PVP - please remove random battle ground or let us black list 5 bgs

[Twistedelmo]

Here's an idea, queue directly for the map you want to play. Problem solved.

"But but but... we do not get the random battleground reward"

OT: The only BGs I black list is the 40 mans even though they are great but over-redundant when you get 2 AVs then an IOC and then 3 more AVs and 1 WSG and 3 IoC during peak times.

- - - Updated - - -

Whats your problem with this, you and your buddies can do the same if that occurs. Unless ofc you have no buddies.

2 blacklists are not enough when you want to blacklist the 40v40 anyway. I would opt for 3 blacklists (1 per size) so this way you can still not entirely blacklist a specific size BG but also remove the annoying ones or the ones your faction statistically loses more.

they should put 40s in their own thing, wouldst even consider them as a battleground. Let people queue for Mass Warfare for a weekly reward.

They should also replace the blacklist option with a preferred option that will put you into 'a preferred' battleground if possible.

[Rafoel]

This is part of bigger problem. Game attempts to load the same amount of bgs of every type. Meanwhile, certain bgs are better balanced and more enjoyable to play than others = a lot of players queue specifically for them. That means those who queue for random bgs are much more likely to get thrown into unpopular bg. People get fed up of getting thrown into them, blacklist them, and only escalate the problem for those who try to queue as random next.

For example, while playing around 40 random bgs on my monk last week on EU (AV and IoC blacklisted) I got thrown nearly always for either Eye of Storm and Strand of the Ancients, both being most unpopular bgs according to chart. Simultaneusly, I got 0 WGs and 0 ABs during that time, both of them being most popular bgs.

[Kivana]

I have been an avid PVP'er since I stumbled into WSG wearing a mix of blues and greens and promptly got decimated by a twink holding our flag in the spawn room so yeah, been playing a long time.

To be honest we could do with the option to ban at least five battlegrounds from the random pool. I personally dislike the WSG and AB clone battlegrounds, add in speedball, strand, mines and IOC and that's SIX I hate playing, so with a total of five bans I still have to put up with one of those and would opt to keep IOC.

No system is perfect but changes do need to be made and increasing the blacklist bans is a good start.

[Schmilblick]

Upvote and Bump this thread on OffiForums:
http://eu.battle.net/forums/en/wow/t...page=1#post-14

[Timberwind]

I always block AV and Strand, IoC is fine, boring, but fine. Alteric is too long and too out of date, Strand is... just ugh. I'd like to see 1 more blacklist, i think it would actually decrease timers because the LFBG system won't be trying to place 40 people into one instance and instead a max of 15.

[Shuji V2]

Tyere is no reward unless random, and there is no reduction in queue times either. This is a fallacy.

lets say 19 queue for wsg, 29 for arathi, and 79 for AV. Then lets say that 83 queue random. 3 people fill out those other queues then the last 80 fill ANY BG BLIZZ WANTS. There is no requirement for any bg to be used, other than it has the right number of people. It is on blizz for still using battle grounds others dont like, not us. If 40 of thpse 83 blocked all but wsg, arsthi, and av, then 3 of them would round out those direct queues, and 37 would fill out another bg, for example 30 going to arsthi and 7 waiting for more, or 13 of the other 43 making a wsg and the last 30 either starting a different 30 man bg, some starting a 20 man, or all waiting for an 80 man. There is no requirement thst all bgs be played. That is you projecting.

Obviously you seem to have no idea about the logistics of a queue system. In order to run battlegrounds there must be resources dedicated and allocated (servers) in order to keep up and host them. These resources are spread among the numerous battlegrounds available in WoW. If everyone would just queue for WSG and AB then queue times would drastically go up for those games because there are more players than empty spaces. This in turn also greatly increases queue time for less popular battlegrounds because suddenly there is an abundance of free spaces but not enough players to play games there. There is a real infrastructure to manage all this. It's not as simple as just dropping people in a group.

I'll have you know it's in everyone's best interest to keep the random queue around for Blizzard to effectively manage the resources and spread the load accordingly.

[ShiyoKozuki]

They're not forcing you to do anything, you already get a reward for every BG you participate in and finish, so nothing is stopping you from queueing for the one you want to play. You're just asking to receive a reward that is handed out for reducing queue times, which you are not.. If you want it that bad just suck it up.

First off, 10g isn't a reward.
Secondly, I'd rather sit in 1 hour queues and have fun every BG pop than have fun once every 6 hours.
As they added more bgs, and as they slowly forced random queue more and more onto us, I lost more and more interest in bg's all together.

I used to be able to get friends to run bgs all the time, by the time wotlk came along and we had garbage like IOC no one wanted to run bgs anymore.

[Shuji V2]

First off, 10g isn't a reward.
Secondly, I'd rather sit in 1 hour queues and have fun every BG pop than have fun once every 6 hours.
As they added more bgs, and as they slowly forced random queue more and more onto us, I lost more and more interest in bg's all together.

I used to be able to get friends to run bgs all the time, by the time wotlk came along and we had garbage like IOC no one wanted to run bgs anymore.

Whats stopping you from queueing for the battlegrounds you want to play right now? Do you realize this is a non-existent problem? You can still run the BG's you want without having to touch an IoC, TP or SotA or whatever.

[BannedForViews]

Obviously you seem to have no idea about the logistics of a queue system. In order to run battlegrounds there must be resources dedicated and allocated (servers) in order to keep up and host them. These resources are spread among the numerous battlegrounds available in WoW. If everyone would just queue for WSG and AB then queue times would drastically go up for those games because there are more players than empty spaces. This in turn also greatly increases queue time for less popular battlegrounds because suddenly there is an abundance of free spaces but not enough players to play games there. There is a real infrastructure to manage all this. It's not as simple as just dropping people in a group.

I'll have you know it's in everyone's best interest to keep the random queue around for Blizzard to effectively manage the resources and spread the load accordingly.

Yes, I get there are dedicated servers, and their loads are fixed, but I also get that resources can be reallocated. There is nothing saying that AV must have 10 servers, for example, and they can't reduce the numbers to fit how people want to block AV.

Your argument also fails by not realizing the purpose of battlegrounds. They are for our enjoyment. If people are expressing a lack of enjoyment in a certain battleground, it is in Blizzards best interest to reallocate resources away from that battleground to others. If only 5% of people want to play AV, then only 5% should, and if it means they have to wait a little longer because others don't share their interests then so be it.

[Shuji V2]

Yes, I get there are dedicated servers, and their loads are fixed, but I also get that resources can be reallocated. There is nothing saying that AV must have 10 servers, for example, and they can't reduce the numbers to fit how people want to block AV.

Your argument also fails by not realizing the purpose of battlegrounds. They are for our enjoyment. If people are expressing a lack of enjoyment in a certain battleground, it is in Blizzards best interest to reallocate resources away from that battleground to others. If only 5% of people want to play AV, then only 5% should, and if it means they have to wait a little longer because others don't share their interests then so be it.

All I'm reading is: "I don't like this BG it's not enjoyable by me, I want to play only this one and this one". I'm pretty sure your opinion alone isn't a good measurement for everyone else's enjoyment. How about you realize there are other people who do enjoy it? And besides that, there is a valid solution to your problem already available. It's called queueing directly for the battlegrounds you want.

[BannedForViews]

All I'm reading is: "I don't like this BG it's not enjoyable by me, I want to play only this one and this one". I'm pretty sure your opinion alone isn't a good measurement for everyone else's enjoyment. How about you realize there are other people who do enjoy it? And besides that, there is a valid solution to your problem already available. It's called queueing directly for the battlegrounds you want.

First, queuing directly is not valid since they only reward boxes for random. If they just gave out boxes for the winner regardless, then I would queue directly.

Second, this is not just my opinion. May people don't like a lot of bgs, and therefore block them. There was a chart earlier on that showed the percentages of bgs occurrences. They are not equal.

Third, I never suggested they do this just for me, or even a small minority. Instead what I am suggesting is that they listen to their player base and find out which bgs are more desirable based on feedback, direct queues, propensity for people to take the deserter buff just to leave at the beginning, etc, and then realize that not all bgs are equal, their desire to be played is not equal, and start to reallocate resources away from the less desirable ones so that people can randomly queue the ones they like more. this could be accomplished by allowing us to block more than 2, so you can get a much clearer picture of which bgs are least favorite. I do not see what is controversial about this? Their goal is to provide a product we enjoy. We pay money for them to do so. Why would you not want to allow us to play the bgs we want so that we keep subscribing and playing. I just fully reject any assertion without a blue post with empirical evidence, that they there is a logistical reason they cannot allow us to block more bgs, not "because developers made these so you should want to play them."

[ShiyoKozuki]

Whats stopping you from queueing for the battlegrounds you want to play right now? Do you realize this is a non-existent problem? You can still run the BG's you want without having to touch an IoC, TP or SotA or whatever.

No reward is bad. Please learn this.

[Lightslinger]

For the love of god just let me blacklist 3. Strand, Isle, and AV. Just one more! That's all I need!