[Conjecture] Hidden horde buff in bgs

[Eliessa]

Im aware I cant show nothing empirical and everything is anecdotal. however, I transferred back to horde a few days ago and while as alliance with the same character/gear I always felt that I was weaker than compared to my years of experience as horde before.
As alliance every win in bgs was hard earned and I had the feeling that we had to outplay the horde massively. Now back to horde: every match we lose I feel like we simply let them win/ don't care enough to do objectives. There are no roflstompings as the ones I experienced as alliance almost daily.

I think to compensate that nice shiny 50% honour buff the horde has a hidden buff so they win more in exchange. am I just paranoid?

[Deleted]

Sounds pretty paranoid tbh.

[A Chozo]

am I just paranoid?

Yes, very.

[Nuba]

I posted this a while back but it has to become common knowledge with time so I'll just say it here as well:
Horde has better players.

Good players tend to migrate to the better racials, that is it. Casuals don't really care, so the odds of you getting a good team on Horde are much higher simply because it has the better racials => better players are on horde because of it => higher chances of winning as horde.

When you BG as alliance during the day you'll often find yourself surrounded by newbies with literally no sense or idea of what is going on a lot of the times, this barely happens on horde at any time.

During nighttimes (1am+) you'll have a better chance of winning as alliances because you'll find a lot of Merc-mode horde people playing as alliance, and because casuals don't often play at night.

[Thelxi]

Out of all the explanations to come up with..

[Eliessa]

Out of all the explanations to come up with..

I know Occam's razor and everything. However, does transferring to horde make me suddenly a better player? I just see how we wipe the floor with the alliance and in the end the honour gain for both parties are the basically the same, as long the horde wins. smells fishy too me.

[Woadnson]

Having played BG's in the aptly named Misery group for years, I can tell you my experience is the opposite. I'm not particularly up to date, but I believe they've been removing the battlegroup segregation on the US servers, and plan to with Europe, which would lead to a much more samey experience either side.

[rda]

Having played BG's in the aptly named Misery group for years, I can tell you my experience is the opposite. I'm not particularly up to date, but I believe they've been removing the battlegroup segregation on the US servers, and plan to with Europe, which would lead to a much more samey experience either side.

"What year is it?" pic

(They did away with battlegroups a long time ago everywhere.)

[ilik2345]

I've played just under sixteen thousand bg's as alliance over the years, over three characters and despite Eye of the Storm wins not properly being recorded in the statistics (for the longest time they record the games played but not the wins in that bg), i have a average 45% win ratio, probably nearer 50% if you fixed the EoTs statistics.

There are people out there that have played many many times more bg's then me and have similar experience, the games average out, for random bgs it really does not matter which side you pick, you'll be losing half the games you play.

[rda]

I've played just under sixteen thousand bg's as alliance over the years, over three characters and despite Eye of the Storm wins not properly being recorded in the statistics (for the longest time they record the games played but not the wins in that bg), i have a average 45% win ratio, probably nearer 50% if you fixed the EoTs statistics.

There are people out there that have played many many times more bg's then me and have similar experience, the games average out, for random bgs it really does not matter which side you pick, you'll be losing half the games you play.

You are trying to extrapolate global stats from your own experience.

Don't do that.

Random BG winrates for US:



Etc.

PS: And the real picture is actually way less even than it appears on the overall graph, because if you take away AV / IoC which are traditionally Alliance's and skew the picture towards A while in reality being completely separate from everything else, the H are dominating on the "real BGs" way harder. It's not 55:45, it's 60:40 or so, and that kind of difference is huge.

[ilik2345]

Where are your statistics for alliance queuing mainly AV / Ioc (two bgs i have personally blacklisted, though i alternate AV with strand depending on mood), i can only go on my own experience as i'm unsure where you got the helpful graph from, but on the character i'm playing at the moment a few examples of the smaller bgs.

WSG - 844 played / 539 won
TP - 596 played / 393 won
Silvershard - 505 played /266 won
Temple - 482 played / 263 won
Gilneas - 478 played / 295 won

I'm just trying to say that i don't think either horde or alliance has any advantage in random bgs, and if there are small advantages disadvantages in the maps, the fact your playing with random people generally smooths over it.

[rda]

Where are your statistics for alliance queuing mainly AV / Ioc (two bgs i have personally blacklisted, though i alternate AV with strand depending on mood), i can only go on my own experience as i'm unsure where you got the helpful graph from, but on the character i'm playing at the moment a few examples of the smaller bgs.

WSG - 844 played / 539 won
TP - 596 played / 393 won
Silvershard - 505 played /266 won
Temple - 482 played / 263 won
Gilneas - 478 played / 295 won

I'm just trying to say that i don't think either horde or alliance has any advantage in random bgs, and if there are small advantages disadvantages in the maps, the fact your playing with random people generally smooths over it.

It's not that the Alliance are mainly queuing AV / IoC, it's that they are mainly winning them for historical reasons. These wins skew the averages to look better for the Alliance than the averages on real (non-PVE) BGs.

Your statement regarding no advantages is beside the point, we are talking about winrates. The winrates are uneven. In WoD the BGs were dominated by the Alliance. In Legion, they are dominated by the Horde. That's the global picture. (Yes, 60:40 equals "dominated", the difference is huge.)

(And, by the way, in your personal stats such peaks in favor of either one faction or the other will partly cancel each other.)

[Count Zero]

I must be queuing at the wrong time of day or something because as a Horde player I wind up losing like every damn random BG I play.

[rda]

I must be queuing at the wrong time of day or something because as a Horde player I wind up losing like every damn random BG I play.

If you want to improve your winrate - whatever faction, even a losing one - just don't queue alone. Queue as a party of 5. If you don't have any people to PVP with, start a thread on the official forums, there are many guys in the exact same position as you are.

I am speaking from experience of thousands upon thousands of BGs across five expansions, used oQueue and whatnot, and later LFG. Queuing as a party propels your winrate to 80%+. The biggest problem in Legion is that there are plain much less people doing PVP = your friend list will take a long while to get to the point where forming a group (yes, you have to lead, no way around it) takes reasonable time. In Cata / MoP and even in WoD you could form a group just from trade.