They fixed the backdooring into bases.
You can’t skip past the ally bunker anymore either.
What more do you want? The Alliance cave leading into the Horde base and all Horde NPC’s removed?
I got over 70% winrate in AB. Apparently that now counts as losing the vast majority of my games.
2 Likes
When you start to reach 200-300 trials then it’s enough samplesize for most distributions, especially if you settle with a margin of error of ±5. 60 is a good enough sample to get a good estimator for the true p of a binomial distributions.
The basis you call “non-existing” is me working as a statistician. But do go on, how much statistics did you study to put yourself in a position where you can judge if someone understand statistics or not?
I was under the impression you think the battleground is equal for both sides in which case it would be around a 50/50 shot at winning when a bunch of randoms square up.
Mages beat warriors in a 1v1. Do you dispute that or is it just the mindset of all the warriors out there? In reality mindset can make a difference but it’s seldom the deciding outcome of an event. It’s small shifts, like someone winning 55/45 isntead of 50/50. You put way too much weight on the psychological aspect of the game.
But please continue to talk about how AB and WSG is around 50/50 and AV is 95/5 and that’s because of mindset instead for a heavy horde bias. Maybe you can put it up as a thesis before you start working as a statistician.
1 Like
Except this isn’t about binomial distributions, which you should know as a “statistician”, for this is about an extreme amount of circumstances all with heavy impacts on the success rate on an individual basis. Which is why entire regions can end up with very different metas compared to each other, with very different success rates vs. each other.
It’s not just a simple true or false question for statistical significance.
Except not really. You’re trying to make it sound like just because the chance is more or less equal in PvP, the win rate should subsequently become 50/50. That’s not really how PvP works, you know? Otherwise you’d see PvP in refail also reflect a 50/50 win/loss rate in basically everything, if the theoretical side of statistics would be enough to explain the many relevant factors at play here.
Google confirmation bias, proportional bias and martyr complex. They all fit you.
Silly me. Here I thought that the number one important thing in AV for a vast majority of the players are winning or losing and that’s the goal they strive after. I.e. the outcome is binary.
So what kind of distributions are you talking about here? Can you give me some examples of battles where the meta didn’t include winning AV?
Yeah, since the class distributions are somewhat equal.
So how does it work, you know?
The last time I checked that’s what I saw. Do you have any other examples because I don’t know which stuff you studied but I more and more suspect those studies were never finished.
I don’t have to because I’m educated :). I already know and I question whether you have the expertise to diagnose anyone with anything.
But let me get this straight. Your assumption is that H/A is 50/50 in WSG/AB and 95/5 in AV becausae of mindset?
Basically says everything. You’re trying to extrapolate statistical significance to infer reasons for it, without actually considering possible causes for it. Not to mention that due to the huge difference of that small sample size compared to all AVs played each day and how long AVs have been played in Classic thus far it means your margin of error is incredibly unreliable, because the conditions are never static.
This is what’s called confirmation bias.
All you can infer is that due to the skewed win rate, there are common denominators probably affecting most of the games, but not necessarily all.
The problem is that confirmation bias spreads like a plague in online anonymous “voice” outlets, so what should be a pretty simple way to deduce common denominators such as endemic mindset issues, it instead is left at the most shallow part of it. Which is, of course, the map, which just so happens to absolve any and all responsibilities for making it such.
It’s something called diffusion of responsibility.
- It isn’t 50/50.
- It’s not even certain it’s 95/5. You need to include a larger margin of error.
You saw 50/50 win rate in refail PvP? Are you for real right now?
A simple example:
2 players of opposite factions meet up randomly at some location of the map. 1 player wins, because of something I just call “PvP ability” since it includes stuff like handling of gameplay and gear and spec and so on, and then have that happen everywhere on the map, several times over.
By following your logic, all of these should end up at 50/50 because of statistical probability somehow deciding PvP in WoW. Yet that’s not what happens. 1 side inevitably ends up winning more, always.
Just because the end result of a BG is binary, it doesn’t mean the reasons for it are the same.
For your “logic” to work, you’d need something like MMR as part of the matchmaking, to provide more stable conditions. And this is what’s called proportional bias. You can’t imagine the vast difference to be heavily affected by random individualistic elements or shared mindsets, so you feel the need for it to be caused by something more encompassing like for example the same map that is played every game.
I would hardly call this effort to balance the battleground. No. I will not take this suggestion seriously.
Instead I’m asking for actual balance. The most obvious examples that come to mind are:
- Mirror the map
- Make us start on different sides every other game.
Now, if you want the layout to be similar to what it is now and still start at your beloved base, some other changes are direly needed.
- Maybe move the starting location of the horde, like they did in TBC, back further south.
Nobody knows the exact way you balance the BG making changes like example 3, but you have to start somewhere. Trial and error.
The reason they even changed that was because the removal of NPCs, reducing the dmg of archers and bringing in reinforcements that’s burned away when a tower/bunker burns, and reducing the time it takes for a tower/bunker to burn down to like 2 minutes iirc, it put a lot more emphasis on that running distance.
A better change, which is also from burning crusade, would be to make it only possible to ress inside the caves when all the faction’s graveyards have been captured.
Are you saying that it would be a bad idea to move the starting cave?
2 Likes
Yes.
10chars
Whatever changes are needed to make it more balanced, I’m all for it. 
2 Likes
It doesn’t matter. The outcome is [win, loss]. Then you can divide it into subcategories like [winning while maximizing honor] or [winning while eating bananas] but given enough players on both sides it’ll even itself out over the longrun. I don’t think you have provided any reasons why the outcome is anything but binary and I asked for examples and they’re not here. Any examples on how different metas include anything than trying to win?
You’re thinking 40 players all have different objectives and matched vs 40 others with different objectives and you simply fail to udnerstand that they average out into strat vs strat and that what you see is still two outcomes.
I mean you can talk about the words you googled and seem to have incoprorated into your forum warring like “confirmation bias” but I’m telling you, since you have little clue, that for a binomial distribution 60 is a sample size that can’t be waved away as a small sample size and does not give such a huge margin of error you seem to be convinced about. The true winrate is nowhere near 50/50. So you can take your poor understanding of confirmation bias, sampling and inference and basically go back to LFW.
Yeah ok, ±7. It’s still enough to say that the outcome is not a result from a random trial which means it is biased. Do you understand?
What are you talking about? What do you mean with “yet this is not what happens”? You can’t just write that and say that’s that.
I mean if you’re talking about momentum or something like that because I don’t know which holes you dwell in, then momentum will only skew the results by a little. People still push 1 for fireball and there aren’t a multitude of ways to press 1 on. You’re just making it way more complex than what it is. The BG is biased. Horde wins way more than they should. End of.
And what do you mean with MMR? Is it some mix between MLR and MLM?
Dont waste your time with people that cannot see AV map imbalance… i mean lol
1 Like
the problem with the alliance AV is now mostly the people. There is 0 reason for higher ranked people to play AV besides beeing semi afk. And the rest of the people are low levels & rep farmers who don’t even know how to win, I mean many of them don’t even know that killing drek’thar is the goal of the BG - nevermind knowing winning strategies.
so it’s basically now a never ending death spiral of semi afkers & rep farmers
Except I can.
I can see you’re a true master PvPer with a perfect grasp of what determines a win. 
Except not really. End of.
MMR is short for matchmaking rating. Serves the purpose of providing more balanced encounters. The absence of it makes it random, and in large scale PvP encounters in WoW like in AV then the difference between social norms, gear, class differences, talent choices and so on all impacts these things.
You say your 60 games can be used to infer map bias in the thousands of games played, yet you ignore the prevalent social norms having formed thus far and the actual relevance of the individual impact in a BG in WoW.
Once upon a time when AV was intrduced Alliance was winning a fair bit of games as I recall.
Horde adapted strategy from zerg to turtle. Alliance started lose games.
Alliance started premading in order to get some more wins. (aka cheating)
Got fixed eventually.
Now alliance cant win games.
Sad but true. Alliance just simply isnt good enough in av due to afks and morale.
I seriously doubt map has to do 95% of loses xD
Also worth mentioning didnt alliance long long time ago in vanilla wow dominate the bgs? xD probably horde had faster queues back then :p. I kind of see a trend here.
because why would they try at this point? it’s not uncommon to have 10+ lowlevels and 15-20 semi afks in the group.
which only leads to more people semi afking AV and the death spiral continues.
You could argue for strikter punishments for that, but this will only lead to more extreme horde que times and therefore a even faster death spiral for AV.
if you would ban every alliance AFKer in AV the number of open AVs at any point of the day will probably half.
The biggest issue with “mindset issues” is that its an oversimplification in the same way that “map imbalance” is an oversimplification. There are a multitude of reasons that have resulted in the the current trainwreck that is AV.
There are gear imbalances since the geared alliance have 0 incentive to do AV
The ranker imbalance since the alliance rankers have 0 incentive to do AV
The IB GY imbalance with the double respawns and excessively short reinforcement route
The easy to hold IWB choke
The mount imbalance, green geared alts do not have epic mounts
The queue imbalance, which for horde means only dedicated rankers can be bothered to queue for 1 - 2 hours to weave in AV.
The queue imbalance, which for alliance means you get better honor spamming AB or WSG over weaving AV.
All of these things and I’m sure more add up, and for alliance the most important aspect is that you’d need AV to award 15 - 20K HPH in order to get rankers back into it, to do that you need clean, blowouts in less than 10 minutes. Meaning 5 - 6k honor pr game, and the game finished in 10 minutes or less. That’s never going to happen, the horde loves turtling too much.
There were a few Alliance premades running around since day 1. It just took a couple of days for it to become the popular choice by the Alliance, and eventually it overtook the majority of the Alliance queuing for AV.
The premade exploits were already known from both pservers and refail, so there were a couple of people who had already planned for it before the BGs had been released, and then it just spread like wildfire.
Which is why the reasonable fix to AV would be to bring in the burning crusade change that made it so people could only ress at the cave when all of their faction’s graveyards have been assaulted/captured.
But not the part where it makes people ress at the furthest graveyard no matter where they die, that was a horrible change.
More like the Horde earns much less honor per hour from quick games compared to that 30-minute bonus, because of the long queue times. And the shorter games wouldn’t significantly reduce the queue times either, because while the 40 Alliance players might be returning to the queue, the Horde players would do the same. So the answer to that is to have vastly more Alliance queue up for AV, which is never going to happen.
It’s truly ironic.