We Need Faction Based Queues NOW

WoW Classic WoW Classic General Discussion
201

Not everyone trying to level has a 60 main. I mean this might be okay for you, but if you were on a balanced server that wasn’t overpopulated, you would be able to pvp while leveling without getting ganked as often. It would also stop people from quitting . Wouldn’t that be better?

I mean being horde as the underdog is fine for now (until you are the last horde left haha - I think some horde are quitting as well) , but what really sucks is we are still going to have horrid queues for bgs. I’d much rather the alliance not quit at the rate they are quitting at this time .

Even with cross server bgs, The pve alliance may not want to even bother participating in PVP.

202

In an ideal world, of course. Should players have tools leveled against them in some hope to attain a dream that has never been realized, no.

And no, not everyone has a main, but I also don’t leave my main where my alt is: I ask for help from others or run. When I come on my main, it is to help others. Sometimes I don’t get help, so I die and run back.

There should have been more servers, and they should have been locked to population sizes the game world was designed to support. Transfers should have always been faction locked.

There are a lot of “should haves” that could have improved the current state. Should servers with no queues have them artificially added in some hope enough people will transfer to level them out? No.

Put simply, enough people won’t transfer. There will always be queues now, gating people from entering.

Let’s say it’s raid night on Heartseeker. Last week, my group of 15 and I pushed through 220+ Alliance to get into Ony. We corpse walked a lot. We lost our foolishly gotten world buffed.

Should the Ally not be able to log in to raid because there isn’t enough Horde, if every single one logged in, to support their population? 100% not! They deserve to play to. I selected a PvP server. I will corpse walk my a** where I need to when I need to, and make the Alliance do so every opportunity I can.

The quote that I referenced, and my answer to this:

"Daxxarri
Community Manager

This is going to sound weird, and while I do empathize with the frustration that’s being expressed in this thread, this conversation still warms the cockles of my black little heart.

Why? Because for too long there was very little distinction between playing on a PvE realm and playing on a PvP realm. We had inadvertently created a situation where there was little risk when leveling in the world on a PvP realm. The experiences were, for all practical purposes, virtually identical, but that wasn’t what we had in mind.

Life on a PvP realm can be nasty, brutish and short. Justice is in very short supply. Every action you take in the world carries with it an added level of risk, from questing, to hunting down profession materials, to simply traveling from place to place. You can be attacked at any time, sometimes by an overwhelming force. Of course, the shoe can also be on the other foot, and you’ll be able to turn the tables on your attacker, or find clever ways to delay them or escape from them. Some will become roaming slayers, seeking out enemies to destroy.

In short, the experience on a PvP server is different. We want it to be different, and that includes everything from honorable conflict on the field of battle to horribly despicable ganking. It’s all part of the fabric that makes a PvP server what it is .

Let the blood be spilled ."

By the way, that quote is from 2009-2012ish timeframe, this is not a new issue.

1 Like
203

They don’t need to transfer to fix the imbalance. But the ones that do will help. We could create a queue system, where you play in a layer until your queue is over then you go to the balanced layer.

204

I considered this as an option, and realised it was impossible.

You don’t log on to a server as a character, you log on as a player. And as a player you may very well have a main and a number of alts. So say you want to log onto play your alt, to get some levelling done and check your AH/mail, whatever. This means that you, the player, have logged on not as a level 60 but as a level 25. Which will have zero impact on the balance of cap level world pvp so far as your faction is concerned.

Blizzard is good but I’m not sure how it reads the mind of a player to know which toon it wants to play.

1 Like
205

I also think that guy that made the quote had no idea that overpopulated servers would make it so it would be nothing but ganksquads with horrible imbalance where the faction that is dominating never has to worry about pvp and just eats chicken while afk in front of BRD.

206

I take it this layer would have no world bosses? And would possibly create the same issues layering did in the first place.

If it has no world bosses, are people relegated to this layer unable to swap and engage the world bosses when they do spawn?

What about raid nights? If you’re stuck on this layer, are you unable to join with your raid team?

If you can just get an invite to swap over and enter the raid, could this not create the same exploits we’ve witnessed before?

207

This is a very very good solution to a huge problem.

Let’s hope this problem is lessened by bgs as well.

208

I’m sure there are some simple solutions to your questions, and some that would require much thought. But at least this is something. and i have to go shopping bbl :slight_smile:

209

That is the exact issue he was responding to, just on a lesser scale due to new server populations.

Which is why I previously stated I support blanket queues and reversion to vanilla-sized population servers, with the addition of new servers and faction-controlled transfers.

That said, many people wouldn’t want to play on a server with the population size the game was designed for because it would be “dead.” People already call our server “dead,” while there is 3-5x a vanilla population on it.

Queues shouldn’t be specific to factions, as they never have been. If anything, bring the total population density down.

210

/wave

Ciao! Nice chat =)

P.S. if I see Ally on you, expect +1 to at least die with you when I engage.

211

Not one person who says a faction queue is a good idea has answered the question why players in the majority faction who want to run a dungeon or raid should sit in a queue just because not enough of the other faction decided to login.

212

People who are calling our server dead didn’t check to see our server population, or , logged in late at night , or saw how little horde there are. There are tons of alliance.

213

I know, but even on the Horde side we have a large pop compared to vanilla. It’s all perspective.

More Horde transferring to Heartseeker helps everyone, and they’ll find there are plenty of people online doing things if they join.

214

I suggested they could still play inside of a layer without world bosses. I think thats fair.

215

How would you even do that? Forced transfers? I can imagine that would go down very well. People make these assertions or suggestions without really thinking them through. The chaos that would result from forced transfers would fundamentally destroy Classic. People would quit the game in droves.

Players had choices when starting to play. They chose to play where they did. And then you suggest what I assume would be forced transfers, taking away choice.

No thank you.

216

Took 2/3 posts for someone to detract from this consideration. I agree entirely, this isn’t a feasible solution, it is simply the fairest and truest to vanilla. The game was designed for a certain population density, but we have 4-5x it in most cases, which is causing the “problems” may are encountering, and has been from day one.

If you took NYC, and increased the population by 5x tonight without adding land mass and new population support, systems would break all over. This is what WoW: Classic has done.

The transfers aren’t ever forced unless your server is merged, you always have an option to wait in the queue.

I would reduce server sizes, make queues massive, and offer transfers to new vanilla sized servers. Many would be malcontent, but it would reduce wPvP encounters as they are.

Apparently, people are already quitting in droves.

But you hit the crux of my point: any of these “solutions” create more or different “problems.”

I agree with you, we that play on a PvP server need to recognize that PvP is not always, and normally won’t be, on our terms. That’s part of the game.

217

If the solution is, as our Horde posters say, for Alliance to re-roll onto PVE servers, what will become of the game?

Faction imbalance will become even more skewed. Forget 65:35 like we have now, we would be looking at 90:10 H:A on every PVP server. Or every Alliance member re-rolls on Heartseeker to attain a 99:1 H:A ratio there.

Clearly the Horde’s solution is irrational because it would be completely self defeating. Eventually those PVP servers would simply become, de facto, Horde Only servers.

218

I can see it now,

“Holymary, the Alliance Paladin reroll from the Horde, last bastion of hope, and the last standing Alliance.”

2 Likes
219

If there was a huge player drop off then the problems that people are posting about surely wouldn’t be happening. Less players, less server load. Yet I see the same long queues for Faerlina now, weeks after the layer removal and after the introduction of the honor system. Fact is, people want to play on these busy servers. What you all need to remember is that the forums are a very small loud voice as against a very large playerbase. The ones that keep paying and playing. And the ones that don’t come here to complain.

You keep saying “reduce server size” and then say “new vanilla sized servers”. I’m not sure what you mean by that. Create a server and put a cap on how many people can create toons on it? How do you then manage the faction balances, given that you might get a rush of people creating on Horde which would instantly topple the balance? So you’d have to keep upping the total allowed to try and even the balance. Or stop people creating on Horde. It would get insanely complicated and would drive players nuts. It’s easy to say these things but if they were easy to implement I have to assume that Blizzard would have thought of it.

220

“Solution”? To PvP on a PvP server?

Don’t worry, plenty HS Ally say this too! We’re all the same gamers behind the curtain.

It continues, as it has for 15 years of imbalance now.

Let’s say it’s raid night on Heartseeker. My 15 guildies and I are running to Ony, where we end up having to corpse run through the 210+ Alliance there on raid nights. These Ally should have just as much a chance to raid on their raid night as I do. Even if every single Horde logged on, there wouldn’t be enough for the Alliance to log - thus, many won’t be on for raid nights.

I’m sure that would be well received.

1 Like