Cross realm battlegrounds and OCE

WoW Classic WoW Classic General Discussion
7

If there are only 2 OCE servers, hopefully you’re only working between them.

8

thats the dream, don’t get me wrong this whole post is pure speculation but… better to have the discussion BEFORE concrete decisions are made, right?

more power to you guys, any particular reason for playing NA when a local server is available?

9

HELL TO THE NO for cross realm BGs

3 Likes
10

Well if you’re playing arena/RBG’s you’re matched with US players. It’s just how it is.

11

Does the “CR” in “CRBG” not stand for “cross realm”?

12

Playing cross realm PvP we always have to play on NA servers, that’s just how it’s always been being the minority. There was one expansion where arena did a coin flip on which server we played on, NA players cried harder than anything I’ve ever seen saying it was “unplayable” for them. It was reverted in 3-4 days.

I don’t expect classic to be any different, expect to play BGs with 200 ping if there’s cross realm.

13

For sure I don’t disagree… I’d put this down to oce population and a very loose matchmaker that doesn’t want to keep players in queue for longer than 15seconds to find a game.

When oce servers were announced way back when, I distinctly remember reading about how arena/instances would be handled. For most things the group leaders’ location would determine what region x is played, with instanced PVP however the matchmaker would make an effort to find a local game before heading out to NA for games.

14

CRBG’s were definitely in 1.12 and solved some major issues.

People trying to pretend battlegroups were not CRBG’s are just mincing words.

It would be cool if the CRBG system in classic tried to make same realm matches first as long as it’s not at the cost of queue times.

4 Likes
15

100% agree, it wasn’t that long ago and correct me if i’m wrong but did Ashran ever match OCE with US? Memory is hazy but weren’t there two separate OCE groups that would only ever match with each other?

I feel oce would have more than enough to keep bg’s popping at all hours, maybe thats wishful thinking and I’m the same, I 100% expect to play bgs on 200+ms but… it’d be nice not to right.

16

Not sure about Ashran, wasn’t around much at that time.

OCE servers have always been matched with US since they’ve been on BG9/Bloodlust battlegroup from the beginning which was filled with NAW servers. If both teams are OCE based then it will use OCE server, that’s the only time you’ll have low ping.

I think you’re overestimating the OCE classic population but we’ll have to wait and see, maybe I’m wrong.

17

Personally that’s all i’m after, I understand the need for cross realm stuff, and if there is legitimately not enough players queuing a bg at any one time to allow for a quick local queue pop then by all means start looking into the NA pool. Live handles this poorly imo and with all of oce condensed into a couple of servers I’d like to think this is a good opportunity for oce players to not have to play with wildly varying ping depending on whether you’re consuming pve or pvp content.

Probably am tbh, quietly hopeful though. Ironically a completely disconnected OCE would kill any other bracket bracket below 60 which is why I’d hope for something like Ziryus suggested…

Different game entirely but I find it interesting that at any time of the night I can queue a ranked OW game at an okay rating and still find OCE matches, the queue takes a little longer but it’s super rare to find yourself in NA, maybe it’s wishful thinking but I would have thought total OCE population above masters would be smaller than the amount playing classic, on/during early launch at least anyways…

18

We might get OCE servers, but when you play a rogue till 60 and gear up in MC/BWL, and then realise you get matched with NA players in BGs… well, back to retail (or anything else). At least you can queue arenas there with a better chance of low ping PvP.

19

Well, since overwatch is 6v6 and WoW is 10v10 and 15v15. Better luck with arenas, maybe.

20

Fair point tbh and one I hadn’t really considered, 12 total for each match is a lot easier to find than 20+. I guess people could organise wsg or abs, have everyone queue at the same time and hope for the best

21

Forgot about no premade queue.

Were you planning to play rogue? I remember trying one in vanilla and people rubber-band around, and you have to be running a few metres ahead of them to hit them when chasing (to compensate for 200 ping).

22

Ya probably playing rogue, toyed with the idea of something new but it’s been my main for a very long time… Definitely well before oce servers were a thing so I’m hearing you on having to compensate heavily.

Who knows what’ll happen really I guess, it’s probably a safe bet going with being tied to NA like normal :frowning:

23

Lag + spell batching is actually better for us, you will see :slight_smile:

On current wow in US bgs i get around 250ms+ and without the spellbatching it feels rly bad as melee

24

I don’t remember it being much better if at all for melee way back when, but memory is shot so can’t be sure… You’re 100% on current NA arena/bgs feeling like absolute garbage tho, is honestly the entire reason I won’t play retail :man_shrugging:
The solution is to just play better I know

25

As someone pointed out there is a difference (to me) between cross realms, and cross realm battle grounds.

They have been clear - and emphatic - on cross realms, to date nothing has been stated on cross realm BGs. (And honestly I wouldn’t trust them if they said no XBGs anyway - it’s too early to make that call I think)

26

For instanced PvP its actually whoever zones in first determines the host server location.