Arena vs Battlegrounds

[Shuckles]

Why does everyone judge how good you are at your Arena rating?

I have been called an exceptional Unholy DK by many before, but I just don't like the mechanics of arena. I love the whole fight were you have to hold as many reinforcements as you possible can, and you do that by overtaking enemy territories and etc.
Not the "Ok, cyclone the priest, and then tunnel the warlock" kind of fights.

So, I know this is going to be fixed in Cataclysm with Battleground rating(Your K/D, W/L, etc) but what about for now?

[bw13187]

Sounds like you couldn't hack it in the arena.

I'm terribly afraid they're going to stuff it up on rated BGs. If you're still able and/or expected to queue up randomly with people you don't know, and then get rated on it, that's just horrible.

But how can we be expected to form 40 man AV teams? Or is it only certain BGs that will be rated? Who knows!

to answer your question, people judge how good you are based on your arena rating because in arena, you never kill someone only to have them respawn in your face and kill you right back when you were trying to cap the flag. Well not since season 5 and the DK ghoul shit was fixed. In arena, you will never face 5-1 odds. In arena, you will not res with your trinket down only to be jumped by a rogue, and be pretty much helpless. In arena, you do not rely on 9/14/39 strangers to help you win. In arena, neither you nor your opponent have to face so so many random elements that are inherent in BGs, mostly, is someone going to come ride by on their horse and tip the scales of my fight? Things are more or less balanced, or at the least, the balance issue is reduced to that of class v class or comp v comp. And that is a much more stable and fair way to judge skill than whether or not you can effectively zerg hapless BG honor farmers.

Maybe rated BGs will be nice. It'd be nice to log on and play AB or WSG with a dedicated team, where everyone cared 100% about the outcome. I can't say I ever have done that. So long as they don't screw it up.

[Odyseas]

Sounds like you couldn't hack it in the arena.

I'm terribly afraid they're going to stuff it up on rated BGs. If you're still able and/or expected to queue up randomly with people you don't know, and then get rated on it, that's just horrible.

But how can we be expected to form 40 man AV teams? Or is it only certain BGs that will be rated? Who knows!

to answer your question, people judge how good you are based on your arena rating because in arena, you never kill someone only to have them respawn in your face and kill you right back when you were trying to cap the flag. Well not since season 5 and the DK ghoul shit was fixed. In arena, you will never face 5-1 odds. In arena, you will not res with your trinket down only to be jumped by a rogue, and be pretty much helpless. In arena, you do not rely on 9/14/39 strangers to help you win. In arena, neither you nor your opponent have to face so so many random elements that are inherent in BGs, mostly, is someone going to come ride by on their horse and tip the scales of my fight? Things are more or less balanced, or at the least, the balance issue is reduced to that of class v class or comp v comp. And that is a much more stable and fair way to judge skill than whether or not you can effectively zerg hapless BG honor farmers.

Maybe rated BGs will be nice. It'd be nice to log on and play AB or WSG with a dedicated team, where everyone cared 100% about the outcome. I can't say I ever have done that. So long as they don't screw it up.

Yeah but also in arena who get steamrolled unless you are playing TSG/RMP or any other flavour of the season combo. If you dont have access to any of these combos you are pretty much screwed. But dont get me wrong im not saying that arena is worse than bg's are(and im mainly a pvp player)

[silentwords]

Yeah but also in arena who get steamrolled unless you are playing TSG/RMP or any other flavour of the season combo. If you dont have access to any of these combos you are pretty much screwed. But dont get me wrong im not saying that arena is worse than bg's are(and im mainly a pvp player)

I agree it's frustrating to play a not-so-popular combo in higher rating, maybe 2200+.
However, combo is not that big of a deal below 2000 rating imo.
You may not be as competitive in 2200+ bracket.
But, if you are decently geared and experienced in pvp, you can still get to 2000 with ease.

Like BW13187 said, BG really has too much random variables compare to arena.
There is no readily-available and objective way to judge and compare how players have performed in BG.
On the other hand, looking at arena rating is just quick and easy.

[Spurmwhale]

there are good players that dislike arena. there are even some very high rated esport players that aren't that fond of arena in terms of pvp for an mmo. but like it or not the developers have made it the central focus of WoW's pvp endgame and its been this way since early BC. i highly doubt rated BG's will overtake arena considering its going to be based on something like one rated game per week from what i heard, and even then its going to more or less cater to arena teams combining/stacking to get that one match in, then go back to arena playing.

i think arena does speak for skilled players for the most part, but its not absolute. i've played with many players that are in the 2000 ratings, and know of some players who just don't care about ratings that i consider better players than some of the high rated ones. some of them aren't that great, but more good at the communication and following directions side of WoW play.

personally i think arena is an awful basis for a mmo PvP system. the amount of central focus it gets is a joke, really.

[Odyseas]

I agree it's frustrating to play a not-so-popular combo in higher rating, maybe 2200+.
However, combo is not that big of a deal below 2000 rating imo.
You may not be as competitive in 2200+ bracket.
But, if you are decently geared and experienced in pvp, you can still get to 2000 with ease.

Like BW13187 said, BG really has too much random variables compare to arena.
There is no readily-available and objective way to judge and compare how players have performed in BG.
On the other hand, looking at arena rating is just quick and easy.

true, you can easily get 2k and even 2.1k with a non-so-popular combo but ye above that not rly...

[Tenzz]

true, you can easily get 2k and even 2.1k with a non-so-popular combo but ye above that not rly...

That's not really true though. I've amongst others seen dk/ele/healer and ret/desto/healer at 2.4k, and those arent really popular comps. I probably takes a bit more effort to play these type of comps but saying that it can't happen is taking it too far.

[gemuadrken]

pve version of this thread: heroics or raids?

[K4ge]

Arenas hands down.
I sometimes lose arenas :P

[Mystz0r]

Are you seriously suggesting that you can be "good" in BGs?

[Odyseas]

That's not really true though. I've amongst others seen dk/ele/healer and ret/desto/healer at 2.4k, and those arent really popular comps. I probably takes a bit more effort to play these type of comps but saying that it can't happen is taking it too far.

i got 2.1k with dk/destrolock/ prot holy pala, last season but it was impossible to go further than that. It is possible to get 2.4 with a non popular combo but you need skills over the roof to be able to outplay TSG, RMP's and all that kind of crap and also it depends on the battleground you are playing.

[K4ge]

Are you seriously suggesting that you can be "good" in BGs?

Although correlation rarely implies causality, I belive my average solo stats of something around 30-3 do have something to do with my leet skill... or my overpowered gear, one or the other.

[tha3l91]

Although correlation rarely implies causality, I belive my average solo stats of something around 30-3 do have something to do with my leet skill... or my overpowered gear, one or the other.

Correlation does not imply causation. Ever.

And it's causation, not causality.