I don’t mind having that conversation. But we have to get passed silly things first…like the notion the Horde have a 30 second head start.
Well its a good thing we dont have the resource mechanic in classic
Name checks out.
2 Likes
To what end? Great, she’s the middle. The horde cave also gives a head start to many objectives. The two are not mutually-exclusive.
She should not be the middle. Both her and Galvanger should be equidistant to the starting points since they are equivalent objectives. All you’re doing is proving that her location is indeed incorrect.
1 Like
I don’t necessarily disagree. The point I was trying to make was balance agnostic though. I was just trying to claim that she was the middle…with no comment if that was good or bad.
Again, to what end? It makes no sense to quibble over this point. You’re being argumentative for no good reason, unless you want to prove that the BG is unbalanced. Is that your reason for calling Balinda center?
Give it a week or so and the AFKers will return.
One question. How long are these bans for?
The end was to argue against the fact the Horde have a 30 second head start to anywhere, and the fact that Horde/Alliance getting to Balinda at the same time is supposed to prove that.
Seems like most of them were a 1/2 days, if they were just willingly being non-participatory. Actual botters got more.
1 Like
Again, if Galvanger and Balinda are equivalent objectives and it takes 30 seconds more for alliance to get to Galvanger than horde to get to Balinda then the horde do have a 30 second head start to her.
The same goes for any other similar objectives such as SHB and IWB or SHGY and IBGY. The horde start closer in many comparisons. Balinda being the center only highlights this.
Now do they have a 30 second head start to everywhere? No, not everywhere. But there is a head start to Balinda/Galvanger.
The queue system and the ablity to dodge were never changed in vanilla yet they changed it here, so why not change something that is causing massive imbalance and hurting the game for the sake of better expirience?
If both sides ran directly to Galv instead of directly to Balinda, I think both would meet up just outside…exactly like what happens to Balinda.
If they get to Balinda/galv at the same time, I cannot see how it is possible for them to have a head start.
I am arguing that Balinda is the middle of the map…and that Alliance territory extends all the way to the middle of the map.
I think it was timed by someone and horde supposedly get to Van 2 mins earlier.
Perhaps blizzard was OK with the teams meeting at a major objective? (also has someone actually timed the distance from Bal to Galv, or is that yet more fabrication?)
Personally I would prefer the early AV be used so that the center of the map has an objective (Korrak in FOS, and Snowfall GY) with all of the early NPCs back in force.
They don’t, if both sides head to each one directly they will meet at around Balinda’s building. There is definitely a head start of some sort for the horde in that exchange.
Horde cave location is fine.
No one should res in cave until all others gys are taken however.
I agree, the current Alliance situation doesn’t seem great. But I think its a player behavior problem. I think solving the people being mass-non-participatory would do a lot to make the experience better.
I think I am going to have to see proof of that.
I would argue that the Alliance territory simply extends further into the middle of the map than the Hordes.
Im ok with that change.
It has started. The proof is in the wins we have gotten… no easy but we’re winning.