Alterac Valley in Classic

[Melaned-blackrock (Melaned)]

desire for a different product from what they’ve been promised.

That REALLY comes down to interpretation.
Also foundation is base, what you build up from, you can have 1.12 set as the foundation and make alterations from there and still have 1.12 as said foundation.

Heck based on that definition alone you could have it as the foundation while changing talents, BGs, altering balance etc. All it means is that it is the base from which they will work from. Because a foundation is nothing more than an underlying basis.

And yes, you’re right, they were not trolling.

I always wonder if Blizzard actually thinks less of the Private Server based arguments or not.

Depends on what you mean. If they are arguing from the idea of what they’ve experienced on a PS then likely yes. If they are arguing while having been only on PSers then likely the opposite as Blizzard regaining subs is a good thing.

So if enough people come onto these forums demanding flying mounts, Blizzard should grant that request?

Throwing the baby out with the bathwater much?
This question goes back to the “why should they ever listen to players” remark. There is a line, flying obviously goes past that line. Clearly. 1.5AV however is not an equivalent to it in many ways, the question is where does that line sit? Some of you believe that Classic IS 1.12 while some of us argue that it is only based on 1.12. If it was strictly 1.12 then 1.5AV would be outside the line, otherwise no.

Same question to you as “your pal” Robfried:

• Did you play AV 1.5 in Vanilla?
• Did you play AV 1.5 in Private Severs?
• And if no to both, on what basis can you say that is AV 1.5 the “better” AV?

I’ll also answer yes.
1: Yes I have played 1.5 AV.
2: No I have not touched such.
3: Doesn’t count to me as I’ve said yes to 1.

As someone who played AV 1.5 as Horde on an Alliance dominant server, I can tell you… it sucked. Playing for 6 hours only to have to go to work, come back after work find that the same game is still going, rejoin, and then lose after another 6 hours simply because your faction stopped getting new players joining, until you lost because you were down to 15 on your team…

That’s actually where I’d accept one technical change to 1.5 AV. There was a change down the line during Vanilla that made it so both sides were balanced out. So if you have say 30 ally and 30 horde in the match, 10 ally are que’d and only 4 horde are.
1.5 as it played: Ally goes to 40, horde to 34.
I do think they should add the queue balancing, thus both sides only gain 4 and are both 34 each.

I for one however loved the endless battles. My server back then however was more evenly split.

People like you make it less likely for Blizzard to compromise on their 1.12 AV decision.

While I completely agree with your statement that hyperbole, poor arguments etc are bad for the forums, this statement is either being intellectually dishonest or ignorant to the fact that Blizzard’s staff are likely to not take said words personally but just as simple disapproval. (Note: The statement, not you, I don’t mean to call you anything, just using the word in it’s technical format)

They said at blizzcon the data from 1.12 and slightly before. So it won’t be exactly like 1.5 AV. That doesn’t exist anymore.

They stated that data was lost between patching. Not specified what data however outside of having 1.12 intact. Yes it is likely that 1.5 AV might be lost, and if so I would be willing to accept that if we get confirmation, but they have not directly stated what exactly is lost, just that they lost data due to the way they patched the game back then.

[Seijuron-darkspear (Seijuron)]

I remember pretty clearly they stated that they recovered patches up to before 1.12. If anyone has the link for this, it would be amazing, I can’t find it unfortunately.

But they did say that in the process of making Classic, they were able to recover patches before 1.12 but they use 1.12 as a foundation for the game. But they did say also in multiple interviews (Forbes, DigitalTrend …) that they expect the feedback from the community on which versions of dungeons (and battlegrounds) we would like to play the best. They might not have the full data, but Blizzard as a billion dollars company has the means and the manpower to code, don’t you think?
If a tree is not at the correct place, I don’t think anyone would mind. But having a post 1.11 version when 1.5-1.8 versions are vastly superior is heresy.

[Melaned-blackrock (Melaned)]

But they did say that in the process of making Classic, they were able to recover patches before 1.12 but they use 1.12 as a foundation for the game.

Yeah, there seems to the a group of people of people assuming that they are saying Classic is 1.12 period. Nothing more. Using the word “foundation” as a phrase for “complete model” or something to replicate in its entirety is an issue here.

One of the stronger arguments for such is the question of them having touched the data or not. To which my current new answer is that the simple fact that something has not been done is not proof that it cannot or will not be done.

They might not have the full data, but Blizzard as a billion dollars company has the means and the manpower to code, don’t you think?

I believe the main argument then is their want for authenticity, not having the fullest thorough data to point to to be sure that it is then authentic. Then comes the question of how much is missing really if so?

But as I’ve stated like over 300 posts above, their given reasons in this thread are weak. Until they directly state that they have lost 1.5AV’s data, and not some random “[well we lost some data of some patches]” that keeps getting referred to as if it was some clear clean cut statement that 1.5 AV data does not exist (which it is not! That is utterly laughable and outrageous to assume such as direct proof.) I will argue primarily on their given points.

[Luuni-area-52]

Foundation means the underlying principle or basis on which something is formed.

There is no twisting the word’s meaning.

If you change the basis on which something is formed the foundation is lost. If you change the foundation of a house, it doesn’t stand up straight. That is what they meant by foundation since you cannot Interpret words different.

Webster’s exist so we have a clear understanding of words in their given context. In this context foundation is clear. 1.12 is what they intend to build off of. But changing 1.12 is changing the foundation.

Building off of is adding modern blizzard features. Time gating content. That is building off of the 1.12 which remains constant.

If we don’t respect words and their meaning what the heck is the point of a language?

[Theracistcow-emerald-dream]

I noticed how theres only 100 likes vs 1200 comments. This is clearly not what people want.

This reminds me of when we originally asked for classic and blizzard had the balls to say “you don’t know what you want”.

Apparently we do and I hope you guys fix this instead of pushing your arrogant non award winning contemporary blizzard attitude.

If you guys want to be like this why havn’t you made a great game since Starcraft2. Sure overwatch is fun, HotS is fun, but they’re not a 9/10 10/10 game like WC3, SC, D2, D1, WC2, WoW Vanilla.

What happened to you guys.

[Luuni-area-52]

People want lots of things. It’s what people want vs what they can deliver. They said they don’t have the data. They gave you that reply at blizzcon.

They flat out told you that 1.12 provides the most clarity for them.

They are telling you time and time again why they are doing this. They have looked at discussion as they linked three threads about the topic.

They’re moving onto other issues like sharding and phase rollout and beta. If you’re writing a book and you keep changing chapter one, it never gets published. If you keep changing level one of the game it never gets published. They want to move on from this topic,

They read feedback from three threads. They made a choice based on feedback and what they thought is right for delivering a product within summer 2019.

Also the high elf thread on the general forums has over 5,000 replies. Blizzard does what they view is in the best interest of the game.

[Tracerr-stormrage]

Remember, players are always goal oriented. They want PVP gear rewards, they want the Exalted AV rewards etc etc

Many of us are old enough to remember games being played for the fun of playing the games.

I don’t neccessarily disagree. Just answering the question. People were wanting shorter AV’s and to rush them because they (just like today’s retail players) were always begging for the rewards to come faster and faster and faster.

[Melaned-blackrock (Melaned)]

Foundation means the underlying principle or basis on which something is formed.

There is no twisting the word’s meaning.

If you change the basis on which something is formed the foundation is lost. If you change the foundation of a house, it doesn’t stand up straight. That is what they meant by foundation since you cannot Interpret words different.

Webster’s exist so we have a clear understanding of words in their given context. In this context foundation is clear. 1.12 is what they intend to build off of. But changing 1.12 is changing the foundation.

Changing a single battleground is not changing 1.12. Are we really going to get into semantics and pragmatics here?

If battlegrounds were considered a part of said foundation, then that foundation is entirely incomplete in any phase not consisting of all battlegrounds to exist within said patch. By that definition there is no Classic without all 3 battlegrounds.

The foundation is arguably everything that is included in phase one, as that is what will be there for sure. While it is arguable that the end result, last phase in this case, is the main point, that would go against many decisions made to recreate much of what value is being added by using the phase system.

[Fateweaver-misha (Fateweaver)]

You come here and insult Blizzard and launch into a tirade of hyperbole and poor arguments, which likely has little chance of sparking internal discourse within the Classic team.

People like you make it less likely for Blizzard to compromise on their 1.12 AV decision.

And THIS post is helpful to the discussion how?

[Melaned-blackrock (Melaned)]

Me liking a post =/= calling out.

If you feel that it is then I will apologize for the misinterpretation. However me clicking the little heart button is simply me aligning, in general, with some of the stated points. I’ve at times clicked said button on posts I disagreed with because of something they stated that was direct to a point I did agree with.

But clicking a heart is not re-stating their words. This is not twitter and if it were I would not click the “retweet” button on many of the posts I’ve clicked the heart button on.

[Robfried-shadow-council]

Ive disagreed wholly on a post but I admired their willingness to compromise or at least be reasonable.

[Melaned-blackrock (Melaned)]

Exactly.

My thought is again, much like the conversation here, the interpretation of the subject. Such as the thought that to click the heart button for some is akin to restating the phrase, or akin to completely agreeing at the very least. Others like you and myself will click the heart button based on merits and points.

I find myself more willing to click said heart button if I’ve often found myself agreeing/siding with the person as well as if they’ve done the same for me. It’s a really subjective point. A simple sign of “Hey someone liked something about me or my post”.

[Vulvoi-gundrak]

Also if you had read the thread you would have come across the discussion concerning Mark Kern’s thoughts on why it was changed and why the changes were later regretted.

I honestly wouldn’t waste my time, if I were you. It is like:

Poster 1 - “Why is the sky blue?”

Poster 2 - “Because molecules in the air scatter blue light from the sun, more than they scatter red light. Blue is scattered more than the other colours because it travels in shorter, smaller waves. This is why the sky is blue.”

… ten posts later …

Poster 1 - “Why is the sky blue?”

Poster 3 - “Someone else answered, but maybe you missed it. The sky is blue because the blue light is scattered more than the other colours. FYI, sunsets are different due to the sun travelling longer through the atmosphere and the blue light mostly being removed, leaving mostly red and yellow light.”

… 6 posts later …

Poster 1 - “Why is the sky blue?”

It is simple folly to engage at this point.

The feedback from a lot of people is pretty strong. It has been seen and heard. All that is left is for Classic developers to decide to either act, or not. They are the ones with all the knowledge and all the cards. The conjecture about what they know, what is possible, what they will do, what they can do, is just that: conjecture.

They also know how much positive feedback on this issue has been received, by how many individual posters, both here, on reddit and other forums that we know they are active on. They are also well aware that much of the hyperbole is fuelled by passion and are smart, and experienced, enough to see to the heart of a post and forgive some of the emotional nonsense that people spout when passionate.

My hope is that they will provide a post sometime soon regarding the fate of this issue - they have clarified stuff in the past. Whether that be a simple, “we’ve listened to all the feedback and stand by our decision for 1.12 AV because…” or “we’re looking more at this” or an actual rethink.

There are a lot of very important announcements to come in the coming weeks, so it might be a while, but AV isn’t due to be implemented for many months after Classic is released, so we’re looking at a minimum of 9 months away, that’s 9 months of potential blue posts. We may not even get a look in until after Classic is released.

I’ll still be hopeful, as this is one of the most important issues to me personally. I’ll enjoy the wait for Classic, and enjoy the discourse with many of the people on these forums as long as I can post. There’s a lot of good people here, with a lot of good ideas and intentions, so my advice is always to focus on those people, give those people your time.

[Luuni-area-52]

Ok I’ve linked this in the past. But I’ll link it again. I’ve looked over several peoples profiles and while yes your characters you are posting on may not be the characters you played during Vanilla, mine certainly isn’t. The armory also doesn’t track stats from Vanilla.

https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-us/character/us/blackrock/èlemental/pvp

This is my elemental shaman that I played on Blackrock in WotLK and a month into Cata before I quit. Many of you are claiming that 1.12 AV doesnt provide for an epic experience. On that page you can see that during WotLK I played 1115 games of Alterac Valley. They were not all zerg rushes. They were not all turtles. The games were different because I and others in my group made them different.

I would go and defend Balinda from the Horde. I would go and backcap towers from the Horde. I would go defend the bridge from the Horde. I and others made the game exciting, yet according to most of you… that isn’t possible. It isn’t possible to have an exciting game post 1.8 AV. My 1115 AV games beg to differ.

1115 games of Alterac Valley in an expansion. That’s over 550 hours of just AV if games were thirty minutes long.

Heck I remember one game I convinced twenty people to just turtle. Reinforcements were in the game and we just sat there and dwindled the hordes reinforces down to 0 and won like that. No general died. The players decided the outcome of the game. We weren’t limited to how we played the game because it was 1.12 and beyond.

I’m not saying my opinion matters more than people. I’m just saying that in my experience with over 1,100 AV games that are documented, the state of the game not being in 1.5 didn’t hinder me at having a good time. I MADE the game good.

If I could make the games fun in post 1.5 AV. What is stopping you from doing the same?

[Melaned-blackrock (Melaned)]

No one is saying that a game of 1.12AV cannot be made fun.

IDKY you’re restating this as I recall you posting a post almost identical to this before…

But it is anecdotal and goes against what will be the average. It also goes against the PoLR fallacy. Players will, in most cases, go for the easiest route. I can play 100 AV games in current and guarantee you I’ll run into some turtles. But outside of the few turtles, it is going to be zerg rushes. And there are times when a lot of people will not listen.

That said, turtled AV =/= the full experience we are aeguing for.

[Luuni-area-52]

Yes… but private server players have already stated that they experience the PoLR fallacy in their games. And the servers tried to mimic 1.5 AV.

They rush even on private servers. Why? Because no matter how much people want to force others to play out a never ending game of AV. The majority will rush to the end and try to end it.

[Robfried-shadow-council]

The point your missing isnt that 1.5 cant be zerged. Because its possible. The fact remains that it is harder to zerg. Which means its easier to force a stalemate. Which means your more likely to summon calvary or the elementals. That leads to more fun in my and others opinions. Also the earlier av had a larger map and more and different npcs and mines ect… which means more content. In my opinion mkre content is better than less content.

[Luuni-area-52]

We have evidence of how it will play out though with modern audiences. Private servers already do that. Players have said that private servers have put in NPCs and mines. They have buffed AV.

People still run past those things. They still finish games in 15 minutes.

Blizzard has data from the Nostalrius server as they called them into Blizzard HQ. They have statistics for everything that happened in a modern 1.12 server. AV games, according to private server players (the same players who claim this game is being made for them) didn’t last too long.

[Robfried-shadow-council]

Then theres no problem giving us that version then? So all your muckraking about how its long and will get boring after ahwile was total BS? Also to the point ive seen you make about them not having the data. They might not have it but they sure do have the info on how much npcs were nerfed and taken away shouldnt be too hard to reverse the nerfs at the very least and throw korrak back at the gy.

[Luuni-area-52]

Who said it will get boring? I never said it will get boring. I never complained about long AVs. You have me confused with someone else.

I believe earlier in this thread I suggested rolling out 1.5 AV and then 1.12 in phase six.

I’m just saying even if they give you 1.5 AV, you may be the only one doing those objectives that you’re so passionate about.

My entire argument has been about 1.12 AV being there at phase six. And then I have branched out to explain to some folks who want a permanent 1.5 AV, how that first off would be hard to replicate with Blizzards current data as they have stated. How that would go against the words they’ve said. And then how it would go against the original vanilla timeline.

I have then since tried to explain that 1.12 AV isn’t that bad as they remember it. Then I’ve asked if 1.5 AV was so perfect why was it even changed in the first place over such short spurts in Vanilla.

All of this has stemmed from me not wanting 1.5 AV to be the permanent version of AV because that is not authentic.