Yeah Firemaw feels pretty balanced and even it has skewed now slightly in favor of Horde population. We had a bit more Alliance before if I’m not wrong. I don’t think there’s other servers like Firemaw in EU.
BGs are already crossrealm so what’s your point?
1 Like
To anyone saying its a playermade issue. Yes, but also we pay a subscription. As in ANY software, user breaks it dev fixes it. Thats how software works now get to work blizzard your game is broken
LOL how will you ever win without those boots or bracers! OH NO!!!
2 Likes
As a software developer, let me answer to that:
No, we don’t 
If software does something wrong, aka. if it’s not performing its intended functions as outlined in its specifications, developers fix it.
Otherwise, developers point at the manual, close the ticket, and call it a day.
If users disagree with how the product works, they may talk to whoever does the requirements engineering.
Example:
If people complain that opening a 12GB logfile in windows-notepad doesn’t work, that’s not notepads fault, and the notepad devs don’t have to fix anything. The program was designed as a simple editor for small config-files, notes, and scripts, not to handle super-large amounts of plaintext-data in an efficient way.
2 Likes
Idk about that mate. Software devs get specifications and a level of expected performance. If the user reports something that’s either not part of the spec, intended or an issue not germane to the software itself, you usually find the part in the manual explaining that and close the ticket with it.
Doing anything else would be scope creep and project managers frown on that.
In your analogy, someone at blizzard (at the Game Design or Management level) will have to decide that they think this situation is worth specifying a new requirement for, which will then be done and filtered down to the devs, who then implement it.
No dev is going to put their job or performance review on the line to make some kind of stand against the PM hierachy for this. How do you think stuff like this gets decided in larger project teams?
It’s not like the bottom level developers have any real say in feature specification or decision making when it comes to game systems. That’s the designer’s job.
Your normal game dev employed at blizzard to work on TBCC has absolutely nothing to decide about this, and you would get absolutely nowhere arguing the natural consequence of a faction imbalance would consistute a bug.
Another example from real life. Say I work on an invoicing system and the spec says that every position that is being invoiced as delivered via package should add 12€ to the shipping cost as a surcharge. Now an employee of the customer decides to break an invoice down into 50 positions for readability reasons only. Obviously the customer is not going to pay 12€ for each position, but I can’t just change the software to do that.
The employee would have to speak to the decision maker in his company, who would have to speak to his contact at my company, who would have to tell my PM the requirements changed, who would have to tell me to do it.
I can’t go around deviating from the spec because of “common sense”, nor do I have the freedom to decide something should be done this way instead. That’s not my role. Just because there’s nothing technically blocking me from making that change doesn’t mean i’m allowed or expected to do it.
1 Like
In general terms you are correct, however you see the issue as a feature which indeed is scope creep. However i argue that 2 hr queues are a bug and therefore does not contribute to scope creep / is an design iissue
I could give you that it’s a design oversight. The matchmaking system is absolutely working as intended, e.g it pools everyone queuing and forms groups that way.
Design oversights have to be corrected by management. You can’t seriously expect a developer to put their job on the line to randomly decide this is a bug, it’s not.
I wouldn’t be opposed to blizzard adding free faction changes as a counterbalance to correct this design oversight.
For the Arena players it would be “better” when alliance is dead right now. Because they have due faster queues often with premades even. Nearly all already full gear. And this will be always the same. With dead Alliance for the Horde there wouldnt be a whole faction with gear advantage in arena. But yes for people which play BG´s for Fun and not just for honor/marks it would be even more bad in this Situation OR maybe not? No alliance and blizzard could bring horde vs horde bg´s without any complain
No you don’t.
2 Likes
Ofc he doesnt but its fun tho.
Horde:KEK LETS FARM THIS ALLIANCE NOOBS,DONT LET THEM LEVEL,FARM OR DO ANYTHING…"attacks 1 alliance as 5-10 hordes"then says “GIT GUD”…KEK KEK,REROLL NOOB,GO BACK TO RETAIL…the usual crap…
Horde later:Why are queues so long???we only didnt allow alliance to level and do anything in the game,why are we being punished???Blizz fix this…
Most hordes are just bunch of brainless farts running around,waste of oxygen tbh.
3 Likes
You may try to argue that, but as a developer, I would not follow that argumentation.
And I am pretty sure, neither will many other software developers.
Bug == software doesn’t perform its function as specified
User able to log into another users account without that users credentials by exploiting some buffer overflow or similar weakness in the communication protocol that handles login? That’s a bug.
User clicks “Create Character” and client crashes? That’s a bug.
User gets charged by a warrior and client disconnects? That’s a bug.
Quest cannot be handed in despite all quest requirements met? That’s a bug.
BG queuing system, which is specified as matching teams of alliance vs. teams of horde, not being able to match all horde players quickly, because a lot more horde than alliance queue up for BGs? Not a bug, system working according to specifications.
What you could try to argue in that case, is “bad user experience”.
aka. user, is trying to do something with the software, that something doesn’t work/takes a long time/is overly complicated to do/can’t be done at all → User is unhappy about that.
Then it’s the job of designers and requirement engineers to figure out whether or not this is intended, and how/if to change something. Sometimes they can accomodate such wishes, sometimes they can’t (e.g. because the change required would damage an overall design). If they do, they will change the specifications, and the developers will implement the changes. They will not “fix a bug” however, because there is no bug to fix.
Typical narrow minded person. The Q is a result of the overall PvP population. Open a tab and look at the overall population. Then talk.
you can talk schemantics all you like , there is a 2 hr problem for the majority pvp user and as a developer myself i chose to label it a bug
You’re the narrow minded person blaming me for what people on PvP servers are doing.
Anyone I gank in the open world has chosen to enable PvP by themselves to capture world objectives.
It’s sad that you just won’t acknowledge that.
I didn’t blame you personally for anything. The Horde in general is so blind to the damage that is done to the server balance that it’s not even funny.
1 Like
You are talking about the horde like its 1 person…
Re roll alliance
There’s a logic to this. The idea is if they can grief the alliance enough, if they can make enough alliance players quit or reroll, that blizzard will have to add mercenary mode or horde vs horde bgs because there would be no other way to fix it then.
That’s the endgame. Grief the other faction into literal nonexistance so that blizzard feels forced to remove the only thing that they need the other faction for.
Not all hordes, of course, not even most. But there are more then a few who quite openly advocate this approach to things. This is the “I’m a bully and was always a bully and i’ll keep bullying worse until I get what I want damn it” type of approach to problem solving.