You not liking it or even disagreeing with the meaning has no bearing on it being an actual term used in WoW for years.
I don’t like the term “meme spec” but it doesn’t change the meaning in classic.
Are you a Combat Veteran?
Do you command troops?
My opinion of you just went out the window. Unfortunate.
1 Like
Sorry if your opinion of me went out the window because I am not a combat vet. That does not remove the ludicrous misuse of the term scorched earth, especially from someone with a military background.
¯_(ツ)_/¯ good luck ever winning if you blindly argue points just to be right.
Dude, I do not have to be a combat vet to know the proper use of scorched earth. Napoleon is spinning in his grave.
The point is going over your head, maybe one day you’ll figure it out.
Here’s another military term for you “Hearts and minds”.
You two are arguing over the literal and colloquial use of a term, both are correct, English is dumb.
1 Like
Napoleon was dumb, the Russians were smart.
Scorched earth is a term used for when you are in retreat, you burn all things useful to the enemy. Food, fuel, medical supplies, defensive positions, weaponry. Carry away or destroy it all and leave nothing behind for them to use.
It is kinda sorta useful in an AV context in that you’re denying the enemy faction anything they can use on the entire battlefield but it’s incorrect because it’s being done in victory, not in retreat.
It does not mean you are “nuking” the battlefield with your full arsenal. You’re using as many resources as possible to retreat while still destroying what you can to not leave it behind. It can also be used as a hit-and-run tactic to destroy enemy resources while trying to not engage their full force.
1 Like
You’re missing the point as well.
Actually im pretty certain horde does have better pvpers overall because they have just better racials for pvp. And given that everything now has a guide and everyone recommending bis races for PvP and the sheer overpopulation on pvp realms leaning towards hordes means that the pvper interested people tend to go horde.
Ye alliance has good players too, but the pvp interested folks went horde in large numbers compared to alliance
I actually do not disagree with this but my argument is actually that in the actual BGs, this difference between the factions does not play out in a significant way.
Why?
Because the BGs are capped on each side to a specific number. Every AV is meant to be 40v40. It means that the people who want to queue AV on horde are matched by a same number of players alliance side who want to queue for AV.
The difference in number of people who like PvPing is what affects the queue times, but the actual composition of the groups that get in should largely be fairly equal in make-up in terms of people who enjoy PvPing often or don’t depending on who’s there “just for rep” or not.
lol horde player saying it’s not imopssible. Ok pal. Even if alliance get south a group of 5 horde players can backdoor into ally base and kill vanna while the rest of the team recalls.
They’re also just… Just blue!
No one likes blue…
Where there’s a will, there’s a way!
Hey, not trying is a perfectly valid tactic. Keep at it, you can do it!
no thanks i haven’t queued for AV since the week they nerfed premades. Even if we try and get south a group of 5 horde can win the game. Like I just said. But thanks for the useless reply. keep thinking the horde wins because of skill.
1 Like
How is it that horde can magically win with 5 players, yet alliance cannot with the benefit of pally pulls? Don’t bother answering, as “don’t bother trying” tactic seems to be working out, and you admit to not even playing it since the premade exploit was removed.