Why doesnt Alliance take SF GY in AV?

[Spoonman]

On EU servers every Alterac Valley is the same.

At Start,instead of going instant to DB, Horde tries to controll all lanes around the Balinda area aswell as taking SF GY in order to force allys to spawn at SH GY or north of Icewing Bunker so that they then controll the bottleneck area

The strategy for ally in every single BG is to make it to IB GY but its only sucessfull in maybe 1/20 games

If ally instead all went to try controll SF GY wouldnt the chance to win increase as Horde would have a lot harder time to stop people from getting south?

[A Blue Smurf]

Weird; most games I play ally just ignore everything and go straight to drek. Unless horde is successful in the intercept and/or recall to gank the first attempt on drek the alliance win. If horde are successful it usually comes down whether or not horde can prevent another alliance zerg rush for long enough to win

[kranur]

SF or IB it will be same thing as it takes quite a while to cap. Instead of horde returning to try and recap IB, they will instead come to cap SF.

As of the last few weeks though, horde is no longer as successful in retaking IB and lose when they don't because there's not enough offense and alliance is much better at rushing the win.

Going for IB is generally good and it all comes down to being able to cap it. If allies manage to cap IB they pretty much win becase most people only see defend and zug with little thought to strategy, so at that point you have 30 hordes just delaying the push while the 10 left on offense don't have enough man power to advance fast enough.

[Spoonman]

This is in Classic BTW if someone miss

IB GY is a lot harder to push on start compared to SF GY because Horde spawns there at start

Since Ally lose 95% of all AVs the goal should be to make it out of the bottleneck instead of trying to get the perfect GY on start imo

[Jonnusthegreat]

Since Ally lose 95% of all AVs the goal should be to make it out of the bottleneck instead of trying to get the perfect GY on start imo

Lmao alliance loses 95% of the time? Even with the map objectively favoring them? Damn.

[Kralljin]

Because capturing IB GY early on can easier lead to a victory, if Alliance rushes to IB GY and Horde fails to take it back, Alliance basically has won the game as they then just go for Horde Base while some defender bunker down at Dun Baldar and hold off the Horde offense.

If Alliance goes for SF first, they lose a lot of time and then still need to capture and defend IB GY, SF also needs to be defended because some of the Horde offense might turn around and capture.

The entire Alliance strat evolves around capturing IB GY, so it makes a lot more sens to just go straight for that GY rather than take a detour over SF.
If Alliance holds both SF and IB GY, they can lose SF, but when Alliance loses IB GY, it's game over.

Lmao alliance loses 95% of the time? Even with the map objectively favoring them? Damn.

Horde has some advantages too and it needs to be said that recapturing IB GY is far easier as Horde than recapturing SH GY as Alliance.
The spawncave is closer to IB GY for Horde than SP GY is to SH GY for the Alliance, not to mention that the spawncave has no rezz cap, whereas the regular graveyards do (they can only rezz up to ~10 people afaik).

However, i don't think the imbalanced winrate is down to the map, it's because Horde seems to have far more engaged players that give a shit, Phase 2 has shown, there were more Servers where Horde dominated the Alliance than the Alliance dominated the Horde.
When you rank as Alliance, you just don't give a fuck about AV because you got super fast queues for AB / WSG, whereas every Horde ranker still does AV because they have longer AB / WSG queues.

The quest for the weapons is also unfortunately a factor that snowballs the whole issue, Alliance has far more lowlevel characters in most AV's because the lower rate makes it more difficult to complete the victory quest.

Horde 51 queues for AV => wins game => doesn't queue until they're 60.
Alliance 51 queues for AV => loses game => queues again => loses game => queues again.

To me, it's just this phenomenon within online games that players rather play around an imbalance than attempt to fight against the imbalance - to the point where even a slight imbalance suddenly results in a 80% / 20% win ratio.

[Aurabolt]

This is in Classic BTW if someone miss

Add this to your OP then. And next time post it in the WoW Classic Board.

[Bramickias]

Lmao alliance loses 95% of the time? Even with the map objectively favoring them? Damn.

The map objectively favors the Horde, by a really large amount. If you think otherwise, your memories must be of a time when AV had many NPC, landmines and archers that did damage, none of those are in Classic.
Either the Alliance rush Drek, or rush IBGY while it's not defended. IBGY is just too hard to take if there's anyone's defending it and bypassing it isnt an option if theres defenders. If you waste time sitting enough people on SFGY to cap it, it means youve lost SHGY and the 2 bunkers to cap the neutral GY .... it's a lost.

[Jonnusthegreat]

Add this to your OP then. And next time post it in the WoW Classic Board.

It's already in the Classic Forum. You should pay more attention because otherwise you're liable to embarrass yourself again.

- - - Updated - - -

The map objectively favors the Horde, by a really large amount. If you think otherwise, your memories must be of a time when AV had many NPC, landmines and archers that did damage, none of those are in Classic.
Either the Alliance rush Drek, or rush IBGY while it's not defended. IBGY is just too hard to take if there's anyone's defending it and bypassing it isnt an option if theres defenders. If you waste time sitting enough people on SFGY to cap it, it means youve lost SHGY and the 2 bunkers to cap the neutral GY .... it's a lost.

They changed original AV? I didn't realize.

[Spoonman]

The map objectively favors the Horde, by a really large amount. If you think otherwise, your memories must be of a time when AV had many NPC, landmines and archers that did damage, none of those are in Classic.
Either the Alliance rush Drek, or rush IBGY while it's not defended. IBGY is just too hard to take if there's anyone's defending it and bypassing it isnt an option if theres defenders. If you waste time sitting enough people on SFGY to cap it, it means youve lost SHGY and the 2 bunkers to cap the neutral GY .... it's a lost.

Im not really sure about this because how it feels to play AV against Horde is that they are more intressted in just attacking where ever alliance are instead of acctualy winning the game fast. People like to kill people
This means that if allys went SF GY all hordes would also go there

[Raugnaut]

They changed original AV? I didn't realize.

Classic doesn't use the original AV, but rather the greatly nerfed and gutted AV from 2.0.

[tikcol]

Im not really sure about this because how it feels to play AV against Horde is that they are more intressted in just attacking where ever alliance are instead of acctualy winning the game fast. People like to kill people
This means that if allys went SF GY all hordes would also go there

They know they lose the rush game so horde needs to do the grinding game with few people attacking and the rest defending.

It's also because horde has long queues so a win is much more important to them.

[WaltherLeopold]

The horde reaches the middle of the map like 20-30 seconds faster than Alliance, how can anyone say that the map is alliance favoured when so much of that BG is determined wether Alliance can move past the middle of the map or not (which the horde automatically controls).

[valax]

Lmao alliance loses 95% of the time? Even with the map objectively favoring them? Damn.

You tend to not value the game the same as horde when your que time is 5 minutes vs 50 minutes for horde

[Kralljin]

The horde reaches the middle of the map like 20-30 seconds faster than Alliance, how can anyone say that the map is alliance favoured when so much of that BG is determined wether Alliance can move past the middle of the map or not (which the horde automatically controls).

-Towers are far easier to defend as Alliance
-Horde Towers are extremely easy to cap
-Dun Baldar can be deffed by a handful of people (Bridge Chokepoint + extremely favorable npc positions)
-Horde Base is extremely easy to capture due to the lack of npc's around important areas

Putting aside that quite often the first major clash happens at SH GY, which then ends in Horde capturing SH GY, not because of the Terrain, but simply because the Alliance is weaker, you don't lose a zerg when you control the GY right next to it if both sides are equal in strength.
This whole "Horde spawns closer to the middle" is such a non issue, because no one ever fights over the middle, the first fight is about SH GY and that's where Alliance loses despite holding the advantage.

The only legit advantage that the starting cave grants the Horde is that it's closer to IB GY and has no Ress cap like any other GY, making it far easier to recapture IB GY as Horde than SH GY as Alliance.

Matter of fact, i've rarely seen Horde pulling out a victory when Alliance managed to capture IB GY, because anything south of IB is such a huge pain to defend as Horde, while the Alliance can hold off a Horde offensive at Dun Baldar with far fewer people because it's so much easier to defend.

Fun fact: Even Blizzard made fun of the Horde in early TBC because they kept losing AV and this was before they moved the starting cave to the south for the Horde.

[WaltherLeopold]

horde is just better lmao - some people actually believe this.

[Kralljin]

horde is just better lmao - some people actually believe this.

Yeah, that's why we had Alliance tears during Phase 2 because on most PvP Servers, it was the Alliance on the receiving end.

Let me guess, the design of Kalimdor / EK is also biased against Alliance?
Imagine disregarding the most simplest explanation because you don't like it: Your team lost because they played worse.

[WaltherLeopold]

Yeah, that's why we had Alliance tears during Phase 2 because in most PvP Servers, it was the Alliance on the receiving end.

Let me guess, the design of Kalimdor / EK is also biased against Alliance?

Funny how everyone I know, including myself have a much more even win/loss ratio in AB and WSG, while AV is the one raid which has overwhelming horde winrate.

I play both horde and alliance btw, on competitive pvp realms.

Imagine disregarding the most simplest explanation because you don't like it: Your team lost because they played worse.

No amount of "playing better" can help the fact that, the BG is super skewed in horde's favour and created a culture of AFKers in AV, when 1/4 of your group is levelers, another 1/4 is straight up afk and another 1/4 will go afk once the first fight is over, there is no just be better lmao, it all stems from the fact that the map is much more favoured to horde pugs than it is to alliance pugs.

Just like it happend historically, post tbc map fix will balance the winrate out a crap ton. The tbc changes fixed Alliance turtling which was prevalent in vanilla, also fixes the huge head start horde has to controlling the center of the map.

[Kralljin]

Funny how everyone I know, including myself have a much more even win/loss ratio in AB and WSG, while AV is the one raid which has overwhelming horde winrate.

Quoting myself from a few posts earlier:

However, i don't think the imbalanced winrate is down to the map, it's because Horde seems to have far more engaged players that give a shit, Phase 2 has shown, there were more Servers where Horde dominated the Alliance than the Alliance dominated the Horde.
When you rank as Alliance, you just don't give a fuck about AV because you got super fast queues for AB / WSG, whereas every Horde ranker still does AV because they have longer AB / WSG queues.

You're free to explain how Alliance loses the very first fight that usually happens right next to their GY without resorting to anything that essentially is "the Alliance is weaker".

[Atherions]

-Towers are far easier to defend as Alliance
-Horde Towers are extremely easy to cap
-Dun Baldar can be deffed by a handful of people (Bridge Chokepoint + extremely favorable npc positions)
-Horde Base is extremely easy to capture due to the lack of npc's around important areas

Putting aside that quite often the first major clash happens at SH GY, which then ends in Horde capturing SH GY, not because of the Terrain, but simply because the Alliance is weaker, you don't lose a zerg when you control the GY right next to it if both sides are equal in strength.
This whole "Horde spawns closer to the middle" is such a non issue, because no one ever fights over the middle, the first fight is about SH GY and that's where Alliance loses despite holding the advantage.

The only legit advantage that the starting cave grants the Horde is that it's closer to IB GY and has no Ress cap like any other GY, making it far easier to recapture IB GY as Horde than SH GY as Alliance.

Matter of fact, i've rarely seen Horde pulling out a victory when Alliance managed to capture IB GY, because anything south of IB is such a huge pain to defend as Horde, while the Alliance can hold off a Horde offensive at Dun Baldar with far fewer people because it's so much easier to defend.

Fun fact: Even Blizzard made fun of the Horde in early TBC because they kept losing AV and this was before they moved the starting cave to the south for the Horde.

Defending IB GY is laughably easy as horde and can easily be done by only 5 hordes. All alliance players are funneled in one choke-point with a tower shooting down on them and with hordes spawning 20 seconds away. In the meantime taking SH GY is totally free for hordes as it has multiple entry points, with no towers defending it and barely and NPCs.

The Dun Baldar bridge is both a curse and a blessing, getting across as horde is difficult, but getting across as alliance is equally difficult. So you're essentially stuck inside the alliance base. Taking back SH GY after it has been taken is also next to impossible, as the respawn is 2 minutes away for alliance in a shit GY that only spawns 10 players. In the meantime the horde can just stand at the chokepoint uphill from the alliance at IW bunker laughing at anyone that tries to get across.

Essentially once you start loosing as alliance there is no way back, and you can't win.
The numbers don't lie and alliance has not experienced a 1% winrate throughout the majority of classic by just not trying hard enough.