So you want an echo chamber and any opinion different than yours isn’t aloud on the forums?
…
No! We need MOAR RAMS
2 Likes
Well the thread title got edited (not by me) so somebody at least has seen this thread.
Regardless, it’s good to keep this one bumped up, at some point the map disparity is too obvious to allow to continue and this is that kind of scenario.
The map is clearly too one sided to be allowed to go without complaint in this type of situation.
6 Likes
How would a level 10 worgen hunter even know?
2 Likes
Is this a joke? Yes, the horde cave is closer to IB GY while the alliance cave is closer to SP GY, so each faction has a defensive GY outside of their cave… BUT:
IB GY is the first GY that alliance needs to take in order to develop offense. SP GY is the second GY that horde has to take in order to develop offense. That’s the critical difference.
SH GY is the first GY that horde needs to take to develop offense, not SP GY. So horde can effectively develop an offense without worrying about swarms of defenders with a respawn nearby… but alliance can’t do the same anywhere in the horde side of the map.
That’s the difference and it’s why the cave defense of IB GY is so game breaking. There’s no balance in a map where the horde can effectively develop an offensive beachhead and the alliance can only do so if the horde is completely braindead and doesn’t defend IB GY fast enough.
There is no mirror defense that alliance has at SH GY to prevent horde from gaining that initial offensive spot.
5 Likes
And because of the layout of SHGY vs IBGY horde can afford to let IBGY soft cap and retake it. That option doesn’t exist for alliance with SHGY.
3 Likes
This thread is no more important than the dozen of other threads on the subject. Blizzard is well aware (perhaps moreso than players) of the history and present state of the BG. The history of win/loss % for each faction, etc.
At some point you will realize that a bump to a beaten horse subject is just going to make blizzard write you off that much more easily. Especially when they have your alliance cohorts doing nothing more than whining and insulting anyone putting effort into an actual discussion, and spam RCRing those who do not share their opinion.
It clearly is the same map, same races, same NPCs and same win condition as 15 years ago, as well as 15 years of PSs with the very same map, races, NPCs, etc.
1 Like
Horde also have two GY protected by the cave rez, IBGY and FWGY.
The issue is that when SPGY is capped all of the alliance waiting on a rez are sent east, away from the next GY they need to defend. When IBGY is capped the horde are sent south, in the direction of the next GY they need to defend. Thus the alliance’s cave rez actually hurts the alliance while the horde’s helps the horde.
Doubtful, they’ve had tons of time and lots of people who have communicated the issues to them. They will do nothing, just as they have done for months.
1 Like
Really no need to move the cave for that. There are three things that would greatly help AV:
- Delay the opening of the horde gate so at the start people meet at the middle of the Field of Strife.
- Make the caves the rez point of last resort.
- Randomize the starts so that any asymmetry left will be shared by both sides over multiple games.
These are all pretty small adjustments to the BG that would help to even out the win rates. Evening out the win rates would increase participation for the alliance and would lower the queue times for the horde. Overall, everyone would benefit.
3 Likes
Just a friendly reminder to continue reporting misadventure and redheadchild posts as trolling. It’s nothing else at this point.
4 Likes
There’s very little point in simply holding and turtling at the bridge. Long games are good for the horde but bad for alliance because of the queue times. Horde are very happy to sit at the bridge for a while and farm kills while a bunch recall south and kill off any alliance offense. As long as their queues are long there’s no impetus to end the battle with a strong offense, they’ll just wait until alliance decide to give up and get a new game with their quick queue times.
Any argument that uses the bridge as an example of an alliance advantage is woefully flawed.
edit:
Removed the part about the autocorrect mistake that was made.
Sure, abuse the RCR system just as alliance abused the AV druids and premades.
Held, idk how auto correct even though helded was the world I was trying to use or even what that word is…
The bridge is a strong asset for alliance but they never use it properly. So your right, the bridge is worthless if you don’t use it. Just like having a way to prevent many deadly diseases is worthless if you don’t use it, and yet we have anti-vaxers.
So ya, the bridge if useless if it’s not used properly.
Both of you are nothing but trolls and should be reported as such.
When you’re presented with data backed by indisputable numbers you either shift the goal post or completely ignore it. Every single time. It’s gotten so bad that redheadchild is now calling out level 55 rams as a reason for an Alliance advantage.
4 Likes
By the time alliance is at the bridge the game is over. All turtling there does is delay until the ice guy gets summoned.
1 Like
Yeah, I can see how autocorrect can get ya. It’s happened to all of us, I removed that part.
The bridge would be wonderful if it was before SHGY or similar. It’s current position is worse than useless, once horde take SPGY the alliance waiting on a rez go to the cave. So now horde can easily cross the bridge and use the bridge against the alliance trying to take back DB.
The smart thing to do would be for alliance to give up SPGY and head over the bridge once it’s apparent that SPGY will fall soon. That way they could use the bridge as a good defensive position. However, that means just giving horde a GY without much of a fight and it’s tough to get a random group of people to all do something counterintuitive like that.
So tell me, if a bunch of horde recall south to run defence how are you not pushing the horde back?
Alliance at the bridge should have about 20 at the bridge defending and 20 on offense, with that 20 at the bridge, if used right, can hold off 40 horde indefinitely.
You have 5 of your offense team ready to kill shamans to stop ice daddy summon. And 15 of them capping horde towers, graveyards exc.
The problem isn’t AV favoring the horde, it doesn’t.
The problem is the alliance are not willing to play the game as it’s DESIGNED, which means the possibility of a long battle (aka, war scale), because they get more reward for losing, instant que back in, and losing again.
This is the reason alliance lose AV. Unless it’s a quick win, it’s better for them to lose and get their instant que, because they can get 6+ losses in in the time horde get 1 win just assuming the alliance intentionally fight long enough to finish their rep turn ins, then roll over and lose for the next match.
The que times are a major contributor to the current alliance AV meta.
I’m pretty sure by 30 minutes in they are at a serious diminishing returns on honor; I know I am by that point. Zero honor HKs become a thing in a fairly short amount of time.
20 cannot hold off 40. Archers hitting random people for 300-500 dmg is not enough to be even close to relevant.
The whole problem is you expect alliance to play 2x better than horde and think that it’s a viable strat. Maybe we just need more level 55 rams to defend aidstation. You’re dumb try again.
2 Likes