wheres the 3rd RBG veto?

[Deleted]

2 to uncheck is not enough and obviously the """"""""""horde"""""""""" just unchecks av and ioc because they cant play anything that isint small were they healers rescue them everytime

Such a flaw in design, but no the battlegrounds where both teams dash into middle and spam aoe are the best. Shaking my head to be quite honest with you family.

[Traggoth]

I'm curious: In this scenario, why aren't Alliance healers able to rescue their players in smaller BGs?

[Bearilla]

I'm curious: In this scenario, why aren't Alliance healers able to rescue their players in smaller BGs?

[Saverem]

2 to uncheck is not enough and obviously the """"""""""horde"""""""""" just unchecks av and ioc because they cant play anything that isint small were they healers rescue them everytime

Such a flaw in design, but no the battlegrounds where both teams dash into middle and spam aoe are the best. Shaking my head to be quite honest with you family.

More like Alliance can only win in BGs that require PvE to win instead of actual PvP.

I play BGs to kill players, not gates.

[Eazy]

More like Alliance can only win in BGs that require PvE to win instead of actual PvP.

I play BGs to kill players, not gates.

That's the reason why I'm happy whenever I see IOC or SOTA.

[Danvash]

You know you can just choose the battlegrounds you want to play, right? Why do you need to veto RANDOM battlegrounds? You're specifically saying its ok to be placed in any of them when you choose RANDOM.

They added the veto option in the first place because there was a huge bot problem at the time, and the only random bgs you'd ever get were AV and IOC because that's all the Honor Buddy bots would queue for. Selecting random on either faction now without any bgs excluded seems to actually give you a random result rather than the same ones over and over. Honestly, they should just remove the option to exclude specific bgs from random queues at this point.

[Bearilla]

You know you can just choose the battlegrounds you want to play, right? Why do you need to veto RANDOM battlegrounds? You're specifically saying its ok to be placed in any of them when you choose RANDOM.

They added the veto option in the first place because there was a huge bot problem at the time, and the only random bgs you'd ever get were AV and IOC because that's all the Honor Buddy bots would queue for. Selecting random on either faction now without any bgs excluded seems to actually give you a random result rather than the same ones over and over. Honestly, they should just remove the option to exclude specific bgs from random queues at this point.

If they removed AV and IoC from the game I would be fine with this. Both bgs require pve which is lame.

[Deleted]

2 to uncheck is not enough and obviously the """"""""""horde"""""""""" just unchecks av and ioc because they cant play anything that isint small were they healers rescue them everytime

Such a flaw in design, but no the battlegrounds where both teams dash into middle and spam aoe are the best. Shaking my head to be quite honest with you family.

The horde actually wants to play PVP, u know the part of the game where you have to kill enemy players, no the one where 40 people rush and raid dps each other so they have the chance to kill a pve boss at the end. If anything this type of game play is way more dependent on healers than any small scale battleground, as individual skill is way less important.

[Deleted]

Ok do you want a third RBG veto or do you want some balancing hotfixes?

Pick one, Legion developers are unable to multitask.

[wholol]

I've thought about the whole alliance/horde bg ordeal a couple of years ago and played through both sides in all maps, my deduction is that alliance players tend to stick together as a group as such they are generally better on single objective maps that require group effort, such as the big maps and flags, on the other hand horde tend to scatter and spread into smaller groups which makes that better in capture the area maps and flag maps( this is 50/50 I'd say ).

I know the above is a bit of a hyperbole but does happen a lot, it does not mean that any faction has a particular advantage in a map or any of the sort ( I've won AV as horde several times recently and AB as alliance ) ,at best I'd blame it on habit, people in bgs don't want to exert effort into winning so they go with the flow and over the years the strategies somehow have become the norm and rarely changed.

Take for example Isle of conquest, the alliance rush docks while the horde go for hangar and mid. both sides know that dicks gives access to the glaive throwers which deal the highest dmg to the gates, yet rarely do horde players go docks nor do they kill the glaives the moment they are up to disable that advantage, it's the norm of " Horde will go mid/hangar and alliance gets docks and wins " that has been shaped over the years, all it takes is a simple alteration of the norm and horde would have just as much chance to win that bg as the alliance does.

Take another note as to how russians play bgs, they always play the long game ( aka resources), they huddle together at the best choke point and just stop the enemy from advancing , farming them over and over until they win. unorganized groups usually just keep going over and over till they lose without grouping up , this simply shows the differences in how much effort is placed into actually winning.

As a conclusion : most non russian players join bgs simply to attack a red target, little thought is placed into actually doing the objectives or winning, as such it doesn't matter if u ad a 3rd or even 4th bg ban.

[Saverem]

You know you can just choose the battlegrounds you want to play, right? Why do you need to veto RANDOM battlegrounds? You're specifically saying its ok to be placed in any of them when you choose RANDOM.

They should give the AP token reward for winning 1 BG a day regardless whether it's random or not. Forcing people to do a random where they can get a BG they may not like in order to get a reward is dumb.

[Halicia]

They should give the AP token reward for winning 1 BG a day regardless whether it's random or not. Forcing people to do a random where they can get a BG they may not like in order to get a reward is dumb.

The reward is there to encourage them to do simply that.

Without the randomness, you'd be sitting on extremely annoying queuetimes because everyone wants to do their favorite BG, and *ONLY* that BG.

[Saverem]

The reward is there to encourage them to do simply that.

Without the randomness, you'd be sitting on extremely annoying queuetimes because everyone wants to do their favorite BG, and *ONLY* that BG.

It's called survival of the fittest. If you're sitting in AV queue for 3 hours because no one wants to play that shit BG, then that isn't your problem, it's Blizzard's shitty BG design problem. Players aren't queuing to it for a reason.

Why should I have to be coerced into playing a shit BG simply because it's the only way they can get me to play there?

[Lex Icon]

unfortunately i don't think blizzard is very good a designing fun bg maps so i always dread when there's a new one on the rise.. and now considering the number of them and how people feel about 3 of them in particular(AV,IoC,SoTA) yes we need a third veto.

[ilik2345]

I think the worry from blizzard of adding another veto is it'll make the queues much longer. At least that is my guess, personally i'd love a third veto.

Just for fun, myself i'd veto

AV, IoC, Strand

Also why the heck are the maps still different for rated then random bgs, i'm thinking mainly of Eots... (and i play with a instant knock back...)