My point is that we don’t know how bad the map is, or even if it really is bad if there are people not playing the game.
Perhaps the map is completely busted. I don’t think it is fair to make that judgment until all 40 people are playing on each team. And we need to fix participation before we make any changes to the map…or if the map even needs changes.
I really don’t think that is an unreasonable viewpoint. But I walk people step-by-step all the way down to the conclusion…they agree with me every single step…but they refuse to just take that last step with me even if it is the logical conclusion.
I am sorry but my personal win & loss record says that Alliance do not always lose, because of my play times I am sitting at a 50 - 70% ratio, and a lot of times it would be closer to 50% with how hard you guys played but barely loss. I have ton’s of screen shots taken over the last few weeks as data to fall back on to analyse.
As far as a solution for the battlegrounds several have been suggested in multiple forums, but it’s up to blizzard to break from classic to use them to fix the situation as some happened latter in the games timeline. The premade that the players came up with was breaking the rules enough that blizzard saw fit, not once but twice to eliminate it without banning to my knowledge people that used it.
It depends a ton on time you play and region. At the times I play and in my region it’s still quite a high loss rate for Alliance, although it has gotten a little better lately. The loss rate is certainly much worse than 50-70%.
This is fake news. It was the premades who sabotaged pug alliance teams leaving them with 10 versus 40 horde.
That’s stupid. You judge the map by the map. You don’t need anything else. You don’t need to be a cartographer to read the map. You don’t need to be a military strategist to understand the advantages of the map.
You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to understand that advantages impact outcomes. To try to claim otherwise is just dumb as hell.
To overcome the gross disadvantages they face, Alliance need coordinated organization. That’s exactly why they started queue syncing - because they had to. Pugs couldn’t win.
But you continue to blather on about how “we really don’t knoooow because Alliance aren’t tryyyying . . .” when in fact WE DO KNOW. And that WE includes you so just stop it.
2 Likes
Problem is you where giving one side a unfair advantage. You where allowing a side to take advantage of the queue system in a way that was not intended that was manipulation, zone disruption and could of been a banning offense if Blizzard really wanted to take strict action.
You where setting up compositions that where hard for random people to defend against. It was WsG premade on steroids x 4, and no, no Horde could form their own premade to do that. But their where Horde in your channels telling the teams they where on what you where doing which did allow some Horde victory’s against said tier 2 and 3 premade teams.
And you and I and everyone else knows exactly why queue syncing became a thing.
People keep calling me a liar because just because I have a different opinion, and it is really…really getting old. It gets old because I know they’re not even trying to engage with the words I’m saying because they’re pre-supposing I am a liar. So stop it.
But how on earth do you know if a map is fair if people on your team are AFK, Not trying, Hiding and quitting out? Sure can say “but we’re losing, so obviously its the map!” But maybe you’re really losing because people on your team are AFK, Not trying, Hiding or quitting out.
The problem is that the Blizzard code allowed games to start with that few. If people want to group then that’s their business, this is a game about forming groups after all.
Blizzard needed to change the code so that groups go up against groups and not individuals queuing. It’s a programming issue. Give people a system and they will do their best to optimize their play around it. Then the code has to be changed if this results in something that degrades play for all.
Most people on the Alliance were just fine with people grouping up to play. It’s the Horde that were screaming about it because they were losing against them.
The map isn’t an opinion.
Because people weren’t afking out, they were trying and weren’t hiding and the pugs kept beating their heads against a wall. And so, queue syncing was born. Do you really think people would have bothered with it if it weren’t a necessity?
Never mind. Of course you do.
The problem was that the Instant launches when there are 40 people in queue on either side…before teams hit yes/no on their queue popup. When 40 Horde instantly take that queue and 30-35 Alliance wait until the last possible moment to cancel the queue, you get games starting 40v10.
It most certainly is…seeing as people have different opinions on it.
Oh, I agree. I don’t think any side should have an unfair advantage. Of course, this includes one side winning far more games than the other.
Make changes to fix things when they get in these kinds of situations. I’m all for it. But I won’t complain when someone finds a way to use the current system to win more, that’s just smart.
1 Like
As long as it is within the rules and doesn’t ruin the experience for anyone else…go for it.
So then don’t open the gates until the ratio looks good enough. Or don’t even launch the BG until people accept. There are many ways the BGs could be better coded.
The experience is ruined currently for a whole faction but not much is being done about it. In fact, with the queues it’s ruined for both factions. I’d love to see some changes to address all of this.
We must have had this exact conversation. But you cannot let people into the map and force them to wait even longer…thats punishing them for using the system as intended.
Sure, that could have done it…but it would have required a whole re-tooling off the queuing system.
Sure, I agree the game needs to be in a better spot. But what I meant is that your
Should not come at the expense of people choosing not to participate.
Yes, yes of course. Physical features are “opinions” just like math.
I thought you were kind of dense before but now I’m just sure you’re trolling.
1 Like
Are you sure about that? I’m a software engineer and it seems to me all it would take is a bit of a tweak in the code. I don’t know the specifics of their system but I’ve worked with similar systems in other fields like networking and it’s not that difficult to change algorithms like this.