Alterac Valley in Classic

[Luuni-area-52]

So because I don’t agree with you all is lost?

Why is getting a full accurate representation of Vanilla World of Warcraft a bad thing? Isn’t that what people wanted?

If Blizzard came out and said they were doing progressive AV, would you guys still be here arguing against that, despite it being the most accurate thing they could have done?

I’m trying to figure out your red line in the sand that if Blizzard crosses, you won’t play. Because I want everyone to play. But I also want it to be accurate.

I’ve seen several folks offer up 1.8 as a compromise. What if we started with that?

Right now we’re at 1.12 - 1.12 for Classic.

If we can get to X - 1.12 then that would be beneficial to you guys who are arguing against me.

Then just maybe, when they flip the switch to the older version, people will dislike it Blizzard will decide to keep the one of the older versions.

As I think Prufinnor has stated, I haven’t played the older version. So I can’t argue against it. And I haven’t been arguing against it. Never said it was bad. I’d prefer if they started with it and then progressed.

If a majority of people like the older version maybe they’ll stick with the older version.

But right now I think it would be best to do X - 1.12, if Blizzard can do it. If not, then well, we’re stuck with 1.12 because that’s what they have.

Also really surprised none of you have used the Epic Battlegrounds argument. Incase you aren’t aware… Blizzard actually buffed Alterac Valley a few months ago on live.

Feedback: Epic Battlegrounds

Greetings, You may have noticed we've been doing some updates to Alterac Valley and Isle of Conquest recently. Our goals with these changes are to both improve the gameplay experience in these battlegrounds and to also design them around a longer duration format. We feel that with the longer match length, players have more room to switch strategies in a match, change from offense to defense a few times, etc. to provide a, well, more epic experience. With that, we're looking to you to give us f…

Here is the thread. Unsure why no one is throwing this in their faces, to show that the current live time is trying to go back to a time AV was harder. When that exact time is, I’m unsure.

[Sírre-malfurion]

Here is the thread. Unsure why no one is throwing this in their faces, to show that the current live time is trying to go back to a time AV was harder. When that exact time is, I’m unsure.

I don’t think many people here read other forum sections than this because they can’t post elsewhere anyway

I for one don’t have any idea what is going on in retail.

[Prufinnor-wyrmrest-accord]

One thing I do not believe I have gotten a clear answer on and I have asked before because people just dismiss the question…

Because it is a horribly flawed question. Also people are sick of your arguing against something which you’ve no experience with.

The fact that you are asking that question indicates, to me, that you haven’t absorbed a single argument that has occurred in this thread or paid any note to the viewpoints of the people who are asking for an earlier, more epic version of AV.

That as well.

[Luuni-area-52]

In my latest post I wasn’t arguing against 1.5 AV. I was saying try to recreate it. I was compromising with you, but then just cycle through like actual Vanilla. That seems like a fair compromise.

But I guess it’s either your way or the highway it seems. That isn’t a discussion. That’s a demand.

Blizzard seems to work well with compromises with the community like they did with loot trading and the content phases. Not flat out demands.

[Prufinnor-wyrmrest-accord]

In my latest post I wasn’t arguing against 1.5 AV. I was saying try to recreate it. I was compromising with you, but then just cycle through like actual Vanilla. That seems like a fair compromise.

But I guess it’s either your way or the highway it seems. That isn’t a discussion. That’s a demand.

Blizzard seems to work well with compromises with the community like they did with loot trading and the content phases. Not flat out demands.

I care nothing about a position that leads to a perpetual neutered experience, nor am I interested in compromising with someone with zero experience of the subject matter. Your attempt at equating content rollout to literal content removal is absurd. Dooming the BG to a known history of crippling change is something you should pat yourself on the back about. It is pure ignorance.

[Mergons-terenas]

I demand 1.5 AV, there is no middle way…

[Karch-kilrogg]

The real question on everyone’s mind is can you fish in AV with version 1.12? It was a bonding experience at times even with the opposing faction.

[Minnette-kargath]

I could be happy with a progressive AV. I could be happy with any version 1.5 - 1.8 AV. But I feel that just using 1.12 AV is a mistake. Using only 1.12 AV removes a bunch of NPC’s that only existed in previous versions of AV. Those NPC’s drastically change the way teams have to play. Those NPC’s force teams to play as a team and greatly reduce the chances for teams to rush to the end for a fast win!

[Cubic-emerald-dream]

AV 1.12 is a terrible decision, please reconsider.

Even the EU agrees.
https://eu.forums.blizzard.com/en/wow/t/alterac-valley-in-classic/37036

[Abigaiil-tichondrius (Abigaiil)]

The match will be over by the time you catch something.

[Cubic-emerald-dream]

Boo.
Original AV please.

[Sharinn-tichondrius (Sharinn)]

Well 1.12 is probably the worst decision, usually it ended before you could do the quests to summon reinforcements to help you push to enemy stronghold.

It was also very disgusting to see ally faction pulling drek by himself out of his strong hold and killing him on the hill.

Well av had a downword spiral of nerfs through out wow.

[Synthose-wyrmrest-accord]

I dont get why you are getting dumped on so hard. I understand what you’re saying, and it is a nice idea. After all, we are going for recapturing that classic feel, and progressing AV would be true to the source material.

The problem isn’t that you’re wrong on that front. The real problem is that the AV nerfs have been a point of contention since they were done. People want to experience AV as it was for the majority of wow. Most folks have not been able to play old AV, me included. It’s a part of WoW history.

As far as wanting it for the entirety of Classic, rather than phasing it forward through iterations, you might argue that it goes against “nochanges,” and is therefore hypocritical. Remember, however, that these folks are not voicing new opinions. People have railed against AV nerfs since the beginning. That might honestly be more in line with “nochanges” than 1.12. If it’s possible to experience AV as it was, it would be a sight to see.

Old AV seems more in line with Classic ideology than 1.12, from what I’ve read. I think that’s why folks are so vehement about it.

[Slagface-rexxar]

I played AV from day one and agree 100% that starting the game from 1.12 is to far in.

Maybe the original version wasn’t ideal but at least it gave people that liked to do side quests to help the overall battle have something to do before diving headfirst into a fight.

It would be a sad day indeed if Classic AV doesn’t have Korrak and all assocated road blocks that forced the entire raid groups to act as a full team to achieve “pushes” to take small choke points like graveyards or towers.

An example being releasing Commandoes or Griffons or even both at the same time on an area and pushing the opposing team back at the same time they attack to help force an enemies retreat.

Those are the little hard fought victories that mad AV great as it was full on team work not just rush rush rush tank and spank…but who knows maybe that was just me and what I enjoyed. Just my 2cents as to what made and EPIC battle ground EPIC even if the battle took a day or 3 you knew how or why you won and it was great!

[Microdotx-area-52]

Why lie though? 1.12 is just convenient to blizz.

[Burista-bleeding-hollow]

[Carlognoc-dalvengyr (Carlognoc)]

1 thousand replies AV in classic seems to be a popular thread.

[Vulvoi-gundrak]

What reasons could Blizzard have had for making so many changes and making them so often?

Sometimes it just comes down to the developers trying things, each one had an agenda (PvP wasn’t even going to be a thing until Kevin Jordan wrote a long manifesto advocating for it, which was then adopted).

The popularity of PvP was a huge surprise and often they were making changes on the fly without really understanding why. They had an idea and they went with it: some were good, some were not so good.

A quote from Mark Kerns: "We had issues with that too (talking about BGs), in terms of being too NPC reliant in places. Who knew MOBA was a thing, if we knew MOBAs were a thing we would not have been concerned with the amount of NPCs we had running around doing stuff. So maybe we missed the boat on that a little bit because we revamped it to move the focus off NPCs and NPCs doing attacks and things."

So in hindsight they can see that maybe removing the NPCs from the PvP BGs maybe wasn’t such a great idea, but they had no experience with PvP and had really only DAoC PvP to go on (which they were all playing). They just thought at the time that a better PvP experience should not have contained so many NPCs.

If they knew what we know now, would they have made the changes to AV by reducing the number of NPCs and their health. The above quote indicates that maybe they would not have made those changes, as PvP maps with NPCs have been well received in the ensuing years.

Not every decision a game developer makes, and not every change they implement, are good. People make mistakes based on the information they had at the time. We have 14 years of hindsight, developments in MMOs and the game industry in general, and the experience of many private servers that can influence what we believe is a better PvP experience.

In this case, many of the people who enjoy PvP, and who played many different versions of AV, feel like they were closer with the first iterations of AV and moved further and further away from the solid game design and original intent based on poor decisions, faulty logic and just plain lack of knowledge about what made good PvP.

[Cubic-emerald-dream]

Not every decision a game developer makes, and not every change they implement, are good.

AV and the changes made to it are a concentrated example of what was done to the entire game for the past 15 years.
Vanilla to BFA = AV 1.5 to 1.12

An allegory?

[anon45291730]

So in hindsight they can see that maybe removing the NPCs from the PvP BGs maybe wasn’t such a great idea, but they had no experience with PvP and had really only DAoC PvP to go on (which they were all playing).

I will not play the board game Risk without one or more neutral armies, which can be played more than one way. I want interesting complexity.

Also, thank you for keeping it real by mentioning their greatest inspiration for doing PvP right - Dark Age of Camelot. It was an exhilarating PvP experience. I could not get enough of it. Low level Bgs. High level realm based OWPvP, called realm versus realm (RvR). High level PvP dungeon that included a deep dive raid. One thing that I remember is that NPCs were always a part of PvP. There were secret treasures to loot. They guarded keeps and towers. They provided no-go zones whereat ambushers could try to hide.

Early WoW devs were smart to learn from DAoC. How they eventually got around to removing NPCs from that seems dubious. I call it the invisible hand. The oft cited mantra “no PvE in my PvP” was fiction. True RPG PvP players despised that mantra, because it came from a new source of people who were clearly clueless and careless. Nonetheless that mantra permeated public chat, so every RPG followed the wrong crowd. It wouldn’t surprise me if it was a secret psyop to destroy potential competition. If it was, then congratulations to whoever planned and executed it. The top brass everywhere was snookered.