Id rather have the 1.12 version.
It was more fun for me. 1.5 AV was a PvE mess with PvP thrown in occasionally. Most games I played were spent in stalemate at the DB bridge, watching casters lob bolts at each other while melee just died over and over in between.
Id rather have the avs that last days on end. There was just something about them that was fun. It required team work and communication to get past turtles and to start making progress. Its the only BG that I’ve ever truly loved. This is a essential part of the vanilla experience in my opinion and that should be taken into account.
For me, i never got to experience south shore vs tarren mill and thats something that id like to experience. That being said, old av has been a “legend” and im sure there are MANY players that would like to experience this epic battle of a bg. It would be a mistake on blizzards part to not implement old av.
I have no issues if they want to add the 1.5 or later av to the mix along with 1.12 version LATER down the road But it should be the old style from the start
Melees job was to either rush across as horse, or to jump down as Ally and try to cap another GY and push them back.
There’s a huge difference between changing AV so matches actually ended in a reasonable time frame and AV being a Zerg after being updated.
In 1.12 matches routinely still took a long time to end if both sides were actively playing. It didn’t become a zerg until reinforcements were added which created the let them win quickly mentality.
I think you’re over estimating the work that would go into reverting 1.12AV to 1.5/6 . 99% of the work is simply adding NPCs back in and adjusting numbers.
If you go to the AV where Korrak is gone but it’s still a week long game that’s literally all it is.
We’re likely not going to agree on the “quickly” mentality, but the “hurry up and lose” STARTED when BG tokens were needed for gear. Period.
Keep in mind when they added reinforcements after also scrapping the old honor system. In 1.12 games were at least played until an obvious winner showed up and even then there were plenty of games where one side or the other fought back at their keep and ended up winning.
The mentality to go in and not even try to defend didn’t happen until reinforcements were added. Tokens were a lot more binary than the way honor worked after 2.0 and didn’t reward losing nearly as much.
1.12 is all they have
People keep saying they want the “days long” AV, without giving any sort of real reason.
Old AV was interesting, but not that big of a deal.
You’re wrong.
You started seeing people sitting in the caves saying “just let them win” when the tokens were currency.
It may have gotten more pervasive later, but it began when the currency changed because at that time shorter games do make more sense
There were always a handful of people who were generally not being helpful to the BG. The issue didn’t become pervasive until after reinforcements were added.
AV was PVE messes, yet you claim that you always got stuck PVPing. How odd.
Unless they make AV MoHs a requirement for BG gear, those like Cheater who dislike AV can simply not play AV. Want the specific AV rewards though? Earn it.
Those that claim, that AV would be too difficult to put back into an earlier state forget, or were not around during vanilla when tne BG was patched no less than 5 times, including map edits. Changing the AV instance was not like moving heaven and earth.
Zerging started in 1.11 when they reduced the amount of guards. In 1.8 they balanced the teams out, so the numerical Zerg strat was gone (before 1.8 if one team partially quit you’d have 40 vs 20).
At any rate, the strat would be rush the far GY close to the leader, take out any towers they could, then pull as soon as the towers burned.
It was a race, and the team that did it first won. If your team wiped more than once, you lost.
AV would last at most 15 minutes. This was before TBC.
So anyone asking for “1.5 AV” wants the worst balanced version.
People have given reasons in the multitude of earlier threads in the subject. Do your research before making inane comments like that.
It’s the same reason people shortened the argument over changes to nochanges. We’re just sick of having to explain why the earlier AVs are better over and over just to see the same cast of characters waltz in pretending that the oposing arguments were never made.
I will say this; having players all weepy asking for nerfed content is VERY vanilla like.
I don’t see anything noteworthy of your post, just like those you reference.
Is there something about AV you’d like to add, or are you here to comment on comments?
Use the search function and start reading.
https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wow/search?q=AV%20Alterac%20category%3A172
If neither side played defense. However there was still plenty of incentive to play defense so games very seldom ended up as 15 minutes zergs.
Even a handful of players on defense back capping and screwing up pulls could thwart a zerg.
i wouldnt queue for the long version myself. i like when bgs end in one sitting
that doesnt mean i want an all out race to the boss either, hour long games are not a zerg
I can confirm that what mickymoo said was true, zerging happened even before reinforcements, in vanilla itself, and not TBC, towards the end - when guards became so weak that it just became a race of which team could get 5 T2-geared players to the opponent general to tank them long enough (when raid members from naxx guilds happened to play AV for fun, they didn’t even wait for the towers to cap even) and proceeded anyway.
Anyway, I did notice there have been quite a number of threads covering why people preferred the old AV, but I thought maybe this video made on youtube could be worth a viewing as a starting point too: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zbpgWkPbNc4&t=293s
It wasn’t worth defending. You’d need around 10-15 to defend against 30-odd players by camping the towers and hiding behind the leader. And only rogues and druids could do that effectively.
And if you were doing that, you weren’t going to be able to take out the enemy base which required an “all in” call on the leader.