Capture and defend battlegrounds
eg. - Arathi Basin, Deepwind Gorge
These kind of battlegrounds forces some players to not participate in the battleground as much. They literally sit at a location to defend for the entire match. This concept is not a good concept to have for battlegrounds.
Ashran and Battle for Gilneas
These two battlegrounds are fail battlegrounds. The way Ashran’s map is designed results in total negligence of objectives. 40 players just goes head on with 40 other players.
Battle of Gilneas is also badly designed in the sense that there are only 3 camps. This map along with the “capture and defend” concept makes this battle a failed battleground.
These two BG needs to be archived.
Examples of successful battlegrounds
Wintergrasp, where all players are involved to do some tasks to advance. Seething Shore, is also another BG where all players must be involved to do a task to win. WSG and Twin Peaks, are other perfect examples.
As you can see, battlegrounds where all players must be involved in some sort of tasks to win are good and fun battlegrounds. These battleground doesn’t require a player to sit in one location to defend, with the exception of Wintergrasp but the number of players required to do the tasks to win far outweighs those that defend. The design of the map also plays an important role on influencing players to either defend or attack. For example, AV is a map that can be considered as a defend map, but because it is designed in a way that players choose not to, because nobody wants to turtle a BG for hours. However, AV is still not considered a successful BG because it literally comes down to who can get the bunkers/towers faster.
A good concept of a good battleground is when you have tasks that immediately rewards the team that successfuly completes it, like getting Azerites in Seething Shore. If you have a 40vs40 version of Seething Shore, it would a funner map than Ashran.
? Encourage people to not play the classes they’ve chosen to and progress but instead play inside vehicles (which are immensely more powerful than players).
Try and think critically outside of the mess that is Random BGs.
Seething has perfect fundamentals for the best team players and best individual players.
Player 1 through to player 10’s positioning matters. There’s not a single useless class.
There’s a reason why games containing 20 good players see 4 nodes last upwards of 8 minutes.
The worst maps (and the reason why these weren’t chosen in the recent tournaments) are DWG/AB. If 1 person makes a mistake, no matter how well 9 other players perform, you can lose the game off of 0.1 seconds.
Seething and ToKM are the best fundamentally. It’s really simple.
You’re right on the fundamentals of Seething shore, but then why do so many people hate it?
Probably because the nodes spawn based on RNG and it is easy for teams to get scrambled. The Respawn hardly makes a difference, someone can die then spawn and get back to you in such a short time before you can cap a node.
AB/DWG, it is easier for people to get on the same page and work together, call out incs, same thing with CTF games.
At the moment I think the 40-mans need better design, particularly AV and Ashran.
Honestly, just remove Ashran and bring back Tol Barad, much better 40-man.
