My sentiments exactly.
“Bringing it line with the other bgs in terms of time vs rewards”.
I can almost hear Ion saying that ![:rofl:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/rofl.png?v=6" ":rofl:")
11 Likes
This is a fallacious argument; “More people played after the changes patch 1.11 than the previous versions” is technically true but the reasoning is incorrect.
Between patch 1.5 that introduced A.V and patch 1.11 that drastically changed it, World of Warcraft had gained almost 3 millions players. More people did not play A.V because they liked the changes, there just more than twice the players in the game for the latest patch than 1.5
4 Likes
Exactly, much like other failed mechanics (such as dishonorable kills), the repeated nerfs to AV failed to solve the “problem” that WSG and AB were more popular, while at the same time stripped the battleground of its original scope of offering a huge open world-like environment where to carry out objective based pvp.
I do not wish to do any sort of fear mongering but expecting anything else than 10 min rush to the bosses from this version of the map is naive. The honor per hour mentality will quickly prevail and once the meta develops everyone will just run to drek and vanndar.
Plus all the cool stuff is gone, looting enemy parts for extra rep and silver, building and piloting your shredder, or maybe even summoning lokkolar or ivus if the game goes extra long.
Even slowing down a few minutes to destroy a few bunkers or towers may prove a lethal mistake if the other team is headed directly for your general.
And all this will only get worse as people get more gear. Once most people are decked in tier 2 or even better drek’tar will melt in 30 seconds.
10 Likes
Two things here. A direct response to your question and then a comment about another frequently used argument on the topic.
We should care about the ROI because decisions are numbers based and Blizzard has likely been looking at the numbers throughout this entire process. I’m not saying that we have to agree with the decisions, but to ignore them in our fervor does nothing.
Also, I’ve seen the idea that the number of likes/posts in threads is somehow a reflection of an idea’s popularity. I think that’s a very misleading argument to make. A small handful of people could produce ungodly numbers on a thread were they so inclined. Take this thread for instance. My post will be number 1531 in the thread. I doubt the the number of posters is anywhere near that. In summary, I hear how loud the 1.5 voice are and while I’m open to having my opinion changed, I’m currently unconvinced there are a lot of them. Or, at the very least, enough to make Blizzard rethink their decision.
Closer to 1.5 Galdor for heavens sakes. I want the epic tower versus griffon fights and kiting mobs to captains n stuff.
Or maybe instead of looking at raw numbers blizzard was looking at percentages of people playing each BG. And there were more people playing 1.12 AV relative to AB/WSG.
And what metric was used to determine who enjoyed/did not enjoy it?
1 Like
Participation is not a metric of enjoyment.
Popular is not a metric of enjoyment, but rather is just a different word that means participation.
2 Likes
48 hours? I was so happy if it only lasted 2 days. There was one that was going strong after 4 days.
I don’t mind a long AV but they were borderline un-winnable at the start. It was a novelty to have a long game at first but when they were running that long most people hated coming into the mid-game every time they played. You never got to see the start or the end of the battle, just the slog in the middle.
That’s certainly a way to play the game but I’d rather see something like that out in the open world and not in a battleground. Generally, you want to be able to play the whole battleground in one sitting. A battle rather than a war.
Now, I also don’t want the battle to be a straight-up charge to the end boss and race against time so there should be some objectives and such in there. But make it easier to take than to defend and make them destructible. That way the end is inevitable and the battle eventually winds down.
It’s not a fool proof assumption, no. But when AVs were so dead because no one qued for them when they were previously queing them a lot when they were released, is a pretty fair indicator that the majority of players did not enjoy it.
You can give your anecdote for this all you want, it’s a pretty strong indicator.
1 Like
Really wish I could find that again. ![:frowning:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/frowning.png?v=6" ":frowning:")
1 Like
If you want to play quick PvP, there are already two options being WSG and AB. There is no reason for having short AV duration at all
1 Like
This has nothing to do with them nerfing AV. Just because he wished they wouldn’t have moved away from the PvE and PvP mix doesn’t mean that he wishes they would have left AV alone. To me, it just sounds like he wishes they would have taken a different approach to pvp and pve mix, similar to how mobas worked. If they made a pve and pvp mix similar to a moba playstyle, your version of AV would be even FURTHER gone.
1 Like
Marks of Honor appeared in the same patch that began dismantling AV’s content. Which could suggest that rather than getting more people to enjoy it, they were merely trying to get people to do it. One could deduce that with MoHs in the game, they needed to make the AV MoHs as accessible as the WSG/AB MoHs.
2 Likes
Should be this one:
"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."
3 Likes
On that same argument you could argue that with the changes that they made to AV to get more people to do it, was because of those changes being more enjoyable for other players. You can’t dismiss one statement like “More people played it so it could have been more enjoyable for more people”, and then simply ignore that AV was wildly unpopular so seemingly no reason at all. That’s being as biased as you possibly could be, and if the stats were in your ‘bgs’ favor you would be throwing them around like wildfire. “PRE 1.11 AV HAD WAY MORE PEOPLE PLAYING IT BUT LOOK WHEN THEY CHANGED IT NO ONE PLAYED”.
Another often overlooked aspect of the debate, is that while they were trying to bring it in line with WSG/AB, those other 2 BGs had brackets long prior to people being eligible to play AV.
1 Like
Even if I as a potential customer cared about blizzard’s bottom line (I don’t any more than I care about the ROI of Trader Joes providing me bottles of Green Dragon Sauce…I buy it because it is GOOD) are we seriously discussing ROI concerning classic? Like, really dude?
My concern is my ROI. AV was a huge part of vanilla endgame, and I want a version with the most content, most immersion, most longevity. If it is to be a static version, I do not want the one that was stripped down to cater to those who did not enjoy it, but rather just wanted to get it over with so they could get their loot and toss it behind them.
Where have I heard this before?
9 Likes
I would guess, my opinion here from what I knew, that during the time of vanilla when AV was active, hardly anyone did it for honor. Because of that, there wasn’t a zerg mentality to finish as quickly as possible.
People for the most part did AV for rep and for fun, and the earlier version of AV was more fun. Quibble over the finer points all you want, but you won’t convince anyone who feels this way to change.
6 Likes
I’m not trying to convince anyone anything about what version they liked more. I’m simply showing you that if you are going to use arguments, make sure they make sense at the very least. If you are arguing that people only did 1.12 because they wanted honor and not because they were having fun, you have to use that same argument for your version as well. Or if you say “People only did 1.5 AV because they are there to have fun and get honor” you can NOT dismiss this same point for 1.12’s version.
If you do, then every point you make is null. Whether you like it or not.