What If Ashran Was...

[Cempa]

Alliance and Horde race to kill a boss, the winner gets to reap the rewards of farming all events over a specific amount of time while the other needs to wait for the zone to reset. So its not Alliance and Horde fighting each other to gain control of quests over a zone rather the first to kill the boss at the end of a line of mobs...

You can build it so that the map has two roads that intersect at some point to the last boss!

[Rambofant]

So instead of PVP, it's PVE..?

[Cempa]

So instead of PVP, it's PVE..?

Its both because to get to PvE (events) you need to better the other faction through PvP! Your reward for PvP game play by beating the other side to the boss and downing the boss is 15min of PvE events then it resets and you start over.

[Madone]

This idea is so awful that they just might actually implement it!!

The zone needs *more* incentive for actual PvP, not less.

That said, I do like your general idea of racing for kills, but more in the sense of extending challenge mode concepts to raids, NOT in the sense of turning a PvP zone into a PvE zone.

[Cempa]

...if players want some down relaxed time doing events like now why not give it to them only if they engage in PvP and win? Right now its get into a raid that ignores PvP just to farm events! If other side is stronger leave zone and come back in!

[Rambofant]

So it's Wintergrasp..?

- - - Updated - - -

I'm sorry, this idea is just awful.

[Kaj392]

Its both because to get to PvE (events) you need to better the other faction through PvP! Your reward for PvP game play by beating the other side to the boss and downing the boss is 15min of PvE events then it resets and you start over.

So like world bosses... Only then in Ashran?

[Toppy]

I think the big issue with ashran is that the idea that people will PvP when pitted large scale vs large scale is inherently flawed.

WG and TB for instance worked (TB more than WG) because it actively split apart the groups so you had smaller groups defending objectives, which was fun. When you have 40+ people to a side, you HAVE TO SPLIT THEM UP.

Ashran funnels everyone down a single path if you want to PvP, so it just becomes a lagging, unfun, zerg. Ashran needs a system for splitting up groups. The event system I think was supposed to, but since its just areas that branch off a singular path, and since typically only one will ever be up, and because the group with their base closest to it has an advantage, this just did not work.

It was really, really, stupid to base Ashran down a straight path. Even WG had, essentially, three different ways you could assault the enemy base (not to mention the towers: another system for splitting people up). TB had 3 separate areas equally spaced with three separate sub-areas (towers) equally spaced, so it worked. Ashran is a jumbled mess up singular paths and unfairness.

Simply put, Ashran cannot be fixed without the entire map being redone to something less stupid. No amount of tweaking will fix anything when the problem is the map itself.

[Auxora]

In my experience WG worked much more than TB. WG on my realm(s) constantly went back and forth in ownership until the end of the expansion. It was fun because like AV, there was actually some strategy to it and different approaches to victory (brute force, sneak attack, diversion attack and then rush, attrition, etc.). TB was more like Ashran in that TB didn't have a lot of strategy other than just running circles and 1 side on my realms dominated TB every match. It made for silly easy honor, but wasn't fun.

Plus the WG seige vehicles and choices there meant groups had to communicate and work together to win (both offensively or defensively). Add in that victory affected the ability to enter the pvp bosses, and affected the world buff, was pretty awesome too. AV, AB, WSG, and WG were the pinnacle of wow battlegrounds imo (with EotS getting an honorable mention), and WG was by far the best "expansion" bg. Ashran and even TB, along with most of the other new ones that have been added, don't hold a candle to those 4. And Ashran is such a complete mess and was made even far worse in patching. I have no clue what game the dev team is playing now.

Also, sadly when I refer to AV being good it's also more referring to ~4.x and earlier before that was also mucked up with "improvements". If AV were still as good as it used to be in 2.x-4.x and/or WG were still like (and as active as in) wotlk, I would seriously sub for those alone. And not saying the 1.x days of 24 hour AV matches, but even just 2.x-4.x where matches were ~20-30 minutes but fun, had strategy, and not just zergfests.

[Cempa]

...I should add that 40v40 is too much

[ElDoorO]

I think the big issue with ashran is that the idea that people will PvP when pitted large scale vs large scale is inherently flawed.

WG and TB for instance worked (TB more than WG) because it actively split apart the groups so you had smaller groups defending objectives, which was fun. When you have 40+ people to a side, you HAVE TO SPLIT THEM UP.

Ashran funnels everyone down a single path if you want to PvP, so it just becomes a lagging, unfun, zerg. Ashran needs a system for splitting up groups. The event system I think was supposed to, but since its just areas that branch off a singular path, and since typically only one will ever be up, and because the group with their base closest to it has an advantage, this just did not work.

It was really, really, stupid to base Ashran down a straight path. Even WG had, essentially, three different ways you could assault the enemy base (not to mention the towers: another system for splitting people up). TB had 3 separate areas equally spaced with three separate sub-areas (towers) equally spaced, so it worked. Ashran is a jumbled mess up singular paths and unfairness.

Simply put, Ashran cannot be fixed without the entire map being redone to something less stupid. No amount of tweaking will fix anything when the problem is the map itself.

Which favors range and heals over melee classes, which the developers didn't think about.

[Kauko]

North Horde, South Alliance castle. Which can be partially destroyed with siege weapons and owner(alliance/horde) gets a debuff in gathering resources until it is fixed.

North West is a horde Siege workshop, East is a Resource gathering structure(wood, nodes, plants...), the same for Alliance in the south. Both teams have to defend their structures/gather resources on the map.

And in the middle is a big castle/structure surrounded with a wall. In the castle are raid bosses like in WG/TB. Which team destroys the wall first and caps it has the right to fight the boss for some time.

On the map, there can be towers like in TB which add to resource gathering and strength of siege vehicles.

No NPCs, no PVE objectives(except Raid boss which is a prize for the winner), no other bs like in ashran. Just a freakin PVP/siege zone on a huge map.

[Stormspellz]

wouldn't mind some pvpve scenarios.

[rzzr]

The problem with Ashran is the area is too small. On top of that Blizz adds the Nememis quests so what did they think would happen? You either join an events group or a Nemesis group, there is really no other option. I can't see any changes making things different.

[Deleted]

What an amazingly awful idea.

What do you realistically think will happen? People leave the area if they lose the event. People trickle back in while the other faction remains organized and ready to steamroll once more.

But much worse: the idea of being able to do NOTHING in a PvP area for a long time, because you lost one battle, is horrendous and terrible game design.

[DirtyDotter]

Yeah, no offense but this is terrible. You should apply to be Lead PvP Designer @ Blizzard, they would love your game design expertise.

[Raldazzar]

the failure of ashran in live (i had tons of fun in wod beta..) is huge, it makes me miss tol barad!!

[Deleted]

the failure of ashran in live (i had tons of fun in wod beta..) is huge, it makes me miss tol barad!!

What about Ashran is it that you hate, exactly?

Also, with 6.2, they will remove premade Ashran raids - assume that this change goes through and raids are filled up randomly. This should address some imbalance issues (i.e. one faction getting constantly stomped by the other), but at the same time, it may take away your faceroll Ashran conquest opportunities. You might actually have to PVP to get your conquest points.

I think Ashran's class buffs are strange and poorly balanced; but fun in a way, because they can make you that bit (lot) more powerful. The PvE aspect has strongly reduced now that there is no incentive to constantly farm the main road any more. Events have potential, but only rarely produce even fights (which might be fixed with the removal of premade Ashran raids next patch). Killing a few rares can help kill boredom. The Nemesis quests are a boring grind.

I guess the worst thing about Ashran is that its idea of "PvP" is flushing all players of both factions to one spot, and seeing which faction ends up alive at the end of it. It may be a bit too crowded or laggy. Other than that, it's just PVP, isn't it?

[Deleted]

Actually its not a bad idea.
Sorta liked Wintergrasp, you could spend time ganking pve players who where farming maths and enjoy some 20x Tenacity godmode when the real fight started.
Ahh those 40v1 battles....Sighs

[Antereon]

WG was fun since you could gank even in small numbers or invade/defend the keep and feel like you're contributing.

TB was bad since it was just two raid groups going in circle until the time runs out.

Ashran is bad because I, as a player feel useless and the end-goal is not that rewarding.