Thanks for your approval to play this MMORPG as I like and Blizzard intended. Yeah, some people hate it. People hate a lot of things for no reason, tbh. I prefer categorizing activities by stuff I like and stuff I am indifferent towards instead.
Good for you, I guess.
Thank you. May the odds be ever on your favor. Enjoy the game! Life is too short for hating stuff that doesn’t matter. <3
Making a new Battleground while they killed the Alliance vs Horde Theme over the years is kinda weird.
But hey the at least the premade losers will get something new.
2 Likes
Would be interesting to at least see this new BG be mixed factions.
To see how balanced / popular such a mode would be.
3 Likes
By your recent statements and behavior I no longer wonder why you don’t have anyone to play with. Once again, this is MMORPG and I suggest to look up for the meaning of this using google search.
2 Likes
Of course yes, a lot of people play it because they are a success, and that is why you usually find the same people in almost all the bgs.
Because Blizzard can’t control that. The only way to avoid that would be for the factions to mix, which is the easiest, (which I don’t want, because I like that in normal bgs the essence of alliance vs horde is maintained as much as possible) and another that requires work, which is something that work and blizzard don’t get along with, would be to ban those mechanics and based on reports and an investigation behind it, sanction people who dedicate themselves to abusing that system.
And be careful, I am not against groups of 5 people in epica, because only 5 people does not have an impact, and I think it is good that it can be done in epic bgs. The problem lies when there are 4 or 5 groups of 5 people working at the same time in a synchronized manner.
2 Likes
I’ll tell you a little secret, my young friend.
After some unannounced changes, it became impossible for groups of 5 people to get into one BG, I don’t know what it’s connected with.
But!
It is still possible for groups of 4 people to get into one BG. You can easily check this on Larkus’s live broadcast or get information from one of the thousands of PvP community members, no one will hide anything from you.
Now the waiting time is very short, especially for alliance players, no one gathers more than two groups because 3 groups are now very difficult to synchronize. Therefore, the synchronized pre-made at the moment is only 8 people.
You claim that one group of 5 people is not a problem for you, right?
8 people are a problem for you?
1 Like
I didn’t know anything about that, and surely knowing Blizzard, I wouldn’t know or ignore it either, as they often do with pvp.
8 people depends. 10 Yes, it already has an impact if they go with several well-structured groups
All this does not matter at all, perhaps only in principle, for a very narrow circle of PvP players, I mean the ban on synchronization.
No matter what anyone says, “cowards”, “they can only play in pre-made” and other nonsense, the quality of the players decides.
Synchronization has 99% of victories, a good group has 95%… (I mean a good group, where there are no useless rogues, ench Shamans and fire mages)
Will it make you feel better after the ban on synchronization? By a lot?
Crying on the forum is only the first stage, the second stage will be something like - “ban the leaders on the BG”
True.
…until they face a qsync, then tend to stop queuing after 1-2 annihilations.
There used to be multiple ebgs running at any one time, now it feels like theres only 1-2 running, depending on time of day.
Whether it’s 8ppl or 40ppl synced, if the result of syncing is 95-99% win rate, then yeah -still a problem.
What’s the incentive to join a game players have 1% chance of winning / 99% chance of being stomped & demotivated?
3 Likes
One group has 95% win rate, why don’t you ask what is the point of playing against that group? Or is 99% unacceptable to you, but 95% is perfectly acceptable?
Which part did you get stuck on?
3 Likes
You often mention the word - synchronization, in which, according to my information (I think no one will argue with this) 99% of victories, you think that this is unacceptable, ok.
But in a group of 5 people (in your opinion, quite legal) 95% of victories.
Question!
Does it make sense to play against one group that has 95% of victories?
It would suck, of course -& the result for the losers would probs be the same (they’d stop queuing against them).
But if they’re not exploiting the queue system (or anything else), then I wouldn’t see the need to Report.
1 Like
It often feels intentional that you ignore my questions & instead, ask your own.
Question!
What is the incentive to (why would players) join a game that they will (might) only win one out of 100 attempts?
It won’t make sense until people understand that times are changing, the way players understand the game is changing, the quality of players is changing, classes and specs are changing. It used to be that a fire mage couldn’t kill a raid with two buttons, but we saw that. It used to be that two Boomys couldn’t kill a raid, but now we see that.
Players are now teaming up to compete with each other. If you don’t find a good group with meta classes and players who know how to play, your win rate is going to be around 30% at best, and that’s only because the same strong group you just happened to be matched with is going to win your games.
The meta is the meta of groups now, whether you like it or not.
…to queue into games where players are guaranteed to lose 99/100 times.
Thank you.
…& that’s all very well, metas / classes / comps evolve.
Very few people take issue with players teaming up (the whole BG is a group effort).
Without sounding like a broken record, it’s the bending of the rules -resulting in 99% chance of losing -that many players are taking issue with. You said it yourself, it doesn’t make sense to queue into those odds.
1 Like
Yesterday I played solo, won 10 out of 10 games. Every time I joined, there were groups. I met Zeni, Zado, Eneg, some shaman whom I saw for the first time, maybe someone’s twink, I don’t know. And there was also a hunter, whom I also don’t know. I played only one game without a leader, which I also won without difficulty.
And let’s be honest, I have only 2 options. Either continue playing, or not.
But what moral right do I have to go to the forum and declare how all these people should play?
What rules are violated by one strong group with an outstanding leader who wins ~95% of games? Correct, there are no violations (although synchronization is not a violation of the rules)
But for you it is abnormal to lose to synchronization 99%
and it is quite normal to lose to the group in 95% of games…
You are the weirdest gnome😂
You have the same right everyone else here has: the right to give feedback about your experience.
Large numbers of the community saying: “Qsyncing creates unfair outcomes, Blizzard should look at it” isn’t a moral overreach, it’s feedback …literally the purpose of the forum.
On the contrary, considering I only sub for PvP, both of the above scenarios happening consistently is enough to stop me queuing.
(it just doesn’t make sense to spend £50 +£10/month to pay for a game I have 1-5% chance of winning!?).
Am I reading this correctly?
Yesterday you queued solo & won all your games.
(…& on a somewhat related note, every game you joined you were grouped with really strong groups known for Qsyncing).
I mean, the math checks out.
Players facing Qsyncers, have ~99% chance of losing. Great odds. Worth sub 
Kinda reassures me that not logging in yesterday was a good call, sounds like it would have been another wasted day of unwinnable games.