1. #1

    Should there be big skirmish bgs?

    Basically 10-40 man bgs set up like arenas. No cap the flag/base, destroying gates or taking towers, just straight up kill the other players and they only have one life or have resources and they can respawn till one team wins. I would love to see something like this.

  2. #2
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Exerus View Post
    Basically 10-40 man bgs set up like arenas. No cap the flag/base, destroying gates or taking towers, just straight up kill the other players and they only have one life or have resources and they can respawn till one team wins. I would love to see something like this.
    I've thought a little bit about this before. To give my opinion, yes, I would like PvP to be varied a little more. I really like the idea of players having limited lives, it adds a certain sense of excitement to what you're doing. As far as the massive arena battle idea, I'm not entirely sure if people would like it. The number of people per team would have to be limited, as ramming two groups of 40 people wouldn't be that exciting unless it was in an epic location (such as the AV bridge).

    Both ideas have potential, but the location and the way they choose to implement these ideas will greatly affect the overall fun of these modes.

  3. #3
    High Overlord Conkerzlol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    The Undercity
    Posts
    198
    A last man standing type of game would be cool, but Blizzard won't implement it. They have a lot of their resources on micro-transactions & WoD
    Warlords of Draenor ALPHA Content + Other Games!

    http://www.youtube.com/conkerzlol

  4. #4
    I get that a new bg cant get released before WOD but maybe make 1 or 2 new bgs to release with wod or a later patch that are just skirmish fights. And Im not saying allow 40 man battles in the arena maps or remove the flags and bases from the bgs but maybe with a new bg make a decent sized skirmish map for high amount of players. I would play it all the time if it doesnt require a premade to enter.
    Last edited by Dark Exerus; 2014-02-21 at 12:24 AM.

  5. #5
    A tug of war style map could be fun. Imagine a map like Alterac Valley, but with no towers or NPCs. You can only cap the next graveyard in the sequence, and to win you have to take the graveyard in the enemy base.

    In the case of AV, the chain would be Aid Station (a) - Stormpike (a) - Stonehearth (a) - Snowfall (n) - Iceblood (h) - Frostwolf (h) - Relief Hut (h)
    Last edited by Aliessil; 2014-02-21 at 12:32 AM.

  6. #6
    Moderator Yvaelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    4,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Aliessil View Post
    A tug of war style map could be fun. Imagine a map like Alterac Valley, but with no towers or NPCs. You can only cap the next graveyard in the sequence, and to win you have to take the graveyard in the enemy base.

    In the case of AV, the chain would be Aid Station (a) - Stormpike (a) - Stonehearth (a) - Snowfall (n) - Iceblood (h) - Frostwolf (h) - Relief Hut (h)
    I was picturing this like the Conquest Maps in Battlefield, where you fight for a section, and whoever wins - the map shifts over one battleground in their direction - and you win the series if you push all the way into the enemies home base. Is that what you had in mind too?

    I'm not sure I agree with the sentiment that there should be big battlegrounds without objectives - I think the opposite is true - they need to make the objectives more important to the overall - and make the battleground take longer (IoC and AV are too short for their size). I'd much rather play a bigger, longer battleground - for a proportionally higher reward - than the constant barrage of short matches.

    Paradoxically, I feel IoC/AV are actually faster than like - WSG or Twin Peaks or Gilneas (the small ones) - that feels wrong.
    Youtube ~ Yvaelle ~ Twitter

  7. #7
    Bloodsail Admiral ShadowForge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    1,135
    Quote Originally Posted by Conkerzlol View Post
    A last man standing type of game would be cool, but Blizzard won't implement it. They have a lot of their resources on micro-transactions & WoD
    no it would suck cos the OP classes would win all the time in a game where PVP is never balanced this idea will never happen cos its a bad idea

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by warcraftmew View Post
    no it would suck cos the OP classes would win all the time in a game where PVP is never balanced this idea will never happen cos its a bad idea
    Op classes don't mean anything when there are 40 v 40 players who can just focus one target.

  9. #9
    Mechagnome
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Common Sense Nation
    Posts
    583
    Quote Originally Posted by Dark Exerus View Post
    Basically 10-40 man bgs set up like arenas. No cap the flag/base, destroying gates or taking towers, just straight up kill the other players and they only have one life or have resources and they can respawn till one team wins. I would love to see something like this.
    yes, omg please. it would be optional and so many players would love it, including me!

  10. #10
    Pit Lord DiscoGhost's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Behind the Pillar
    Posts
    2,300
    Quote Originally Posted by Conkerzlol View Post
    A last man standing type of game would be cool, but Blizzard won't implement it. They have a lot of their resources on micro-transactions & WoD
    oh shit just got real

    but really theyre putting skirmishes back in so its all good.
    You can tune a piano, but you can't tuna fish.

    3DS FC: 0490-6077-6557
    Pokemon X/Y Dragon Type Friend Safari - Gabite/Noibat/Druddigon

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •