My post was a reply to the guy I quote who mention this current season teams.
- - - Updated - - -
Mainly due to the fact that the game is "balanced around 3v3", it's the most competitive bracket, and they want people to queue up for it.
Nice. Never bothered with RBG, but time to do it I guess.
“We all know interspecies romance is weird.”
― Tim Burton
Umm, are you sure about your math there? 1000 games at 5 minutes each is 5000 minutes. 5000 minutes is 83 hours. 83/7 is 11 hours a day. Yup, sounds about right. Would get home from school at 2 and play til midnight or so. I remember one day I did 2v2 for like 6 hours, then 3v3 for like 3 hours, then 2v2 for another 5 hours in one day. Didn't really do anything but arenas, was all we found fun for a while after we had full cleared Sunwell and then in Wrath raiding was just bad until Ulduar. Now PvP is pretty bad, so I haven't done arenas in months. =\
Also it's not like we did this every week, school vacation weeks and such and during the summer though for sure we could. Wish there was a way to show it, but armory doesn't show how many arena games have been played, have over 14k on my Priest then I played my Paladin a lot as well. Wouldn't be terribly shocked if I had over 20k arenas total over all my characters.
3v3 is the only balanced bracket, 2v2 is horribly unbalanced and 5v5 is... Kind of a clusterfuck. I'd imagine a large amount of players already do 2v2, and they said they want to get more people into PvP so I'm assuming they want more people doing 3v3 arenas.
That's also why they want more people doing RBGs, however I don't think it's going to work that well. I like the mount, but honestly I probably wouldn't use it anyway and being forced into RBGs isn't going to happen for a mount. 100 3v3 wins I could easily do in a week, 40 RBG wins I couldn't do in my life. I think I have 2 RBG wins, played 3 games, realized it was a joke and haven't bothered doing it again.
I think its should be 100 arena or 40 rbg. Since rbgs were introduced I still havent done even 40 of them. Yet it feels I have spent alot of time in rbg. No way im ever gonna go for 40 rbg victories.
Not sure if I start playing 3v3 instead of 2v2 just for the mount. I really like that cat but still.
40 RBGs seems like a nice incentive for a wider audience to actually play them as Arena is more efficient for capping Conquest. Arena part of the achievement could still benefit from including 2v2 and 5v5 though.
For those who play arenas only to cap Conquest it takes iirc 10 wins per week, so it'll take 2.5 months to complete this requirement for achievement. RBGs will require 2-4 wins a week to cap (as you gain some CP for a loss and you can't always win obviously) plus an additional 1 win every other week while capping by Arena, so it takes approximately 2.5-3 months to complete as a dedicated casual. The achievement requires 5 months of capping Conquest every week, not bad.
Still wish 2v2 were included...
Yes, but now ask yourself, how many players actually do 3s?
From what I can tell, most people play 2s for cap since there is nothing to gain from 3s if you don't play it serious. Heck, I'm even pretty sure there are millions of players that haven't even tried 3s at all. Having people play a ~200 games of 3s compared not doing 3s at all is pretty big already. Aside from that, it should be something easily doable, not something that feels like a massive grind.
So you manage to do a game every 5 minutes, including sitting in queue, preparation time, etc? You even have friends that are willing to play non-stop for that long?
Sorry bro but I recognize bullshit when I see it.
100 arena wins and 40 RBG wins should take around the same time to complete. If you can complete 100 arena victories, 40 rbg wins should be doable as well
Here is the major problem, Blizzard has just designed Arena to be very much a pick up game, no more carries, no more joining with a higher level friend.. it works like leauge of legends does.
Arena now can be picked up and put down without making teams, or any other nonsense... RBG's on the other hand require a well put together team, on my tiny ass server, ain't no one pugs RBG's and I belong to a PvE guild. IF they want pve to try arena.. this isnt how to do it
Are people seriously pushing for this achievement to only be 100 3v3 wins?
Pathetic.
That can be done in an evening or three by any idiot by tanking MMR and just killing people who I can only think to be bots.
People are also over estimating how hard it is to get into a low MMR group. Go join up with the others having such a hard time.
They could have easily made this 100+ RBG wins in a season. I'd love to see the QQ then.
Should have rating requirements.
40 rbg wins + 100 3v3 wins both over 2k rating I would have been fine with.
It's not though.
Here's Holinka's twitter.
Here's the important part:
I agree with you though...I think they should have said "well rounded" initially as opposed to "wider range". The only thing they meant by "wider range" was that rating wouldn't matter. I don't think they're going to draw new people into doing PvP with this just to get the mount. I think they're trying to take the current PvP audience and spread it thinner. Sure there are some people who like both arenas and RBGs but if there's anything I've seen from this forum, it's that arena players typically don't like to do RBGs and RBGers don't really like arenas.Guy 1: Soooo... How do we get these mounts again? : )
Holinka: Win 100 3V3 arena games and 40 RBG in a season
Guy 2: So will we have the choice or will we need to do both arena and RBG ?
Holinka: You need to do both. It rewards the well-rounded PvPer.
The RBG wins will be easy for me. I don't particularly like arenas...I'll get them done for sure, the requirement isn't that hard and I want the mount, but I think there are a lot of people who will skip getting the mount because they prefer one setting or the other and do not want to do both.
The goal is to attract newer players into PvP. Wouldn't be very succesfull if they made them for under 10% of the current pvp population (because as much as people shittalk about rating, most players never even see 2k, specially now.)
Edit : When he said "wider audience", i'm pretty sure he based that off no rating requirements and based on the fact its the first PvP rewards every arena players will be able to work towards since the Tabard earned after 300 wins, wich was introduced in S5). Every other arena rewards usually requires very high ratings that the vast majority of players will never see.
remove rbg requirement, make it 100 wins in ANY bracket over 2k rating. dont forget there is rating inflation going on so by the end of the season everyone will have it even if they are 1500 players.
Hmm, why they don't change normal garrosh mount requirement to 20 normal or heroic kills rather then 1 normal kill then?
Again as I said earlier I have no problems with doing arenas (100-200, doesnt matter) but I have problems with finding rbg team as I don't have rbg experience on my monk. Every time I asked to join I've heard "whisper 1700+ achiev on this char or don't bother asking". Besides monk is not the most desirable class for rbg as far as I know.
It's sad that people are complaining. It's an achievement rewarded mount, not a free one. You have to work for it. It is a reward for the well versed PvPer, not for everyone. Those of who PvP often feel a lot of PvE mounts should be available to us, but that's not how this game works.
Honestly, 40 Wins is way low. It should be 500 Arena wins and 300 RBG Wins.
Show me one mount that is not available to pvper. Even heroic ones are obtainable. You can get a boosts for ONE boss kill, kill him later. Same goes for meta achievements mounts. The only exclusion (and it's a new one) is garrosh mount which requires to kill him ONCE on normal. Come on, it's not comparable. It's like probably 20-30 mins for one kill (or few hours progress if you'd be riding that tier). Getting pvp mount will take a lot more time.
I won't mention gladiator mounts for the very special snowflake group that are not obtainable after the season ends. So no, all mounts are available to pvper, one way on another. Pvp mounts are not always available to pveer.
This is not a massive grind, if we put a 3v3 requirement it is perfectly fine to people to start doing 3s and get into it. Blizz should "punish" more doing 2s and finally "force" players into the kinda-balanced 3s. Then again, PvP is not about accessibility- I am pretty sure thats what pve and lfr is for. Maybe we even get rid of all the 2s QQs? One could only wish...Yes, but now ask yourself, how many players actually do 3s?
From what I can tell, most people play 2s for cap since there is nothing to gain from 3s if you don't play it serious. Heck, I'm even pretty sure there are millions of players that haven't even tried 3s at all. Having people play a ~200 games of 3s compared not doing 3s at all is pretty big already. Aside from that, it should be something easily doable, not something that feels like a massive grind.