https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hhKkP8LryYM
“We still had patch 1.12 and slightly before.”
3 Likes
Few would debate that 1.12 wow was all around watered down. The whole “1.12 data is proof” is horse ![:poop:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/poop.png?v=6" ":poop:")
. Most people were running the content you are attempting to “prove” long before 1.12 and therefore long before content nerfs leading up to tbc.
In the grand scale of things, 1.12 is the most melted watered down crap version of vanilla. From top to bottom. Holding 1.12 data up as proof is laughable.
1.12 data is
1.12 AV is
4 Likes
Because several hours for a single battleground is ridiculous. If you don’t see how or why we simply disagree.
Well get ready for the Horde to turtle every AV for several hours. Because that is the only way for the Horde to win 1.12 AV.
3 Likes
Don’t care whatsoever if you disagree with the length of AV. It was initially intended to be long, and that the players felt part of a larger battle. Go play the other 2 BGs if you cannot stomach not finishing one.
4 Likes
I played AV in Vanilla after it was changed, even when Horde turtled it didn’t take “hours,” and certainly not days. I think I’ll be fine, thanks.
1 Like
If it was intended to be that long, the devs wouldn’t have changed it as quickly as they had. It clearly went past a reasonable amount of time to invest in a single activity in one sitting.
Are you aware the first couple AV patches actually buffed aspects of it’s elements? They only began nerfing and removing elements due to the requirement of finishing the match in order to distribute marks of honor as the other 2 BGs did. MoHs were one of the worst things to tack onto AV.
IIRC it was about 4 months before MoHs appeared and the neutering began. Calling that “quickly” is a bit of a stretch. Had MoHs not been attached to AV, it may never had been nerfed.
There was no requirement to complete the BG in one sitting prior to MoHs, that is the whole point. You could make considerable honor and reputation gains just playing for however long you chose to in early AV.
8 Likes
And you can’t see how fundamentally flawed that design is? The devs did, and that’s why it was changed.
We disagree, that’s fine. Good thing for me though, they’re going with a patch that doesn’t have a gratuitous time sink in the form of a battleground I enjoy playing.
Did you even read what I took the time to write?
Why do I even bother engaging with people like you?
2 Likes
That’s the real question. They’re giving us classic but without the things that made it iconic. Aside from the AQ event, old AV is the thing I heard about the most from old players when I started playing. People remember it because it was epic. The players who come back for classic but aren’t spending all their time on the forums and following the news are going to expect it to be there.
6 Likes
Ok, can someone give me a TL;DR; / AV for Dummies guide of what the issue is and what Blizzard is doing that we don’t like?
You’re over thinking it. They just don’t want to put in the work rebuilding 1.5 AV, same reason they haven’t despite us begging for years. 1.12 AV is mostly retail AV with some things removed.
4 Likes
1 Like
This is primarily an opinion, and one I don’t share. It doesn’t matter what the “initial patches” did because the final decision they made was the one they decided was best. If they wanted original release AV back, they could’ve reintroduced it at any time, but they didn’t, and I believe this is because they didn’t think the original design was good for the game or the players.
Considering how many separate patches were made with changes regarding AV? I think 4 months is a rather short amount of time in the process of iterate>test>release, iterate>test>release ad nauseum until they reach a conclusion. Again, this primarily an opinion, one I don’t share.
This is what I originally addressed but since you wanted further validation, I’ll elaborate. Being the only portion of your rant that wasn’t an opinion, one which I had already told you twice I simply disagree with, this was only part I felt warranted addressing.
If you have an activity for players to engage in that includes win and loss conditions, but the activity itself never has to be won or lost for both rewards and defeat to be experienced, that activity is poorly designed. The fact that one could continuously farm both rep and honor without ever actually finishing the battleground means that the win and loss conditions are invalidated, therefore why is it a battleground as an activity separate from the rest of the game in the first place?
Do you feel better now?
Some people want AV 1.0 back instead of the AV of 1.12.
It was long, had tons of pve elements that have since been removed, favored the Alliance over the Horde, and you didn’t have to win the battleground to reap the benefits of playing a battleground.
Technically they want 1.5 AV back, there was no 1.0 AV. And 1.5-1.8 AV actually lasted less time in vanilla than 1.11-2.0 AV, so technically 1.11 AV is more authentic to vanilla as well.
Not WoW patch version 1.0… AV in it’s original state, or version 1.0 for the battleground. The patch it was introduced in wasn’t what I was referring to.
Regardless the original version of AV was so bad it was changed very quickly and lasted less time in vanilla than 1.11 AV.
What?
1.11 AV, that patch was June 19 2006 patch 2.0 was Dec 6 2006.
Proper AV came out June 7 2005.
So less than 6 months vs over 1 year.
2 Likes