Cylcone was pretty much best battlegroup starting with season2 as everyone and his mother migrated there (Stormscale > horde / Ravencres > alliance).
Battlegroups first destroyed everything but then somewhat saved it with introduction of arenas.
You are correct, gaming changed but psychology did not and it is possible to create more âepicâ feeling for everyone.
Having no xrealm bgs sure seems impossible (due faction imbalances) but they could easily create battlegroups by picking right servers and merging them into same battlegroups. For example, they could put 5 horde dominated servers with 5 ally dominated servers into same battlegroup.
Iâm sure Blizzard has all the numbers but they do not care as they probably see classic as potential gateway to âconvertâ some people into retail and nothing else.
Basically it only destroys when it isnât in a smaller setting such as arenas. Xrealm as a whole should just fly away into the netherworld, and far far away from Classic altogether.
Itâs not impossible, they would just need to accept the storm of hatred for the sake of the longterm benefits of a wholesome social design.
Itâs this âeverything needs to be possible for meâ-mentality where things have to get catered to them that destroyed retail and will destroy Classic if they continue down this road.
It has already ruined AV, together with the version of it. The only saving grace is the ability to queue as a full premade for WSG and (hopefully) AB. That still makes it possible to keep a proper social atmosphere in a BG, since you know the people you play with then.
I would be beyond happy if there was no xrealms but sadly that is not possible at the moment due faction imbalances.
They should invest some time and create large amount of battlegroups by trying to âmergeâ realms into them based on faction balance.
I really doubt theyâll do anything and that is sad, sad thing.
Itâs not impossible. It would just breed a lot of frustration, many would hate it, some would quit and others would reroll.
In the end, people would realign themselves because the frustration would make them take action in one way or another eventually. Itâd get sorted in the end though, in an organic fashion.
Well nothing is impossible, that is true. Though, we have to take a look at it from other perspective and try to be realistic.
No xRealm (as much as I hate them) would probably mean.
A lot of dead servers or servers on which queues for one faction are so long that majority will quit (there are few servers like that if Iâm not mistaken).
Quite a few servers where queue are awesome due big population and faction balance. This would probably in the end bring in more âimmigrantsâ to these servers ending in huge login queues pretty fast.
*Due above some servers would die off completely.
List just goes on. That is the reason why I believe that battlegroups are middle ground here, they just gotta be somewhat âsmallâ and carefully tailored so faction balance can be preserved as much as possible.
The longterm consequences of poor social design is similar to what can be seen in retail and other online games of today.
The prevalence of toxic outbursts.
Affects player retention because the extrinsic rewards are very bland in nature, when intrinsic rewards feels better and encourages emotional investment.
It discourages the creation of friendships & rivalries in such venues, which affects the immersive process overall.
So that list youâre talking about, even the other predictable short term consequences, would naturally sort itself out with time. People would hate it because it disrupts the flow of dopamine, but itâs the addiction to dopamine which is the huge problem in and of itself.
People need to adapt to delayed gratification again, for the sake of improvement for everyone.
Itâs basically the difference between making a game for casuals vs. making a game for gamers.
Gamers seeks the intrinsic rewards, those are the games they like the most. While casuals actively seeks out the game designs feeding the extrinsic reward loop.
Itâs this conscious effort to design retail for casuals that made it lose a huge chunk of players over the years. Itâd be catastrophic to do the same to Classic.
Unfortunately, AV is already a goner. Hopefully the rest of the game will stay truer to the original vanilla values though. (Layers can go f*** themselves.)
I completely get your point but why is there a need to link that report every single time in almost all replies?
Iâve read it and Iâm not even arguing if you are right or wrong here, actually I agree with you but Iâm just a bit more realistic in what can/cannot be done (as there is simply no way Blizzard will go back to no xrealm bgs, I know, thatâs crap).
Youâd think so, but there are many people who barely reads anything other than the last post posted, sometimes skipping even the OP itself of a thread.
So to provide context for arguments presented in a post helps keep a thread from derailing. Itâs not bulletproof though. (The amount of repetition required sometimes in a thread when it has been mentioned in a previous post can get really annoying, when the answer to what a new person who just strolled in without reading much has said, can be found just by scrolling up.)
In other words, itâs harder to take a piece of a post out of context by providing the context in the post itself. Even though it sometimes serves to repeat things already mentioned. It at least does a bit to prevent the spiral of doom where things start going around in circles.
