A couple propositions to alleviate the state of world PvP from a stability and incentive structure standpoint


#1

The state of world PvP is clear to most people so I won’t dwell too much on the complaints. So suffice it to say that those servers in which the minority faction is heavily outnumbered, world PvP isn’t healthy nor competitive. Flight masters are constantly dead, boats/Zeppelins are practically inaccessible, and popular dungeons may take numerous corpse-crawls to access. The infrastructure that makes play reasonable is ravaged.

So, consider some possible intervention that could help steer the course of world PvP closer to something like the “spirit of the rules” and away from the current toxicity which is inherently unstable and a form of a perverse “positive feedback loop” which may promote one of the following outcomes:

Current projections:

  1. Players of the minority faction become fatigued with the extreme obstacles to play and switch servers to where their preferred faction is dominant until servers are largely mono-factionalized.

-This has clearly undesirable consequences in that a healthy faction balance on servers makes for a more interesting play experience and contributes largely to the structure of an MMO based around warring factions. Largely mono-factionalized servers reduce incidents of world PvP, creating an unstable equilibrium, further driving the faction disparity.

  1. Minority faction players stick around but are severely hindered in the available content, and are discouraged from continuing their subscription or resorting to reducing their play-time, effectively resulting in the same outcome as 1).

Thus, let’s consider some possible interventions assuming the trend continues and we are interested in maintaining a semblance of the world PvP structure without resorting to an exodus for a large segment of the population. In order of increasing interventionism(inb4 “no changes” or “u chose a PvP server, dummy”).

Propositions:

  1. Free transfers for characters of the dominant faction on a server to a server in which their faction is the minority.

a) Optional addition of limiting all server transfers(including paid) to servers where their character faction is either in the minority or very close to parity.

-This solution is entirely non-intrusive to the mechanics of the game and can only help to encourage faction-realignment, though the degree of which is possibly minimal.

  1. A system in which after a character has been killed ‘x’ number of times in world PvP, they become “de-flagged” from PvP(even in neutral zones)for a period of ‘t’ minutes/hours.

a) An alternate system in which a character becomes “dishonorable” for ‘t’ minutes/hours after ‘x’ PvP deaths.

-These solutions alter the mechanics of the game and would require testing though they may result in a more guaranteed change in gameplay experience without grossly altering the experience for those interested in “the spirit of the rules” for world PvP.

  1. A system which incentives server transfers by increasing xp gain rate from the baseline value by ‘x’ percent correlated to the severity of the server faction imbalance.

E.g. A server with a 61/39 imbalance would result in the minority faction gaining an increased xp gain rate in some way proportional to the 22 point faction deficit.

-This solution, although more clearly interventionist, strikes at the heart of the faction balance incentive structure. It’s likely that if the xp gain proportion is tweaked reasonably, this incentive could likely result in very closely balanced servers and is self-correcting(a negative feedback loop), resulting in a stable equilibrium of 50-50 and favoring neither faction in the long run.

(note we should reevaluate the state after the release of battlegrounds to see if this world PvP fiasco really was just a short term problem, thus no changes should be implemented until a period of review following BGs.)

Conclusion:

Choosing a faction can be thought of as making an economic decision. Economic decisions are driven by incentives, some of which when considering faction choice are: PvP racial abilities, aesthetic preference, faction map layout, and not the least of which is perceived likelihood of leveling ease/PvP ease.

Ultimately, without a change in either incentive structure or mechanics, it’s unclear that anything in the state of world PvP can or even should change.

Feedback and discussion welcome and encouraged.


#2

You’ve got to learn to deal with it until BG’s come out. Go dungeon, or swap zones…
Our server is fairly balanced on Bigglesworth, and we still get people camping FP’s and towns. Right this moment, literally as I type this out, the guild Roadhouse with a few randoms from other guilds on Alliance is currently camping Camp Mojache in a raid group, and farming the graveyard literally right next to it.

Gotta swap zones… It’s a part of it.


#3

I’m not sure your anecdote really accounts for how much the quality of life on unbalanced servers has deteriorated. Even getting to those dungeons is nightmarish. the incentive structure currently doesn’t do anything to change that. Unless you would consider what’s happening on those servers to be “working as intended”


#4

LOL you may want to check that one…


#5

Definitely how the players intended it to happen. Both alliance and horde have to deal with camping for hours on end depending on the zone. Gotta leave the hotspots or be ganked, it’s what we signed up for by joining PvP server.

Might not be too fun to be ganked and camped, but you should work on trying to get a raid group of your own together to deal with it.


#6

That was my attempt to be faction neutral :slight_smile:


#7

This simply doesn’t map onto the reality of my and many servers like it. One can’t even level adequately in Tanaris, a pivotal leveling zone as Gadgetzan is regularly camped from every direction. People don’t seem to understand that this was considerably less a problem in Vanilla due to the server sizes being vastly larger in the current iteration.


#8

We knew the servers were going to be larger, and we knew we’d have more enemies to deal with in the world. People were warning eachother before the servers launched to roll on a PvE server if you didn’t want to be camped. I don’t know what you want to hear besides reroll PvE?


#9

It seems to me as if you’re missing the nature of the argument, which is focused on practicality and plausibility. Do you believe that the status quo on PvP servers is exactly as Blizzard intended it? Or do you think they chose to expedite Battleground introduction because they are performing poorly?

Secondly, what would be your objections to propositions 1) and 2) ?


#10

Additionally, it was clear they weren’t able to properly estimate the server population size, which is why they added additional servers after launch. They also anticipated drop off.


#11

Thank you for your valued input…


#12

The nature of the argument is this.
The servers weren’t going to be balanced. We knew this. We then decided to join a PvP server, knowing full well that the players decide how many horde and alliance are on the server by creating said character. Anything past that, well…

Do I think it’s fair? Not really.
Is there anything to be done? Release BG’s early? We’re already getting them.
Free transfers such as said by 1 occur, but aren’t always taken advantage of.
The idea on 2, it’s not a PvP server anymore if you’re unflagging.

Well, I keep trying to give my thoughts on the matter but everyone wants Blizz to just make player choices for them because they can’t do it for themselves. Like I said, I don’t know what ya’ll are fishing for right now.


#13

Thanks for the condescending response. Here’s some food for thought. Why do you think Blizz originally made you unflagged in friendly territory? It’s a PvP server after all. Why do you think they decided to make you honorless after flying? It’s a PvP server after all. Why do you think they made low level characters honorless? It’s a PvP server after all, isn’t it?


#14

You’re tiring me. It’s not about being condescending. I’m giving you my opinion in a very straight forward manner. I’ve done nothing to insult nor belittle you. If you don’t want other people to pitch in, stop acting like you actually want to have a conversation.

Because it’s a game of war. You’re not at war in your house. However in zones you’re fighting over in the game, or in hostile territory you’re actively at war…

Because you’re typically AFK/unbuffed after landing. You’re not an honorable kill, literally what it means.

Because it’s based off the XP system…


#15


#16

None of those responses justify keeping the current world PvP rules in place and just sure how arbitrary the original ones are.


#17

Informative and educational.


#18

You’re welcome to your opinion.
However I do not agree with you. I enjoy PvP servers for PvP. I might not always be coming out on top, but I’ll retreat to another task if need be. There’s tons of things I can be doing… Leveling another alt, which I am. Grinding gold, questing, farming mats for my guild, helping my guildies out. Fishing for gold even if you wish. Running dungeons, raiding, collecting pets if you want to grind some out…

It’s not as though your only option is to hit the hotzones.


(Saángreal) #19

In Grom’gol, we Horde like to play the game called who can load first and then stomp the not fully loaded Ally.

It actually goes back and forth.


#20

I do what I can.

You’re welcome.