What do wintergrasp, seething shore, battle for gilneas, and now ashran have in common?
They are all plagued with rampant quitting because of the perception that they are impossible to turn around once the initial skirmishes have been decided. Whether or not this is true is debatable, but I think they have a point. I can’t remember the last battle for gilneas where the game finished with each team having a full roster of players.
I have backfilled so many times into a Seething Shore where others quit. Lots of the time the score has barely moved. With a fresh group of players it’s easy to turn around.
I recall one where the system dropped a premade into one where horde was close to winning. They didn’t score another node. We won that one.
Its not so much the win/loss ratio. Its the BG objective itself. I hated SotA so f****** much due to its primary gameplay. That and seething shore are trashcan worthy.
I’ve seen a bunch. That said, I do blame the difficulty in turning around WG on quitters feeding in backfillers with 0 rank. Not much you can do when you’re up against demos with fresh foot soldiers.
False. There are certain battlegrounds that people are far more likely to quit on arrival, despite your unsupportable claim that all are equally hated.
Read. The. Thread.
Increasing penalties would discourage participation.
except you can’t really tell when ashran is losing, i was in one yesterday where we started with 28 players vs alliance’s 40, they immediately pushed us back to the bridge, we lost two players and chat started talking about it being a loss. however, we backfilled to full 40, then managed to push them back to their bridge and win.
i’ve also won ashran with only 2 healers vs 8. its more than a simple group fight like TMvSS, and the momentum can change rather quickly depending on timing and what npcs are around.
yep, if i have to choose between longer deserter for leaving seething shore and not queueing i’ll not queue. im not paying to play something i don’t enjoy doing.