Burning Crusade Classic Beta Arena Rating Update - May 15

Originally Posted by Naraga

Sad Blizzard buckled to PvE players demands. With the new hugely inflated arena system they are introducing the previous rating standards were already so incredibly low I expected 80% of the playerbase to get their shoulders. Now 100% of the player base will be able to get the full arena set and weapons without any effort. So much for "preserving the prestige of earning the best gear for the higher ratings".

S1 never had rating requirements for any arena gear back in the day, this gatekeeping never existed until later seasons.

Not happy with this change, because i'm horrible at PVP I was planning to make loss team with 2 acounts and that way get Arena poinsts easy.
Now I have to find someone who doesn't mind having a teammember who is absolutely useless in Arena in order to get gear.

Originally Posted by Oneer

S1 never had rating requirements for any arena gear back in the day, this gatekeeping never existed until later seasons.

Lmao sure, gatekeeping ofc. You are rewarded for reaching certain points and that is how it should be

One change from the original game that we’re including is having your team and personal rating start at 0, rather than 1500,

still lost at that change

Originally Posted by Quixef

You are rewarded for reaching certain points and that is how it should be

That's all very well & good, but it's objectively not how S1 worked back in 2007, history doesn't care about how you feel things should of been.

Just to clarify, I don't personally care one way or another if they'd left the weapons/shoulder req. for TBC classic at 2/2.5k or just removed it entirely to be accurate with original TBC, but this revisionist narrative of people getting upset over accessibility of S1 gear is pretty cringe.

Originally Posted by Naraga

On the contrary, getting 1850 will be a lot easier. Relative strength has remained unchanged. There are just as many bad players as there used to be and relatively to good players they are just as bad as they were back then.

But rating will be inflated as hell with one big battlegroup. Getting weapons and shoulders will be a joke because 2k in 2021 will be the same as 1600 in 2007.

I mean I got 2k in TBC while not knowing my rotation, not knowing how to chain CC, keyboard turning, clicking half my binds, having no addons, not min-maxing my gear, hell what binds I did have were setup on the other side to my arrow keys so I literally took my hand off my mouse to use my abilities and I still got over 2k. Compare that to Live now, where at 1500 rating you'll rarely come in contact with people who aren't atleast doing all of these things.

Sure, there is still your odd gamer who has absolutely no clue what there doing but if you look at any video game with a competetive scene right now be it PvP or PvE it's very very clear that the average base skill level is far higher than what is once was, anyone who thinks otherwise is IMO delusional. A bad player now would prob be top 10% back then and this is going to be further compounded by the type of player Classic-TBC will attract.

I remember playing 2v2 arena for S2 weapons back then. Did they have and rating requirement? I think it took 4 weeks about 10 games (or 10 wins?) each week.

Originally Posted by FelPlague

man idk where you were 15 years ago but boosts were literally all over the place, i remeber my brother making fucking bank boosting as prot pally in stratholme.

He means the paid boost with deluxe edition

Originally Posted by Oneer

S1 never had rating requirements for any arena gear back in the day, this gatekeeping never existed until later seasons.

So? We're doing #somechanges. Why should PvP gear not be "gatekept" if you want to call it that way? I cannot see any valid argument. If you're going to give everyone their PvP gear for free you might as well put a vendor infront of every raid instance that sells all drops else you're "gatekeeping" people who can't kill the bosses. See how ridiculous that'd be?

Originally Posted by Fitsu

I mean I got 2k in TBC while not knowing my rotation, not knowing how to chain CC, keyboard turning, clicking half my binds, having no addons, not min-maxing my gear, hell what binds I did have were setup on the other side to my arrow keys so I literally took my hand off my mouse to use my abilities and I still got over 2k. Compare that to Live now, where at 1500 rating you'll rarely come in contact with people who aren't atleast doing all of these things.

Sure, there is still your odd gamer who has absolutely no clue what there doing but if you look at any video game with a competetive scene right now be it PvP or PvE it's very very clear that the average base skill level is far higher than what is once was, anyone who thinks otherwise is IMO delusional. A bad player now would prob be top 10% back then and this is going to be further compounded by the type of player Classic-TBC will attract.

My point is that those bad players have also improved. They are better compared to how they were back then, but relatively speaking to good players they are just as bad as they were back then. The relative skillgap between bad and good players has remained unchanged. So it has not become harder.

Originally Posted by Naraga

So? We're doing #somechanges. Why should PvP gear not be "gatekept" if you want to call it that way? I cannot see any valid argument. If you're going to give everyone their PvP gear for free you might as well put a vendor infront of every raid instance that sells all drops else you're "gatekeeping" people who can't kill the bosses. See how ridiculous that'd be?

And that's absolutely fine, I'm not opposed to the concept of introducing rating requirement into gear for S1 as a new feature to be inline with the design philosophy of later seasons and in retail, my beef is with misinformation some people have been peddling to lazily support the argument that it was like this originally and should remain for the sake of #nochanges (You personally aren't guilty of this but it's been doing the rounds on the forums since the original blue post came out on the matter).

Originally Posted by Naraga

My point is that those bad players have also improved. They are better compared to how they were back then, but relatively speaking to good players they are just as bad as they were back then. The relative skillgap between bad and good players has remained unchanged. So it has not become harder.

I would strongly disagree with this the difference between a bad and good player now is far less than it once was because the bare minimum people expect from a player is so much higher and those who can't get to this level have mostly stopped trying by now. It's just assumed that any random person you meet these days knows there rotation, has there addons setup, is focus interrupting, knows how to use there defensive/offensive CDs etc. So much is just expected these days that the difference between a 1500 player and a 2200 player is maybe only 5-10% where as before a 2200 player would literally be able to win 2v1s or maybe even 3v1s vs 1500 players. And I know this because in WotLK I used to boost people to 1850 for the weapon and I'd win almost every game 2v1, there is no world I could do that now even though I am vastly better than I was then.

I played Live recently and got to 2.1k and it was a grind to get there. I would honestly say I noticed almost no difference in skill between the people I played at 1.7k MMR and the people I played at 2.1k, the people that climbed are just the ones that pushed through. Yes the people who get to 2.4k+ those are noticably better, your top tier is still very much a different calibre of player but your 1500-2200 player, your low-mid tier is all pretty interchangable at this point.

This is shown in many other games to, League of Legends for example. There's minimal difference between a Silver and a Plat player. Diamond players are noticably better and bronze players are noticably worse but that middle ground these days is very much similar and the ones higher ranked are just the ones that grinded more.

Back in TBC you could get 2k while chatting and watching TV if you was good at the game, you'd be shocked to lose a single game. Now, I promise you it'll be a grind and you will not coast through easily winning every game.

Maybe it's terminology that's the problem. It's not so much bad players are better as it is there are less bad players. The majority who haven't managed to get to grips with the basic mechanics of the game at this point have given up and most people hit a certain skill ceiling and neither have the time nor desire to break past it. What this has meant is that in many games 90% of your playerbase is now in this "middle ground". There good enough to not be in this 1k rated region of people that can't press buttons but not good enough to get 2.4k+ where people are planning and communicating strats. This has meant that 1.5k - 2.1k all just kind of feels the same, with these middle ground players. Whereas before there was more tiers of players, 1.5k-1.6k players were noticably worse than 1.6k-1.7k players etc. but now there all quite interchangable.

Originally Posted by Fitsu

I would strongly disagree with this the difference between a bad and good player now is far less than it once was because the bare minimum people expect from a player is so much higher and those who can't get to this level have mostly stopped trying by now. It's just assumed that any random person you meet these days knows there rotation, has there addons setup, is focus interrupting, knows how to use there defensive/offensive CDs etc. So much is just expected these days that the difference between a 1500 player and a 2200 player is maybe only 5-10% where as before a 2200 player would literally be able to win 2v1s or maybe even 3v1s vs 1500 players. And I know this because in WotLK I used to boost people to 1850 for the weapon and I'd win almost every game 2v1, there is no world I could do that now even though I am vastly better than I was then.

I played Live recently and got to 2.1k and it was a grind to get there. I would honestly say I noticed almost no difference in skill between the people I played at 1.7k MMR and the people I played at 2.1k, the people that climbed are just the ones that pushed through. Yes the people who get to 2.4k+ those are noticably better, your top tier is still very much a different calibre of player but your 1500-2200 player, your low-mid tier is all pretty interchangable at this point.

This is shown in many other games to, League of Legends for example. There's minimal difference between a Silver and a Plat player. Diamond players are noticably better and bronze players are noticably worse but that middle ground these days is very much similar and the ones higher ranked are just the ones that grinded more.

Back in TBC you could get 2k while chatting and watching TV if you was good at the game, you'd be shocked to lose a single game. Now, I promise you it'll be a grind and you will not coast through easily winning every game.

Maybe it's terminology that's the problem. It's not so much bad players are better as it is there are less bad players. The majority who haven't managed to get to grips with the basic mechanics of the game at this point have given up and most people hit a certain skill ceiling and neither have the time nor desire to break past it. What this has meant is that in many games 90% of your playerbase is now in this "middle ground". There good enough to not be in this 1k rated region of people that can't press buttons but not good enough to get 2.4k+ where people are planning and communicating strats. This has meant that 1.5k - 2.1k all just kind of feels the same, with these middle ground players. Whereas before there was more tiers of players, 1.5k-1.6k players were noticably worse than 1.6k-1.7k players etc. but now there all quite interchangable.

The issue is that you're thinking of good and bad in absolute terms, like they are objectively quantifiable (not pressing x amount of buttons etc).

Who is bad is determined by who is good. It is a relative spread. Just because the bad become better that doesn't mean the good remained static. They also got better.

edit:
I feel bad giving such a short response after the thesis you typed but there is just nothing more to say. I was a good player back then, I am a good player now. As the bad got better at the game, so did I so the spread between us remained the same.

Originally Posted by Fitsu

One thing people aren't considering is it's going to be a hell of a lot harder to hit 1850 now than it was back in TBC. I would say on live now the avg ~1700 rating player is better than a ~2200 player was in TBC and I imagine this will be even more relevant in Classic-TBC as it's taking on a more niche playebase which will generally not be noobs as most are looking for a nostalgia trip meaning they've played for several years.

Not saying there wont still be bad players, ofcourse there will. Just saying there'll be a lot less bad players than there used to be and that a "bad player" in 2021 in someone who doesn't perfectly chain CCs/Interrupts, doesn't have 50 macros and 12 addons etc. Where as a bad player in TBC was someone who keyboard turned and didn't even use half there abilities. Getting to 1850 for your weapon is gonna be a damn sight harder now than it once was.

Classic is filled with players that quit over 10 years ago, and play like it's 2008. If you had above 2200 experience at any point in the last 6 years, 1850 is going to be a joke.

Originally Posted by Naraga

The issue is that you're thinking of good and bad in absolute terms, like they are objectively quantifiable (not pressing x amount of buttons etc).

Who is bad is determined by who is good. It is a relative spread. Just because the bad become better that doesn't mean the good remained static. They also got better.

edit:
I feel bad giving such a short response after the thesis you typed but there is just nothing more to say. I was a good player back then, I am a good player now. As the bad got better at the game, so did I so the spread between us remained the same.

No I know that but those bad players are now good enough that no matter how good you are you can't 2v1 them anymore, no matter how good you are sometimes you'll make a mistake and they will be good enough turn that mistake into a win. Before they was so bad that you could literally meme on them they just didn't know what to do. Now, no matter how much better you are you have to still have to play well to beat them. There are a lot less players that you match up against where you just win by default and the difference between a 1500 player and a 2k player really isn't that substantial anymore, it's more just whoever actually bothered to grind through it.

To give an example I use League Of Legends. Years ago when I made a new account to have a bit of fun with a friend, the people I went up against were so bad they didn't even buy items, they didn't know how to CS etc. I literally couldn't lose to them if I tried. I could have prob AFKed the first 15min and still beat them. This scenario just doesn't exist anymore, yes I am much better at League now and still vastly better than these players but I can't just joke about, meme and win by default. If you make a mistake and fall behind, even against someone who is bad you can struggle to catch back up because the average gamers base ability to play games is so much higher. This can be seen in every genre, CoD used to be just everyone run and gunning but now everyone hold angles, corners, positions because to run in the open is suicide so because people don't do anywhere near as much dumb stuff anymore you don't get as many free wins even at lower ratings.

WoW is no different, even if your better because the average gamer at the very least knows how to play the game you still have to atleast play very well to win and sometimes you may be tired, make a mistake, get distracted and they will be able to take advantage of that whereas before you could literally 2v1 your way to 1850.

It'll be interesting to see though, maybe I'm wrong and people who are good will still be able to 2v1 there way to 1850, boost etc. But I just don't see it. I expect people who aren't 2200+ players to struggle a lot more in the 1500-2100 region then they did before.

Originally Posted by Naraga

Sad Blizzard buckled to PvE players demands. With the new hugely inflated arena system they are introducing the previous rating standards were already so incredibly low I expected 80% of the playerbase to get their shoulders. Now 100% of the player base will be able to get the full arena set and weapons without any effort. So much for "preserving the prestige of earning the best gear for the higher ratings".

God thats a take Im really not behind. You obviously dont know how arena works in TBC too. You realize 50% cant get to 1850 because of math with MMR ? Your trying too hard be a doomsayer lmao

Originally Posted by Zader666

God thats a take Im really not behind. You obviously dont know how arena works in TBC too. You realize 50% cant get to 1850 because of math with MMR ? Your trying too hard be a doomsayer lmao

I think there is something wrong with your math, theoretically 99% of playerbase could gain infinite rating.