This kills the competitive PVP scene for Oceanic players. If you don’t understand why go play on an EU server from the U.S. please.
3 Likes
messed up part is the last minute bit.
I know for fact in all aspects of retail I make out way better all in all on a straight up US server.
But…that was found after I leveled my first MG char to see the then 10 to 120 run.
PVPers in OCE had no chance to see if they had a char on a west coast US server to see if by some routing change…they make out better.
And they had no real choice. I for example chose to have what will be the main on bloodsail. only pve rp server there is…and lag issues I will accept for the rp call.
Just had an AV with maybe 10/80 players being Oceanic and we had host ping, RIP US players lol.
3 Likes
Confirmed. Thrown into several OCE BGs this morning from a US-W Server. Latency goes from 32 on my home battlegroup to over 240ms+. This is not cool.
3 Likes
Its gonna be like retail with all the illidan and areas 52 rage lord idiots trash talking oce players. As if we like the crap ping any better…
Like at what point will Blizzard accept that this is a change no one wants? 1600 comments and counting? How many more do we need?
Saddest part is that it all feels so futile. Love this game, but I have zero faith that Blizzard will listen to the overwhelming majority here. None at all.
2 Likes
#purgethemerge
5 Likes
Stupid change, I don’t want to play on 300ms again like its 2006 Jesus Christ.
More stupid decisions from this stupid development team.
CHANGE THIS NOW !
It was quite the other way around this AM. 100% US bashing non-stop. I’ve never seen such toxic BG chat.
The whole spiel is not particularly relevant. The quoted sections don’t really apply.
Section 54 is in relation to goods being of acceptable quality. The location of the PVP servers are a small part of the overall package, and there would be way too much gray area in how “bad” it makes that part, and whether that part is sufficient to invoke the protection of section 54. It’s just too weak an argument to get up.
Section 55 is in relation to goods being fit for disclosed purposes.(Whoever quoted this section probably was confused with Section 54). Unless they expressly said “you can pvp at low latency” or you emailed them before purchasing a boost and asked them “will PVP always be on oceanic servers”, it’s irrelevant to your argument.
Section 56 is about goods matching their description. It would be extraordinary if blizzard described anywhere that any of the services provided you are requesting a refund for included “oceanic hosted PVP”.
Section 60 is in relation to “providing services (not a product) with due skill and care”. Completely irrelevant.
The only really correct thing stated was that Blizzard can’t have a blanket “no refunds” policy, as this is most definitely in contravention of the CCA.
The only valid (imo) consumer law argument would be over misleading and deceptive conduct, because for this to get up you only have to prove that the conduct could be misleading or deceptive, intention is irrelevant it’s the actual effect.
I would argue that the fact that the service has been provided via oceanic servers for the entirety of classic’s existence created a reasonable ongoing expectation it would stay that way.
Changing this has a demonstrable negative effect on the experience that would likely cause a reasonable person to reconsider purchasing the product(s). Activision knew this, and the decision to merge battlegroups would have been made well in advance of boosts, deluxe editions etc going on sale. Despite this they chose to hide the fact this change was coming and implement it in secret. Classic unconscionable, misleading and deceptive conduct.
If I was ticketing for a refund, I would point out that their blanket policy of no refunds breaches the ACL, and that you are requesting a refund due to their misleading and deceptive conduct.
1 Like
Please revert! I would actually like to play a melee class in tbc ::
1 Like
#purgethemerge
1 Like
I thought there was no battlegroups for Classic games ?
PVP becomes a meaningless pursuit for want of quality of gameplay with the integration of merged battlegroups. If there is a notion at Blizzard that OCE players want or require a larger representation of titles and accolades in the NA cluster such that they outweigh the need of the 99% to enjoy the seamless PVP combat they would otherwise enjoy then this is a textbook case of cultural disconnection. No titles can be used to justify this change as a benefit to the OCE PVP community.
Queue times remain the same.
This change is neither in the best interest of the majority nor indeed the minority of OCE players who intend to push for higher ratings; for those in contention for titles, the ability to play without a 200ms or higher ping is far more important than any perceived detriment to their queue times or ratings weighted against players in the NA battle cluster (of which no OCE player I know foresaw being a part of).
In hindsight this seems like the only change sufficient to ruin a launch as fiercely anticipated as classic TBC. This abortive change, made without consultation, is nothing but destructive to the OCE PVP playerbase. Seeing so many decentralized PVP discords echoing the aforementioned gives me hope that this issue will result in continuing backlash until this change is reverted.
8 Likes
This applys more:
For a major problem with services you can cancel the contract and obtain a refund or seek compensation for the drop in value of your services provided compared to the price paid.
A service has a major problem when:
- it has a problem that would have stopped someone from buying it if they’d known about it
Damn! Those are some outstanding consumer protections.
I mean, buyer beware and all in other nations but hot damn they got you guys covered.
IMO merger like this is a massive downgrade in performance to everyone no matter the location because no one wants to deal with lag or laggy players; or sucks both ways.
1 Like
Cancelled my sub, guess what day it was due to resub? June 2nd. No longer will. Have also opened a ticket for a refund on my character boost that I only bought thinking I could finally enjoy TBC arena with a low, stable ping.
1 Like
the impact of 250+ latency on melee and healers literally make the game unplayable to think arena is gonna be the same just makes me not wanna play why can’t blizz just implement a vote system before they change things like many others have said, I think its even worse that blizz is most likely doing it to cut costs. Why do I even pay a sub then??
2 Likes
Words fail.
It’s supposed to be a good change for horde, because our queue times aren’t great. But no horde player I know wanted or likes this change. We don’t care for faster queues if the game doesn’t feel smooth to play.
For alliance players like yourself, there’s no potential upside at all. It’s a massive kick in the face. On the way home today I was contemplating playing an alliance toon for BGs between BGs on my horde toon, and now I’m contemplating unsubbing my 2 accounts and my gf’s.
This change just ruins our community. Now we can’t even play against our mates/rivals on the opposite faction or with the friends we’ve made during our pvp grinds that are on different servers.
2 Likes