Some word of mouth Rated BG info

[Beaavis]

Oh, and I also met Kalgan, who gave some pretty interesting information, albeit was very careful not to spill any secret information. I found out from him that rated BGs were planned and that we would hear much more about it at Blizzcon, but I did get to find out that Blizzard intends to make rated BGs a lower "echelon" (or "tier") than arena and would be an alternative way to get gear. The way I took it from Kalgan, Blizzard intends to allow individual players to pug queue rated BGs and every player would have their own PR.


Sweet 8)

[Nangz]

source or didn't happen

[perera]

Well he didn't source it but I found it xD

http://wowriot.gameriot.com/blogs/Wo...ng-the-Players

I just hope it's true, hope it doesn't get changed in the process and wish it was launched sooner :

[Swiftz]

Lol people who dislike arena because they aren't really good at pvp and enjoy BG don't realise once they introduce that, they're gonna have the same 1000 rating in BG (suddenly competitive BGs) and have to wait for the same 12 weeks to get a piece of gear...

^^

[Balduvian]

Lol people who dislike arena because they aren't really good at pvp and enjoy BG don't realise once they introduce that, they're gonna have the same 1000 rating in BG (suddenly competitive BGs) and have to wait for the same 12 weeks to get a piece of gear...

^^

Not everyone dislikes arena because they aren't good at it you know :
There are people out there who are able to hit 2400 without problems but just don't like arena's.

But yea, if Blizzard does it right, it won't be any easier to get gear then trough arena.

[rabbimojo]

Is this news? Pretty sure Blizz has been fairly open with their interest in getting back to BGs. They've also said several times that they would like to change the gear emphasis more towards BGs, but don't want to just make it an enormous grind, which is all you can manage with BGs as-is.

The problem, as they've said, is that it's difficult to determine who in a BG is playing well. Is someone standing at Farm the entire fight playing well? Does it depend on whether farm gets attacked, or is their mere presence there effective at deterring some attacks?

Very few BGs have a clear path to victory, so it's never clear if someone is doing something that helps. When there is a clear strategy, people use it more or less exclusively.. In my battlegroup, alliance zerg in AV every time. RH or bust. It works, too, because the only alternative for horde seems to be to drag the fight out into a war of attrition. I imagine this is mimicked across all battlegroups.

In an arena match, at worst a person accounts for 20% of the population. This is already getting to the point that 4 exceptional players might be carrying a bad player, though in general you'd assume the person was ok. How then can we evaluate an individual by BG win-loss record, when the best (WSG) still yields half as much credit per player?

That's the question Blizz is wrestling with, and has been for quite some time. When it is solved (and technically it's a well-studied problem which has solutions, though they're never perfect, so it is 'when'), then Blizz will have what amount to rated BGs, though whether it'll require that you form teams or something else, hard to say.

So again, I don't think this is really news.

[meliancill]

here are the problems i can see with a new raited bg system. are they going to run them threw pugs or teams? if they do pugs how can you say who is doing well and who isnt? if they do teams are you going to have a problem with entire classes geting locked out because of min/maxing your bg teams kinda the same way arena is now. wich is why blizz wants to get back into bgs wich for all intensive purposes makes bgs one big arena game.

you cant realy let premades into pug battlegrounds becaues doing it will make even more problems then it does now. with a new raited system you will have even more premades runing around rofl stomping pugs. so the problem becomes 1 or the other in raited bgs. now from what was said i can see they are looking at the pug part wich for me would be much easyer to judge then premades. now ill explane in a long and draw out post wich puts you to sleep beffor you get to the bottom ;D


----PROS OF A PUG RATED BG----

it will make it so no matter what class / spec you are because you still have the same chance at poving your worth in a game and geting raiting.

class ballence can be focused agen like it used to be. for those who dont remember it used to be placed around large group play and not around small group play like it is now. wich would bring wow back to its roots wich most people who have played since pre bc would very much like to see agen.

it would let you be able to more limit roflstomping in bgs. stoping premades from going into a game and wtf destroying the other side without trying.

----CONS OF A PUG RATED BG----

you would have to use a system based around base deffending and capturing and not a system based around wining or losing the game.


----PROS OF A PREMADE RATED BG----

it would give people the ability to set up the best bg groups posible ( this would then make the problem i said above )

you would be able to use a more simple way of giving raiting

it would bring back pvp guilds ( wich if you can remember the way bgs were back then you can consider that a pro or a con ) by that i mean it got to the point were if you were not in one you didnt do anything in pvp worth doing. and i would hate to see it so you have to be in a guild to do raiding OR pvp that would just suck.


----CONS OF A PREMADE RATED BG----

you would have some classes that would get left out or suverly under represented like arena now. example being shamans. they lack dps and survivability needed by premade teams.

[iktankniet]

survivability goes up in 3.2 where resil lowers all dmg taken. so no class will be left behind.

and since its a BG, there will be healers helping you

[Beaavis]

I think one of the better aspects of a Rated BG's over Arena is that its way more inclusive. I don't think Blizzard is going to have to worry too much about classes being unwanted nearly as much as one sided Arena synergies. 10 slots minimum leaves a lot of room for variety, and every class brings something to the table. Granted i don't know if anything could beat a team full of Rets and DK's(WSG) :P They are absolutely retarded in BG's right now, even still...

To me one of the bigger disappointments of this news is that its still going to reward gear a tier lower than Arena, which doesn't really change anything. Arena players will still be the end all be all of PvP play, and they will waltz into Rated BG's dominating them w/ gear advantages like they do now also.

[perera]

There are 2 reasons why I don't play arena:
1 - I like larger scale pvp (10+, though I prefer 15+);
2 - I don't like being put in a little box with the goal of just killing the other team... I like objective oriented pvp.

I'm just saying this so it might give some insight to the people who think if someone doesn't arena it instantly means they suck at it... well there you go, it's just not my thing. I like competing though, just in a larger scale... so I do hope it's hard to get ratings, but I also wanna point out that if the quote is true the gear would be inferior to the top arena gear... If I had to guess it's gonna be one tier lower. I hope they manage to pull off a very competitive rating system though, and don't develop it with a 'sub-par' mentality because of it being one tier lower.

@meliancill: If that little text is true... well it says PUG. I'm sure it would incentivate premades though.

@Beaavis: As long as the gear difference isn't too big, bring it ! Also, we could see the reintroduction of items like Horde Battle Standard, which might give the good BG players an edge against arena players while inside bgs.

[Lovely]

I'm just saying this so it might give some insight to the people who think if someone doesn't arena it instantly means they suck at it... well there you go, it's just not my thing.

99% of the cases it's because they suck! :-)

And honestly, if you're not gonna compete in the arena why do you even bother to grind pvp gear? To play more Battlegrounds?

[Beaavis]

99% of the cases it's because they suck! :-)

And honestly, if you're not gonna compete in the arena why do you even bother to grind pvp gear? To play more Battlegrounds?

you're a retard.

if you're not going to compete in battlegrounds why do you bother grinding battlegrounds?

Oh thats right, because to have competitive gear you have to, just like arena players grind bg's, and vice versa. Except arena players get the top gear which is lame but thats stupidass Blizzard for you.

Arena is such a joke in the context of the whole game. So many of you are ignorant to how great MMORPG PvP can be if done right. Its a hell of a lot better than this lame fotm comp vs comp multi dueling in a box, most of you might as well be standing in front of Org/IF all day dueling like you did in vanilla WoW. Its really too bad these Developers went that route :

[Jimec]

survivability goes up in 3.2 where resil lowers all dmg taken. so no class will be left behind.

and since its a BG, there will be healers helping you

Healers?? Where?? =O

80% of the classes that can heal have their dps spec in BG and only use their healing ability's on themselves.. if not more..
No offense to the ppl who actually do Bg's with their healing spec.. Respect to them and wish there were more of you guys!

[x]

Healers?? Where?? =O

80% of the classes that can heal have their dps spec in BG and only use their healing ability's on themselves.. if not more..
No offense to the ppl who actually do Bg's with their healing spec.. Respect to them and wish there were more of you guys!

i do think if this change goes live, you will see a small(but noticeable) change in peoples mindsets in BG's. i honestly believe there are a few people out there who will stop trying to dps wsg and will actually try to assist the team.


the day of battlegrounds with 1 or maybe even 3 healers(ret, feral, enhance and shadow dont count) is at hand!

[DrJones]

everytime I play dps (class or spec) there is no healer seen anywhere in a bg... IF I play my healer... there are several others there several others there with me most of the time... it's like some kind of curse :>

Anyway, I'm really looking forward to rated bg's, not because I suck at arena (or maybe I do, I don't know :P ) , but because BG's provide much more fun for me than arenas do.

[kommon31]

Some people have the problem with finding a partner or 2 that are good enough to compete with. Its not that all players are bad, some people just don't know other good players. I remember a mage on my battlegroup could never get a 3's team, and now he's in the top 15 on my battlegroup.

This could help them out, but... it does help out the barntards as well. The casualness of this game is really sickening me, its getting to the point where most people will stop playing and the terribads will roam around thinking they are bad ass.

[Morwrath]

Arena is a problem for sure, while I still love it. BG's were alot of fun back in Vanillia. I played with 14 very compotent people that had a similar goal in mind....Rank/Gear. The old system was extremely flawed it was about time and less about skill/knowledge. Now Arena is more about Comp and gear and to a lesser extent skill. I would welcome this change, Playing with 14 others was so much more rewarding then with 1,2 or 4 others.

As far as a way to establish a persons Personal rating it would have to be based on somthing like. Wins vs. Losses, Captures, Saves and Returns. for DPSers somthing like Kills Vs. Deaths -Healing received (to very small extent, meant to lower the effectiveness of pocket healers)
Healers would add in somthing like Total healing, how many Healed possibly healing flag carriers or defenders as a small increase in rating. there are alot of ways to do this really you just have to think about what makes a BG successful. It rarely has little to do with how many people you farm at a GY or Midfield.

[yannick0007]

this is just unlikly to happen it req to many player at the same time

[Morwrath]

This could help them out, but... it does help out the barntards as well. The casualness of this game is really sickening me, its getting to the point where most people will stop playing and the terribads will roam around thinking they are bad ass.

Man I love this type of thinking. Seriously ITS A VIDEO GAME ITS MEANT TO BE CASUAL!!!!! Were you born with a keyboard and mouse in your hands and 1337 tattoed on your forehead? Those Terribads you refer to prolly own their own companys and make 10x the money you do. Or like me have a Family and a Career and enjoy PvP as a way to relax after the day. I have yet to set foot in 1 WOTLK 25 man raid other than VOA. And have a current 3v3 rating of 1900 with 2 people I enjoy to play with, not becasue they are amazeing at Arena or their class. 95% of the time Im the top on KB's and within the top 5 DPS on every BG I step in. I play for fun does that make me Terribad? Did I mention I play a Hunter that hit lvl 80 on 2/23/09 so I really couldn't participate in the S5 Hunter goddliness.

WOW=SRSBIZNUSS

[blee732]

I really like this idea but I wonder if they'll have to rethink the Battlegroup system as a result. If there's separation of players based on rating, presumably there will be much fewer players in the upper tiers, which translates to longer queue times.

Might have to merge some Battlegroups together if this is going to work (at least how I'm thinking it's going to work).