INTRODUCTION NOTE: This is a long post. If you dont have the pacience to read everthing or you feel just to pick a quota, just because a phrase isnt right (in your opinion) and start your “atacks” , please dont. Read everything, think, contemplate and then answer. Thank you.
As many of you know me already, especially the players that are more involved in wpvp forum section, i am a very vocal and persistent player. I shared in the past comments some ideeas/opinions about wpvp and WM concept and some players (majority from alliance side) rejected all my arguments and persisted with their opinions. In their point of view, ethics, fairness, honor, fairplay, etc doesnt apply. With this post, i wish to hear opinions from both sides.
Why i started this post? A player made 2 surveys wich i doubt their credibility because of 2 reasons:
First, it was a IP based survey, wich didnt require to make a account or at least register a email. I belive that one or more pro-“that player” persons used IP change software and answered more than one time to the same question.
Second reason is that most of the answers are “favorable” to that player’s arguments or pro-alliance orientated.
To crush my disbelief and to finally see how and what people think, the most fair option is to make it this way:
I will ask some questions that offers only yes or no/agree or disagree answer option. Middle options like “i dont care” or “maby” are confusing and can alter the outcome. Making this on forum, this would allow me also to see the players profile, therefor deducting very easy if his answers where bias or not. If for example a player posts from his 119 alt or 120 alt with 0 progress in raiding or PVP, then its obviously that the answers could be bias from a alliance player pretending to be a horde player or vice-versa. If a player answers from a “main profile” (wich can be very easy to check) that has progress in this expansion (like 5 or more kills on each boss in HC BoD or arena rating above 1800-1900), then this player has put some time and work into that character ,therefor resulting that the player plays the faction he says, therefor his answers have a high chance to be genuine and his opinion can be taken in consideration.
Therefor i would kindly ask if you could use ONLY your main char as profile and not use “alts profiles”.
Before i start with the questions i would like to share with you what i think is wrong with the current WM and WPVP concept:
-
Rewards and siding a faction: in my opinion Blizzard did a wrong thing when they combined PVE rewards with PVP content. Especially by offering PVE raiding gear as reward for completing AOO quest was very,very wrong. The first AOO quest, wich happend 2 weeks after 8.1.5 release in march. 90% of players had only one 400 ilvl piece from the first warfront and then the alliance received the second piece. I considered this like a “blunt” favoring of a faction and a free boost. Same story for the "bonus % " for wq. If for example, next week’s reset, when 8.2 launches, Blizz would give AOO quest to horde and reward horde with a 440 ilvl piece (that should be the HC ilvl i think), i am pretty sure that alliance players would storm the forums and complain. From all the data avaible from sites like realmpop, raiderIO, wowprogress and wowhead, the conclusion is that the ratio between horde and alliance, in the EU region (all EU servers/realms) is quite ballanced : 48-49% alliance and 51-52% horde. So for a difference of 1-2% between factions, i dont see a reasonable reason to give such huge rewards and bonuses. Beside that, we use theese sources to make a statistic,because Blizz doesnt want to share with us the real numbers. And just because a “guy from Blizz” says that a faction is outnumbered, that doesnt mean it is or not true. In my opinion, when Blizzard choosed to “favor” a faction because of outnumbering, the fair and normal thing to do was to reveal the numbers, so that at least the other faction to have a proof and a reason. Thatswhy, i used theese sites as statistics,because Blizz didnt revealed the real numbers.
Another thing what they did wrong, especially that this expansion’s “story” is about returning to the fight between the alliance and the horde was to NOT implement PVP gear (like in old expansions, PVP gear that is usefull only for PVP and useless for PVE) or add stats for PVE and PVP and the coresponding gear (for example: PVE stats to be crit+mastery and PVP stats to be haste+versa, therefor separate the gear). In a PVP orientated expansion story, it was mandatory to add PVP gear.
I think that each type of content must have its own type of rewards: you do pet battles wq? you get pet stones, pet charms, pet bandages. You do PVE wq? You get PVE gear. You do wpvp? You get honor,conquest and PVP gear. Mixing rewards between contents brings discontent and frustration. We already saw the “raiders” discontent, when Blizz added easy obtainable PVE gear with almost 0 effort. Then why raiders waste time, wipe hundreds of times, when a twink can gear himself almost similar ilvl with them by doing warfronts and wq?
In my opinion they should do the following regarding PVP / WPVP rewards in the future: add PVP EXCLUSIVE gear and give ONLY honor/conquest+ PVP gear as reward from wpvp events/invasions/quests or other PVP activities (arenas,bg’s,etc) , remove any types of bonuses for wq if you have enabled WM (for both factions), give both factions equal quests (you cant give to one faction a quest like AOO and let the others “suffer the consequences”, aka being camped for a week). By making wpvp rewards only PVP exclusive, this would discourage PVE players that enable WM only for the bonus to join, therefor making a more “clean” enviroment, with only players that WANTS to pvp and like it. Another thing i would add a boost to all PVP rewards to stimulate players to join: ex: a quest similar with AOO that would reward 1000 honor+200 conquest+a HC piece of gear). The current wpvp rewards (ex: “Call to Arms”) are not so “stimulative” to make players join wpvp. -
Alts (bellow 120 lvl) and twinks: the scalling doesnt work. We all know that. It works in a certain percentage if two 120 or apropriate lvl players fight, but they have different ilvl, but it doesnt work between two players that have a huge lvl difference (120 lvl vs 80 lvl). Many times i killed low lvl players in Pandaria/Draenor and Legion maps very easy after i got pissed off because i was ganked in BFA maps, so i seeked revenge. A 120 lvl player can kill a 80 lvl player in two hits. So therefor i consider that alts/twinks should be forbidden to join WM. Taking in consideration that WoW is a end-game orientated game (first you must reach max lvl, then enjoy the content of the game) and that is not “level progression” game (example: Perfect World, a game where you make 1 lvl in 1 month or more, where char lvl does really matter), twinks and alts should not be allowed to enter into WPVP content. We saw that during AOO quest, many ally players geared their alts and joined raids to hunt hordes and they just stood afk while they received a free piece of gear. Another reason to not allow alts/twinks join WM is that many dont know to play that class. There are players that did for example a druid alt, only for the Ragnaros raid toy (wich is a druid exclusive drop) and they have 0 clue how to play a druid, because for years they played only hunter. The ideea of growing a alt is that untill you reach max lvl, you have time to learn the class.
Therefor in my opinion, especially that WoW is focused on a “end game philosophy” , WM should be enabled ONLY for chars that have 120 lvl (or max lvl in future expansions), not bellow. -
WM cooldown: i heard many times this reply : “if you dont like it, turn WM off” . I think this is the most stupid answer a person can give. Especially when they argument that turning off or on its a matter of choice and that if you turn it on you accept “the consequences” . Well, first of all, in my opinion you cant say “that you did a choice and accepted the consequences” when you have the option to reverse that choice whenever you want or when it suits your needs. Example: I turn it on, i go Drustvar, i am ganked, i turn it off and then i go back to continue my questing like nothing happend. A choice means that if you accept it, you cant reverse it whenever it suits your personal needs. A choice is a conscious act in wich you accept any type of consequence: negative or positive.
Another example, to point my view better,is the game “Do you want to be millionaire” : you choose a answer (that means you already made a choice), the operator asks you if that is your final answer , you say yes and then you receive the real correct answer. If the answer given by you was wrong and you lost the million, you cant say: “ohh wait, cancel my answer, i want to choose another option”. Its a irreversible consequence of your choice and because of it you lost the million dollars. A choice has either a positive or a negative outcome and you need to accept them both.
Same should be applied in WoW: a minimum 12h cooldown (i would apply a week cd, but lets say 12h to please everyone) for WM enabling/disabling. Then we can say that it was REALLY a choice and that you accepted any consequences and you cant reverse it when-ever you want. -
Sharding/phasing and LFG: this is one of the most annoying topics regarding WM. The ease and accesibility with wich players can form groups its not in concordance with the wpvp original concept. Wpvp should be spontaneous, not premeditated, unpredictable, unfair. But when a group of 40 players make a raid party and then they plan to go to a location and “massacre” everything in their path,that can be called anything you want, but not spontaneous or unpredictable and cant be called wpvp.
How i would change wpvp?
Well, first i would allow LFG+sharding only in some specific wpvp zones: invasion points, capitals, cities and villages (in wich i would add some faction bosses that needs to be killed by one faction and defended by the other for rewards and achievments), some random zones that doesnt contain PVE+pet battles world quests, but instead, they contain world pvp quests ( enter zone x and kill y number of enemies players), i would bring back zones like Wintergrasp and improove them,etc. I would not allow LFG+sharding to be able on the entire continent, only on specific wpvp designated zones, so that players to not abuse it: make parties or raids and camp wq zones or other zones (this would reduce the drama between factions players). I would allow “no rules” wpvp in all the remaining zones, but without LFG+sharding. That means you can kill, gank, camp, harras others do what-ever you want, but only with players from the same realm with you (if you want to party, you need to make manual parties). This would reduce the scale or “carnage” and “massacre” and would bring a more even wpvp enviroment. Some people would say : “yea, but i play alliance in a dominant horde server” . Well mate, most of zones are separated: horde has Zuldazar continent, alliance has Kul-Tiras continent. From what i noticed, usually each zone has its own faction majoritary on their own continents and usually players of oposite faction go to oposite faction’s continent only when there are invasions or wpvp quests (AOO, Call to Arms, etc). The probability to meet only “carnage parties” from oposite factions is very reduced without sharding+LFG and this we know all from previous expansions. Another reason to do what i said above,about sharding+LFG is that i think the lag/delay/frames will be reduced if they would apply this “strategy” . -
Kill count: In wpvp i would allow “party kill count” (you are in a party,but another members kills the enemy and you still get the kill count), only in the specific designated areas mentioned above (invasions, capitals,cities,wpvp wq zones, Wintergraps similar zones,etc). In all the other zones (the entire world,except designated wpvp zones), where sharding+LFG are forbidden, i would allow kill count only if you do the last blow (last hit) to the enemy. Why? First of all to add difficulty: how it is now,for example during Call to Arms quest, i can be in a party of 5, i stay afk and cuddle my cat, my party does the killing and i get the count>>>thats bollocks. You want to kill a player outside the designated wpvp zones? No problem, work for it. Secondly: for the feeling of acomplishment. You encounter a enemy and you atack him, you fight and win and feel proud of yourself that you did something alone with “your own hands” .
…
Now, lets start the survey. Remember: answer only with yes or no/agree or disagree to each number (question) and if you want you can add or not add arguments (why?) . So…here we go:
- Do you agree that the current status of wpvp enviroment is wrong as a whole (sharding+LFG, rewards, no feeling of acomplishment, too easy to complete content, low content,etc) ? --> agree/disagree (+argument, optional)
- Do you agree that one faction to be rewarded “extra” just for the reason that they are “outnumbered” (thing that wasnt prooved yet, with a official Blizz statement, with real numbers) ? --> agree/disagree (+argument, optional)
- Would you like/wish that both factions to receive equal quests/rewards and to be more rewarding (add stimulation for more people to join) ? --> yes/no (+argument,optional)
- Do you agree with adding the WM cooldown, therefor making “the choice” of enabling WM a more impactfull decision? If you answer with agree, what is the “proper” cooldown you think is reasonable? --> agree/disagree (+argument, optional)
- Do you agree to be removed all types of PVE rewards from wpvp content (rewards like PVE gear, bonus wq % , etc) and keep the rewards to be exclusive PVP (honor/conquest/ PVP gear in future) ? --> agree/disagree (+argument, optional)
- Do you agree that sharding+LFG should be allowed only in the designated wpvp zones described above (read sharding+LFG section) and that in the rest of the world, the wpvp to function as before : only same realm/server players ? --> agree/disagree (+argument, optional)
- Do you agree that War Mode feature to be exclusive only for 120 lvl characters (or max lvl characters in future expansions) ? --> agree/disagree (+argument, optional)
…
Compared with the others surveys done, i think my questions are straight to the topic and dont give a chance for “confusing” answers. Before you answer them, you need to read the entire text, to understand where i want to go with the question (although the questions are quite understandable even without reading,but i suggest it anyway).
Please answer like this : give answer to each point punctually and at the end add your own opinion to any topic related to wpvp or WM if you wish.
Have a nice day.