complicated system that only the math gods, Blizzard, could concoct? Sorry.
For that to happen the number of players would have to increase to compensate. what I was saying is that if there is a fix number of players say 100 its easier and faster for them to get a game if there are 5 battle grounds than if there were 10.
Lets say 100 people go to the amusement park... the rollercoster cant run unless there are 50 people in the queue, the tea cups cant run unless there are 20 people, the log flume cant run unless there are 30, the merry go round cant run unless there are 20 and the vomit rocket can run unless there are 30 people.
so thats 5 rides.. all of them cant run at the same time, theres not enough people, and it my even be the case that theres not enough people queued for either ride so none of the rides will run.
ok so lets only give them the roller coster, the tea cups and then vomit rocket.. there now all 3 can run at the same time and much less likely to be in a situation where none can run.
Hope ya got all that.
This is so funny because you're the fanboi of a game with over 10 million subs, yet you're talking about "not enough people". Move to a more populated server if you're in the sticks. The point is, why do all of them have to run? If I have a steel roller coaster and a wooden one, I want to ride the steel one. I wouldn't care less if the wooden was running or not.
People have the same mentality, they will flock to the battlegrounds that are more fun. HOWEVER, when the steel roller coaster gets overpopulated, wouldn't it be NICE to have the wooden one which is still a roller coaster but with less people?
Hope ya got all that.
--------------------------------------
A human and an Elf get captured by Skaven. The rat-men are getting ready to shoot the first hostage with Dwarf-made guns when he yells, "Earthquake!" The naturally nervous Skaven run and hide from the imaginary threat. He escapes. The Skaven regroup and bring out the Elf. Being very smart, the Elf has figured out what to do. When the Skaven get ready to shoot, the Elf, in order to scare them, yells, "Fire!"
Order of the White Border.
Are you saying more battlegorund will make the queue times shorter?
Obviously, it offers more variety. More people waiting to get into a BG = longer queue times, just like your favorite ride at the amusement park. OR is it calculated by some ultra scientific and absolutely complicated system that only the math gods, Blizzard, could concoct? Sorry.
For that to happen the number of players would have to increase to compensate. what I was saying is that if there is a fix number of players say 100 its easier and faster for them to get a game if there are 5 battle grounds than if there were 10.
Lets say 100 people go to the amusement park... the rollercoster cant run unless there are 50 people in the queue, the tea cups cant run unless there are 20 people, the log flume cant run unless there are 30, the merry go round cant run unless there are 20 and the vomit rocket can run unless there are 30 people.
so thats 5 rides.. all of them cant run at the same time, theres not enough people, and it my even be the case that theres not enough people queued for either ride so none of the rides will run.
ok so lets only give them the roller coster, the tea cups and then vomit rocket.. there now all 3 can run at the same time and much less likely to be in a situation where none can run.
Hope ya got all that.
This is so funny because you're the fanboi of a game with over 10 million subs, yet you're talking about "not enough people". Move to a more populated server if you're in the sticks. The point is, why do all of them have to run? If I have a steel roller coaster and a wooden one, I want to ride the steel one. I wouldn't care less if the wooden was running or not.
People have the same mentality, they will flock to the battlegrounds that are more fun. HOWEVER, when the steel roller coaster gets overpopulated, wouldn't it be NICE to have the wooden one which is still a roller coaster but with less people?
Hope ya got all that.
Hum you still not getting what I was trying to say. so lets leave it there.
Empty BGs just doesen't make more sense than full ones.
Also, internet is not made out of series of tubes that get clogged when more people are using it, the same thing goes for BGs.
Someone worshipping blizzard... that's kinda sad. Gaming companies becoming false gods now I see... another name for super fanboi? lol
Hmm 1 more BG! WHOA! That's not gonna save the pathetic state of WoW PvP.
WAR didn't invent assault style maps and nore did DAOC.....
Everyone copies ideas off eachother otherwise we wouldn't any of the good games or products we do now. also it's pretty easy to see this as a natural progression from the old battlegrounds.
Though I do agree atm this battleground just looks bad.
----------------------------------------
Talking about SWG much?
it's just like all the other korean mmo grind fests.
could we please get correspondent writers and moderators, on the eve forum at mmorpg.com, who are well-versed on eve-online and aren't just passersby pushing buttons? pretty please?
That may be true, however it doesn't prove others wrong in spirit and I think you and a few others know that deep inside. I think it is pretty damn obvious that this is supposed to compete with WAR. There are a lot of natural routes of progressions from the old battlegrounds, this was just one of them.
IMO it probably will be bad simply because it was created to as an answer to WAR, and essentially they tried to fit all of WAR into a single BG. Itll help them with retention and sales, but it will actually suck in practice.
___________________
Sadly, I see storm clouds on the horizon. A faint stench of Vanguard is in the air.-Kien
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/12/13/
That may be true, however it doesn't prove others wrong in spirit and I think you and a few others know that deep inside. I think it is pretty damn obvious that this is supposed to compete with WAR. There are a lot of natural routes of progressions from the old battlegrounds, this was just one of them.
IMO it probably will be bad simply because it was created to as an answer to WAR, and essentially they tried to fit all of WAR into a single BG. Itll help them with retention and sales, but it will actually suck in practice.
Well, there is now also a complete open world PvP zone with Siege combat and the AV BG is completely revamped. That's already 3 major changes to PvP.
Interesting: what will happen in the non instanced Wintergrasp open Pvp zone when 200 vs 200 would go to battle? Because non instanced means everyone can join.
With an average server population of 3000 playing at prime time, this is a real possiblity as everthing is concentrated there.
It will only depend on Blizzard to put up the appropriate rewards and the open world PvP zone will be as highly played as the BG's these days.
A complete set of gear and timed based buffs together with a few titles and I think a lot of hardcore PvP people will happely stay, because 2 new arena's are also included.
Today every 6 months there is a gear update in Wow applied to (new) raid, BG, Arena and crafting. It would be very easy to Blizzard to cover the same update for Wintergrasp and their new siege and air combat systems.
All this will result in a lot of people trying out both games, but most will stick with the characters they created for years and combat they are used to.
I agree with this assessment
EQ2 fan sites
That may be true, however it doesn't prove others wrong in spirit and I think you and a few others know that deep inside. I think it is pretty damn obvious that this is supposed to compete with WAR. There are a lot of natural routes of progressions from the old battlegrounds, this was just one of them.
IMO it probably will be bad simply because it was created to as an answer to WAR, and essentially they tried to fit all of WAR into a single BG. Itll help them with retention and sales, but it will actually suck in practice.
I honestly dont know how people see this as a rip from the WAR concept of tiered combat, the only similarities are the words "Tier" and "Four". The first thing that comes to my mind when I see this battleground is an assault map using walls and gates to pace the combat depending on how well the players are doing so they dont just run all the way to the end to win the game (Which im guessing they saw from AV).
I see it as a counter-move by Blizzard because:
1) Timing
2) They've been touting world PvP an awful lot, really pushing LW
3) The nature of the BG in question, as I said there before there are other maps they could have gone with.
4) The "dark" atmosphere of that BG
I don't any of this is a coincidence, and am shocked people don't believe there is a connection.
___________________
Sadly, I see storm clouds on the horizon. A faint stench of Vanguard is in the air.-Kien
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/12/13/
I see it as a counter-move by Blizzard because:
1) Timing
2) They've been touting world PvP an awful lot, really pushing LW
3) The nature of the BG in question, as I said there before there are other maps they could have gone with.
4) The "dark" atmosphere of that BG
I don't any of this is a coincidence, and am shocked people don't believe there is a connection.
1) LK is not a response to WAR, blizzard said it themselves that they wanted to get an expansion out every year if possible. Unless you are suggesting they were somehow threatened about a game that didnt have any media hype at all.
2) People have been ASKING for world pvp ever since BG's became the staple of WOW's pvp content, they wanted a reason to attend world pvp. You can see how blizzard was testing the waters of world PVP in BC with the capture areas in Hellfire, The flag run in Zangarmarsh and the Spirit towers in the Bone Wastes.
When you look at it this way Lake Wintergrasp is the natural evolution of world pvp blizzard is trying to get, they want to mix PVE and PVP as much as possible to make the benefits worthwhile. Lake Wintersgrasp is what people have been asking for since Vanilla WOW, that doesnt nessasarly mean it was added to compete with WAR.
3) Again, "Tier" and "Four" come to mind, AV is closer to WAR pvp then this new map is. And what are these other maps you speak of?
4) "John look at this game, how are we EVER going to beat THAT! JUST LOOK AT IT, THE SUN ISNT SHINING" "Add some fog and include dry patches in the grass! AND ADD PALM TREES, THATS DARK"
___________________
Sadly, I see storm clouds on the horizon. A faint stench of Vanguard is in the air.-Kien
http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2006/12/13/
Asking for Blizzard to return it, more like
Which makes it all the more odd, because this is exactly what they have been doing since, oh, Silithus? Why the big deal now?
The entire system is WAR in a can, sorry. Right down to the keeps. As for other maps, I have made oodles of long winded posts about them in here. Don't even try to suggest that this was the only option they could have went with.Obviously you're right so after this post Im just going to stop, but first lets clear up a few things.
The point still stands, LK is not being built to compete with WAR, the same as how LK is not built around Wintersgrasp. This is why timing is irrelevent.
They didnt push BC world pvp because they were busy with Arenas, at the time people were also asking for competitive PVP designed around group combat, thats why you dont see the rest of the zones having those pvp features I mentioned.
It isnt a big deal, they are telling us what the incentives are for attending World PVP combat, which is the main reason world pvp has been so lack luster, a severe lack of significant reward, making sure the rewards are varied helps get more people into the combat so it isnt a wasteland like silithus turned into. What exactly are the benefits of wintergrasp combat then?
War in a can, right down to its keep*. WAR is a glorified AV, WAR has glorified Hellfire pvp battlegrounds, WAR has glorified Spirit Towers. The BG has similarities to what WAR has, ITS BEEN RIPPED. Also I'd like to see some of these ideas blizzard came up with as options to pick for battlegrounds since you didnt bother to throw any links my way.
Here is a BIG difference between world PvP siege warfare in WotLK and WAR:
Lake Winter = FULL end game open world PvP (not instanced).
Even the end game capitol Sieges will be instanced in WAR.
For a game that is called the official heir of DAoC this must hurt really hard for the DAoC fans to swallow.
And ... instances in WAR are pure copies of the Battlegrounds in Wow (most are only played with 12vs12).
So everybody lends game ideas, but I don't mind.
As long as gaming fun can be kept up, np.
Let's not argue that much. WoW is a great game. However, as it looks right now WAR will be a better option for fantasy MMO PvPers while WoW will continue to be the king when it comes to PvE.
WAR might of course crash and burn and all that but as a beta tester I believe you will be pleasantly surprised at launch by what you see and feel.
And as information to the poster above: 90+% of the PvP in WoW is instanced. 90+% of the PvP in WAR is open world whatever way you try to skin the cat. WoW is designed with PvE in mind. WAR is designed with PvP in mind.