Kerns seems like the proper person to quote rather than that guy who simply claimed AV was not “popular”.
Not having npcs events in blizzards attempt to remake tauren mill vs southshore probably is one of the reasons why a lot of people hate it besides being unable to run anywhere you want.
In classic horde had that quest where they could summon an army of zombies in alliances graveyard that would attack people. The whole area of hillsbrad should of been playable, especially the mountain area.
Well Alteract valley needs more then 1 way to play it, especially they need to revert npc nerfs. Seeing how classic is suppose to be different then retail they should throw the philosophy changes to make battlegrounds into fast and furious for what it use to be.
1 Like
I don’t know if the people early in the thread are still around who kept saying ‘Well if they’d zerg in 1.12 AV they’d zerg in any version of AV!’ – but my -GOODNESS- do I need to highlight how wrong that is. People look for an excuse, and NPCs are the -reason-. When it’s just you and two others who hung back to defend and there’s no NPCs, well, you’re gonna get slammed by about 30-40 PCs in a minute or two and your defense won’t matter all that much, and then you’re down to one other, and then maybe even not that.
Having NPC buffers encourages people to fight, on both sides, because they have meat-shields. They’re not always the most effective meat shields, and they’re certainly not the smartest, but they exist, and some versions of those meat shields were much more effective than later ones.
No matter how you cut it – for the average player, taking on other players with some NPC backup is better than taking on other players without them. Contrary to what some people have expressed, NPCs -encourage- PvP rather than take away from it. When they hit hard, they encouraged strategy and concerted efforts to take them out, and provided opportunities for the enemy team to jump in.
Incidentally, the 1.12 version of AV was the AV that was mostly around for TBC. The revamp happened in TBC, but the majority of TBC had 1.12 mechanics. For which reason, I’d highlight that I, personally, would rather have an earlier version of AV for Classic, because if we end up with TBC and Wrath servers at some point, either Wrath and TBC’s AV will be the same or Classic and TBC’s will. I’d rather think about that eventuality now, because I don’t see them ‘downgrading’ AV versions after Classic releases.
13 Likes
It would be an upgrade via patch reversion for AV, not, as you said, a “downgrade.” I know you meant the same, but that word implied the opposite.
If they’re getting ready to deploy Beta, they seem like they’re done with discussion on certain issues.
Who knows they may surprise us, but if they’re dropping Beta, I’m unsure if they would go back and add the NPCS and mess with the numbers.
While I completely agree with you (as you noted), I only meant it in a ‘patch number’ sense. ‘Revert’ doesn’t work as well either, since it sounds like they’d have to reconstruct the old numbers and / or positions / pathing of mobs, it seems. I agree that, playability-wise, it would be an upgrade.
And, yes, this may be a done deal, but I’d still rather state my preference with everyone else, with reasons, than to go quietly into that long goodnight.
1 Like
Nope, they are not done until they say they are.
Besides AV doesn’t come out until a later patch.
4 Likes
Our words fight against hubris, an arrogance about ignorance.
They “know better than us.” Consider that from a public relations perspective. It comes across as rude. It feels belittling and is dismissive.
I do not want to be mischaracterized as one who posts only grievance about this matter. Companies definitely know best what product is intended. Game devs definitely know best about their capability and the guidance of their design principles. In their defense, participation in gaming forums teaches that a lot of gamers ought not be catered to. A game will quickly fail if some people are given what they think they want. However, companies do not always know best what is the best product, and game devs do not always know best how to meet the needs of every target audience member. Also, a general rule in business is to appear skilled and confident even when not. That is a major problem. That ramps into hubris, which can surreptitiously destroy a product, career, or company.
Those who argue against the development path are not merely combative. They do so with deserved concern.
This next point will feel like a narrative jump, but it shapes the crux of this issue.
Entertainment products involve us. They entertain our internal representations (psychobabble there), and stoke our imagination. They are stimulating. We can self identify with relatable presentations, so, in a subconscious way, we can feel personally represented by an entertainment product to such extent that we feel protective. This is one reason why sometimes people feverishly defend their perspective about a game, even when sometimes it is self serving. Now, again think about that statement, “we know better.” They know better about each individual’s internal representations? Obviously not. This is how we know that hubris has been our opposition all along. Clearly, we do not want that same attitude to be the authority during production of Classic Wow.
1 Like
Problem with that statement is it will not be part of Beta as it is not part of Phase 1.
2 Likes
This thread has almost more then double of all other stickies so maybe they will address our concerns and give us “original” AV lets hope! We just need to be heard that this is a legitimate and wanted thing.
4 Likes
Then for gods sake do us all a favor and leave the discussion. You’ve added nothing in this thread beyond dismissiveness.
9 Likes
I think trying to temper expectations is still adding to the discussion. Just because I’m not merely repeating what everyone here is saying and being in full agreement with people doesn’t mean I’m not contributing.
This is a discussion. Not an echo chamber.
I said they’re moving onto beta. As of right now, the beta shows us that we’ll have mostly 1.12 versions of things.
Certain items are in their 1.12 state. Talents are in their 1.12 state. Things appear to be in their 1.12 state. I’m sure when beta is deployed, someone will figure out a way to get into AV and check it out.
Just because I’m not repeating your talking points doesn’t mean I’m not adding to the discussion. How boring would it be if no one had a different opinion or saw things differently than you? I’d imagine it’d be pretty boring.
We have the luxury of hindsight in this case. When the vanilla playerbase asked for changes to the game, for the most part we didn’t have a clue that we were fundamentally altering the nature of the game with seemingly beneficial and innocuous features. However, many of us know exactly what we’d be getting with 1.5 AV or 1.12 AV, and therefore know which version provides a better experience. The general consensus in this forum is that AV should be closer to 1.5, and I very much doubt that vanilla vets who aren’t active forum goers have a fundamentally different opinion.
4 Likes
It seems the ones who want the later/last vanilla iteration are more (only?) concerned about the speed that the rewards are obtained, rather than the quality of the BG itself.
Which would better serve longevity and best represent the vanilla era, that is what Blizzard should be focused on.
7 Likes
On a personal note, I have no problem with a dissenting opinion, but I’d prefer that we avoid the collective feeling of defeat, and ‘too late to change anything now’ attitude.
I’d actually prefer disagreement than encouraging a feeling of hopelessness in continuing the discussion. At least disagreement adds a side to the argument, but – and I mean this with all respect – saying ‘might be too late now’ just seems to encourage a lack of discussion, or at best, discussion in the wrong direction.
I respect that your goal is to temper expectations, but that’s not how your post came across to me, at the least.
I fully respect that the data Blizz has available is 1.12 only. And as I said, maybe this is set in stone, and nothing will budge the situation. But I’d rather try than ‘just accept’ that it -may- be a done deal.
Even as a museum piece, the majority here seem to agree (again, from what I’ve seen) that we’d rather have a restored version of an earlier AV than the definitively accurate 1.12 version. This is why paintings are restored rather than just displayed in whatever condition they were found in. So that we can admire the original piece, rather than just what the ravages of time have left of it.
7 Likes
This is not true for me. I want an accurate representation of Vanilla. I want to go from start to finish. Blizzard is trying to do that with phases.
Let’s look at relics. Blizzard has stated they’re going to hold off on relics and other items that didn’t get introduced into the game until 1.10. These items won’t be added until phase 5 so it would be patch appropriate. That’s consistent with the patch/phase progression. Same with raids that are being added.
In order to properly recreate Vanilla and go through the patch/phase cycle, we’re going to end up with phase 6/patch 1.12. That is the end of the ride.
I’m fine with them trying to recreate 1.5 AV. But I’m not fine with them changing the natural cycle of patch progression. Why would we go from 1.5 AV and then suddenly stop? That’s not an accurate representation of the patch cycle. That’s stopping the patch cycle from continuing.
I understand that people hate the 1.12 version of AV. But it existed at the end of the line. It happened. To get an accurate representation of it happening, it needs to be included. Just like relics being added at a later phase. That’s how it happened.
Some people want BGs from the start. Some folks want relics from the start. But that’s not a good representation or the recreation that Blizzard is going for.
Again… I’d love for them to try and recreate 1.5 AV, but make it patch appropriate and progress as it was in Vanilla.
I’m sorry, this is a flawed argument. If this were true, If Blizz was truly following the ‘patch progression’, they would be reverting stats on items, talent trees, class changes, and rolling them out throughout the course of things.
They are not doing this, for a great many reasons, but the one thing we can say about it with pure finality is that when MC, BWL, AQ, DM – when -any- of them opened in Vanilla, it was not with 1.12 everything else.
Classic is a Frankenstein’s Monster, stitched together from pieces of A, pieces of B, and mostly pieces of 1.12, because that’s the data available. But to pretend that ‘everything else is evolving as it goes’ is not genuine. Once things are added, they are added statically, except for location of gear drops. Everything else is simply the 1.12 version.
And to be honest, more likely than not, if we get a TBC server, 1.12’s version of AV is prime for that, because mechanically it was the version of AV that was available for the majority of TBC. The revamp with reinforcements would work best as WotLK’s AV, as it was the only version of AV that WotLK knew. These are my opinions – but basing it on the idea that Blizz would like to pick a version and put it in place with no further maintenance required, -and- thinking ahead to two more expansions of servers, I think it makes the most sense, even if it’s more work initially to get an earlier version of AV set up for Classic.
7 Likes
They do not have accurate data from the previous patches. So they’re trying to make do with what they have. So that’s why I said they’re trying to replicate a patch cycle through their phases. It’s not going to be 100% accurate. But they’re working with what they have.
So they’re trying to evolve classic with what they have through content gating. It’s not perfect by any means, but it’s what they have. So that’s why I thought it’d be cool if they could do that with AV instead of just doing the 1.12 version.
Alright, I understand your point, but I would, personally, posit that we can get 1.12’s AV mechanics in a future TBC ‘classic’ server, if that happens. I don’t see Blizzard as wanting to add the extra maintenance, as Blizzard seems very much on with the ‘Do it once’ plan, currently. Evolving and recreating multiple versions of AV seems like it’s not something they want to do.
Hence, my suggestion of an earlier version of AV for Classic, 1.12’s version for TBC, and the revamp version for WotLK.
Personally, if wishes were horses, I’d say add multiple versions of AV to Classic and see what floats to the top over the long course of things. It’s a museum piece – being able to showcase -all- versions of AV that were available would be great. I just think we’d be lucky to get one earlier version – but I do think it’d be more true to the spirit of Vanilla to showcase a version that was -only- available during Vanilla.
2 Likes
I’d like to add my name to the growing list of those who are disheartened by this decision. While it’s true that later iterations carried some specific benefits that were missing from Alterac Valley in its first incarnation, I have doubts as to whether this version is in keeping with the general design philosophy and goals you have demonstrated in the various interviews and other materials I’m sure we’ve all watched time and again.
1.12 AV is absolutely better balanced, less time consuming, and more approachable than the battleground’s earliest days. Its rewards are easier to acquire, and the odds of losing out on honor you’ve worked for because you were only available for 23 straight hours of play have been eliminated. These objectives likely helped contribute to much of WoW’s later PVP design philosophy, and it’s important that this work continues to be done on live. It is, however, antithetical to WoW Classic.
Classic is, compared to retail, not better balanced. The cost/benefit of bringing a warlock instead of a mage during most content illustrates this easily enough. It is not less time consuming, or more forgiving; these factors drive a large part of the nostalgia that serves to amplify the hype for so many of us. It’s certainly not more approachable, unless you’ve just woken up from a coma more than a decade long. With no sarcasm whatsoever, what you might consider flaws, we see as features.
1.12 AV has its place, showcasing a monumental change in direction from WoW’s original incarnation towards the design decisions through the first several expansions. It does not seem to fit with the general blueprint of Classic, however. When I say “warts and all,” I am far more enthusiastic about the warts than the all. I suspect many others feel the same way, and so I urge you to reconsider your implementation of 1.12 AV.
11 Likes