It doesn’t matter. If any team is so good they are killing 3:1 then they are probably winning AV if they pick good fights. Of course, if they sit in one spot and the other team manages to get around them then they still may lose.
The issue is that you almost have to have such ridiculous kill ratios to win as alliance. Horde can easily win even if they are outfought, just from having better position and easier objectives to take.
That’s my point to him.
Because even when he maths out that ratio at IBGY he’s going to see that alliance still will be out reinforced because of the cave…
It’s more of a trap question and to further show the disparity.
Any alliance that die won’t make it back south.
At 3:1 kills you’re probably winning the IBGY capture. It might be close, depending on how each team plays but alliance will probably take it. Of course, this assumes that alliance is playing smart and do stuff like not tap out. Rez people instead.
If the alliance team is being dumb and tapping out while their nearest GY is SP then they are probably still losing at IBGY. You need to have SF or SH GY and the ability to reinforce if you’re tapping out. That presents another wrinkle because now you have at least 3 points you need to split people between – offense at IBGY, defense north of the horde offense, and a team trying to keep either SF or SH GY for reinforcements – or people not tapping out and others getting out of combat and having mana to rez.
And that’s the problem, we’re getting into complicated territory here. A very organized alliance group can probably do it, whereas a pug vs pug the horde will win nearly every time since their simple strategy needs little coordination to win. They need to zerg the next GY and back-cap if the alliance gets too far ahead. They don’t have to maintain a GY because the cave serves as one decently north to launch off of.
First fight is 20 horde vs 30 alliance. 3:1 ratio.
6 alliance die from those 20 horde, 24 Alliance remain.
Say you stagger the horde deaths so instead of 20 only 10 make the Rez each time.
Next 10 horde kill 3 more alliance, 21 alliance remain.
Next 10 kill 3 more alliance 18 Alliance remain.
Next 10 kill 3 more alliance 15 Alliance remain.
Next 10 kill 3 more Alliance, 12 remain.
That’s 4 rez cycles for horde. So it’s been about 3:30.
Next 10 horde show up and kill 3 alliance, 9 Alliance remain.
Next 10 horde show up and kill 3 Alliance. 6 alliance remain.
At this point it’s been really close to 5 minutes.
So now the alliance have 3-6 players at IBGY but there’s still 20 horde trying to take it.
Alliance can now Rez at IBGY, but will they survive 20 horde VS 6 Alliance???
Again, you’re not taking into account reinforcements/rezzes on the alliance side. That’s the argument Fayld was making. You’re arguing apples and oranges.
I’m arguing that no alliance will make it back to IBGY from SPGY.
We all know they won’t it’s been proven time and time again.
Even that guy who does the 5 man pre-mades with full rank 12+ players with full consumes and buffs he has stated they have NEVER retaken SHGY, so that’s my evidence that you won’t get alliance pass the choke and pass SHGY to get to IBGY.
So those 30 Alliance will be on their own until IBGY hard caps, my point is by the time it hard caps you will only have a handful of alliance as your offense, if ANY.
Exactly. Which is why saying an alliance group with a 3:1 kill ratio who loses sucks is not a fair statement. Having a 3:1 kill ratio offset by a 2:1 spawn and 3:1 travel time, if they can even make it back, says otherwise.
I am arguing that if you start the game at SHGY and realize you just flat WTFPwnd Horde to the tune of 3:1 kill ratio (and you will figure it out quick because there aren’t any there after that initial exchange), you send people to SFGY and WTFPwn the horde there too. While that is happening, you also WTFPwn the next wave of trash Horde rolling into SHGY. Wait for SFGY to hard cap. Then proceed to mop the freaking floor with Horde at IBGY.
.
Again, I am not suggesting anything about how easy this is in a normal game. But that dude was talkin 350 HK to 100 HK. That’s a freaking massacre. And they lost. Why? Because they literally didn’t do it the way I just said to do it.
.
Now if you are arguing this:
I 100% absolutely positively without any kind of anything agree. It isn’t worth it for Alliance to play scorched earth like this. Not even a little. The bonus from the win outside of AV weekend makes this strategy a non-starter because it is too low.
.
That’s really what I am getting at here Drink. It literally only takes time to apply this strategy when Alliance are this much better than Horde. The fact that being only slightly worse than this can change the numbers at IBGY to a toss up isn’t fair. But at the point at which you are smashing Horde at the 350 HK to 100 HK level, the only reason you lost is because you didn’t pursue a scorched earth strategy.
My point is you will still need to get to IBGY with that disparity.
I guess you could argue that you might control sfgy so you’re reinforcements are coming from SPGY.
I have yet to ever see that tho.
Typically we trade SHGY for Ibgy.
Then we lose ibgy because even at a 3:1 ratio it’s not enough to hold off the cave rez.
Yet you have those people here arguing that our caves are equal.
Yes fundamentaly they work in the same way it’s just where they are in relation to each other is game changing
It’s like saying both sides have a button they can press that makes them automatically win AV.
Hordes button can be pressed at the 15 minute mark.
Alliances button can be pushed at the 16 minute mark.
I mean they both have the same button to win the game, so it’s clearly fair right??
That’s literally what I am saying if you meant reinforcements coming from SFGY. Just because people don’t play it that way doesn’t mean that isn’t the correct way to play it in this situation. It definitely is. If you are kicking the crap outta Horde, you are guaranteed a win this way. If you aren’t kicking the crap outta Horde, everything you are saying comes into play. But a 3:1 ratio, you aren’t struggling to take SFGY. You aren’t struggling to hold SHGY. Literally the only struggle you will have is taking IBGY. Once it is capped, the superior Alliance will hold it easily.
.
The problem with all of this is that 3:1 is very uncommon. So basing literally anything off of a 3:1 win (on either side) is pointless. That’s like 1-3% of games that don’t involve some kind of premade.
The reason we don’t play that way is because it’s not viable. Here’s why.
We control SHGY so we split half to defend it and half to attack SFGY, you guys can cap it before we even get there.
The issue is we HAVE to defend a graveyard while horde don’t, now ask yourself why don’t horde need to defend anything??
So we split our forces for SFGY, we cap it, odds are horde will just send 40 to shgy to cap it vs our 20, they will wipe us. We lose SHGY and sfgy isn’t far behind.
The biggest issue with the middle and south part of the map is the fact we don’t have a graveyard that can’t be taken. As soon as we lose any of them we now lose the game.
Then on top of that if you die in the wrong spot at SFGY you’re sent to Aid Station, good luck getting south. That’s a 4+ minute walk back.
And I completely agree that it is difficult in a normal game. We aren’t talking about a normal game. We are talking about a 3:1 advantage game. Half the game is recognizing when you are smashing your opponent and then doing what you need to get the win. In this case, it is patently obvious you have smashed them early on.
The biggest issue of these scenarios is we never have a place that’s reinforcing us.
Sure we’re smashing you but we can’t get reinforcements to any place.
The thing is it’s a super extreme edge case where alliance are going to be able to take IBGY without losing SHGY but have to have SFGY to do it. Taking SFGY only helps take IBGY by a small degree so that being the breaking point for alliance winning or not is just super rare. And that’s in the games where alliance already RNG’d into a team that can get that 3:1 kill ratio.
If you are smashing us, you take SFGY easy. That becomes your reinforcement point. That’s the part that I keep repeating. You are kicking the snot out of us. There is no meaningful resistance at SFGY in this situation because a boatload of Horde are rezzing.
.
Once you have SFGY fully capped in this situation, it is over.
I am not suggesting anything about games outside of this scenario. That Alliance player decided he wanted to drop the 350 HK to 100 HK gem and I decided to challenge the logic because in my experience, the only time Alliance loses when this happens is when Alliance do nothing offensively. Straight up, if you just sat at SHGY the entire game and maybe sent out some token forays for offense while maintaining a 3:1 kill ratio, then don’t come crying to me because you lost that game even though you were drastically better than the Horde. If you are that much better, do something with that advantage.
Today I went to AV.
There seemed to be a lot of new people there who’ve never played Classic AV in their lives. They tried to zerg RH and then blamed the healers for being pushed back to SP.
I tried to explain the map situation and someone said, “Well we’ll adapt and learn.” 
I guess good for them for having a good attitude? LOL. Well except for the blaming the healers part. Sounds like some PVE peeps lol.
Yeah that will last.
Anyway, so much for attitude winning games.
Which is why SF was used as the example.