Page 16 of 22 FirstFirst ...
6
14
15
16
17
18
... LastLast
  1. #301
    High Overlord PsychoSe7eN's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2021
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Posts
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by OwenBurton View Post
    One of the major complaints about players regarding the Alliance - and why they favored the Horde, even back in the original game - was the Alliance seemed too bland or uninteresting, while the Horde was much more nuanced and complicated.

    For example, many Horde players insist that lots of fantasy games, especially back then, did not allow you play as orcs, trolls or tauren, which was why they felt the Horde in World of Warcraft was so appealing and unique in that regard, the orcs were not simply rampaging monsters, but a conflicted people with an ancient culture and a proud history who struggled with their identity while fighting for survival.

    While Stormwind humans were simply the default option for beginner players, the same old human protagonists who fought against monstrous-looking invaders, that were used over and over in most every fantasy franchise. The "traditional" Alliance races of humans, dwarves, gnomes and elves simply seemed much less fascinating and engaging to some people than the opposing races.

    I can understand this, to some extent, having an interest in both factions lore-wise - even in Battle for Azeroth, Kul Tiras was a beautiful place, but Zandalar honestly seemed much richer and more deeply fleshed out, and much more original, and far superior even to most of the previous Horde cities. The playable Kul Tirans were basically somewhat more obese humans with a modified Gilnean accent (which is even more confusing, as Jaina, her brothers, her parents, Brother Pike, Lady Waycrest, most of the major Kul Tiran characters were portrayed as in fact fairly slender and thin human characters, so I don't know what they were trying to get at there).

    Regarding the other Alliance races:
    - The dwarves seemed too generic and even among most Alliance players never seemed that popular. The ever-loyal short human sidekicks with a weird accent.

    - The night elves I think were the most interesting part of the Alliance, but their story has been heavily diluted since the Third War, and always seem extremely reliant on the assistance of the other Alliance kingdoms, especially Stormwind. Cenarius no longer cares about them and is friendly to the Horde, most of the Wild Gods are neutral; Nordrassil was nearly destroyed; their immortality is gone; the Temple of Elune and their capital Darnassus itself are both gone; Elune has lost most of her mysterious nature and is the sister of this newly introduced afterlife character, and did nothing to save their people; their race is now all but extinct. They've lost Teldrassil, and much of Darkshore and Ashenvale, and most of their civilian and military forces, and the Horde has them vastly outnumbered and surrounded on all sides.

    Look at Wolfheart - in which even Tyrande was not able to help win the battle for the night elves, but Varian Wrynn came charging in at the last moment and saved them - or Mists of Pandaria, in which Varian taught Tyrande lessons in patience against the Horde. Some interesting elements such as the Highborne introduced in the Cataclysm, or the Wardens and demon hunters, seem to be almost never utilized in-game or heavily explored either.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/warcraftlor...nowledge_seen/

    - The gnomes, well...they are interesting, but I think most Alliance and Horde players are divided between those who intensely love them and those who intensely despise them. They also seem to be only in a background supporting role, Gelbin's appearance during that Zandalar cinematic was I think one of the few major appearances of gnome involvement, and they have yet to appear in any major expansion cinematic.

    - The draenei also seemed to have been largely skimmed over with the exception of Legion (and I guess Draenor, but those draenei are now fanatics, and that world is long since lost, so I'm not sure if that still counts). Velen and most draenei characters had pretty much no role in Battle for Azeroth (Velen's greatest role was caring for refugees in Elegy), not showing up even for Battle for Darkshore; the Exodar itself was not mentioned whatsoever throughout the expansion and seemingly forgotten by both factions.

    - The worgen provided an interesting twist, but they seem to be heavily ignored also after Cataclysm, with the exception of Genn Greymane, the token advisor at Anduin's side - their lands are STILL lost to them, so it's not like worgen players have much to look forward to either.

    - The Tushui Pandaren other than Aysa's brief and stationary appearances with other Alliance leaders are not mentioned either.

    - The Kingdom of Stromgarde seemed to have been rebuilt, but again, we saw nothing of this reflected in-game or in that novel.

    Even the new allied races, such as the Lightforged and void elves, don't really seem to be expounded too much, just a couple new fodder NPCs for Horde players during Faction Assaults perhaps, but not much more. For example, why is the Vindicaar entirely absent from the Fourth War, and how did the void elf population grow significantly in such a short period of time?

    How do most Stormwind humans view the Kul Tirans, positively or negatively, and how do most Alliance races actually regard the dark iron dwarves and mechagnomes? Why are there next to no interactions between any of those allied races themselves? Why can't most Alliance players visit 3 of 5 Allied race zones? In fairness, the Horde has full and constant access to the entirety of Highmountain and Suramar, in addition to all of Zandalar, and the only inaccessible zone for most Horde players is the time-displaced Draenor for the Mag'har orcs.

    Even during Battle for Azeroth - the Horde players at Level 120 still heavily outnumbered the Alliance players, both in guilds and individually, leading to a major gameplay imbalance between the two factions. Are there any ways to better address this to even the playing ground perhaps - and perhaps to improve and diversify the Alliance in general, such that it might appeal more broadly and deeply to most players?
    Three words: Mad King Turalyon.

  2. #302
    Free faction and server transfers. And maybe an alliance themed mount for free, if you switch with x chars that are max level and have at least x hours of playing time.

  3. #303
    Basically: Brutality, arrogance and division.

    Imagine a paladin dragging a Forsaken bound with Light-infused chains into the Stormwind Cathedral to torture them for information, the holy ground and chains searing their rotting flesh.
    A commoner speaks up in protest, only to be "disappeared" by nearby guards.
    Finally, a priest begins a sermon advocating for "justice" against the Horde, using their psychic magic to affect their congregation's minds and whip them up into a frenzy.
    Some aren't affected, but they go along with the mood of the crowd for the sake of their own safety.

    Outside the Cathedral, a couple of Night Elves watch from the shadows as the sermon ends. Only humans are allowed inside the Cathedral these days...
    It became clear that it wasn’t realistic to try to get the audience back to being more hardcore, as it had been in the past. -- Tom Chilton

  4. #304
    The Alliance lacks kick-ass moments.

    It's sucked playing Horde during the past two faction conflicts. Again forced into the bad guy by an asshole. But I'm guessing in many ways, it was even worse for the Alliance.

    I mean, losing a city is crap. But if some enemy does it, such as when Deathwing destroyed part of Stormwind, it can at least show off the power of the bad guy. But who does the destruction of Theramore and Darnassus hype up? The Horde. The other faction of players. That's not a healthy thing.

    And what revenge has been had? Garrosh escaped and was then killed by a Horde leader, not Jaina. The Undercity was blown up by the Horde themselves. The Alliance failed to take or destroy Zandalar; they killed a king that wouldn't submit, and were chased off. Sylvanas escaped Tyrande and the coolest strike against her came by a Horde general built up in a series of great Horde cinematics. Ultimately Sylvanas gets judged, but only after being turned good. It's not an awesome moment.

    So yeah, personal journeys where the Alliance gets some cool moments that show what makes the Alliance a great faction. (Also, just boost the racials). The Alliance has many things in their favor. They attract more new players. Their aesthetics are better than the Horde's by far. And their leaders are on average a ton more powerful than the Horde leaders.

  5. #305
    Quote Originally Posted by Blayze View Post
    Basically: Brutality, arrogance and division.
    Quote Originally Posted by Accendor View Post
    I completely get that the Horde is running rampart all over the world if nobody actually decides to DO something about it, despite their ability to do so. I'm not saying go forth and genocide some orcs, but stop being a punching bag and strike back for once.
    I want things to be different. But not necessarily mirror Mists of Pandaria and Battle for Azeroth. That would lead to losing more players in the long term rather than achieve a positive effect for society. A corrupted Turalyon has been frequently discussed, along with Yrel and the Lightbound being the main antagonists. But it seems SO predictable and boring by now that I wonder whether even Blizzard itself has second thoughts on this matter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Loreth88 View Post
    Im not talk about just some quests thats cool, but like indead and orc get new building style etc. mostly they and humans get the attention. Other races are sidekicks of the humans in the alliance faction. They are there, but not really. When we get the kultiran humans why not give vyrkuls instead and the fat human can be a choice for body type. Waste time. Uninteresting subrace. They have so many opportunities to make the races and the story better. In a fantasy game we get humans.
    Agreed. An Alliance victory honestly always seemed so...tainted, honestly, and seemed like a false victory more than anything.


    https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comment..._war/?sort=new
    Last edited by OwenBurton; 2022-05-16 at 10:05 PM.
    "Always you speak. Never do you listen! You ignore the lessons of Pandaria! You see, there is balance in all things. Wisdom etched in our very fur: Black and white. Darkness and light. When the last emperor hid our land from the rest of the world, he also preserved...our ancient enemy, the mantid. So it is with your Alliance and your Horde. They are not strong despite one another; they are strong BECAUSE of one another. You mistake your greatest strength for weakness. Do you see this?"

  6. #306
    End the human hegemony over the alliance, bring back diversity to it. I'm so tired of seeing stormwind guard armour, gimme some regional stuff! And down with the high king nonsense. Bring back the nobles of stormwind into play. And of course peasant tensions in westfall and elwynn.

  7. #307
    Quote Originally Posted by Blayze View Post
    Basically: Brutality, arrogance and division.

    Imagine a paladin dragging a Forsaken bound with Light-infused chains into the Stormwind Cathedral to torture them for information, the holy ground and chains searing their rotting flesh.
    A commoner speaks up in protest, only to be "disappeared" by nearby guards.
    Finally, a priest begins a sermon advocating for "justice" against the Horde, using their psychic magic to affect their congregation's minds and whip them up into a frenzy.
    Some aren't affected, but they go along with the mood of the crowd for the sake of their own safety.

    Outside the Cathedral, a couple of Night Elves watch from the shadows as the sermon ends. Only humans are allowed inside the Cathedral these days...
    Come on man, this is a child's idea of edge. Adding more grimdark cynicism to WoW won't fix the pretty simplistic issues of forcing your playerbase to pick a team.

    WoW's issue lies in wanting to create a team rivalry, but failing to make the Alliance appealing. The Horde favoritism has always come in the form of the developers thinking the Horde is cooler -because it is, by design, even. Cause it feels like the alliance was only put together to hit the same traditional fantasy notes that every other game/setting has, but without showing it the passion and love the Horde got on its worldbuilding.

    What the alliance needs is for someone that is actually excited for them to write them, someone that takes the potential and manages to crack at least one good story about the Alliance and what it *means* beyond its leaders and beyond reacting to what the Horde does.

    The alliance doesn't need division, arrogance or division; for that to even have any meaning on the first place we need a watershed moment where the value of the alliance as a faction is galvanized, where its the unity and trust between its people what shines.

    And what gets to me it's that it would be *so easy* to build on the War2 Nostalgia, showing how that "alliance" still exists and fights by each other's side. But as they cannot win alone, we get to see how all those that have joined since have made the alliance stronger.

    The alliance needs unity, it needs to make sense as a faction first and foremost.

  8. #308
    Quote Originally Posted by Blayze View Post
    Basically: Brutality, arrogance and division.

    Imagine a paladin dragging a Forsaken bound with Light-infused chains into the Stormwind Cathedral to torture them for information, the holy ground and chains searing their rotting flesh.
    A commoner speaks up in protest, only to be "disappeared" by nearby guards.
    Finally, a priest begins a sermon advocating for "justice" against the Horde, using their psychic magic to affect their congregation's minds and whip them up into a frenzy.
    Some aren't affected, but they go along with the mood of the crowd for the sake of their own safety.

    Outside the Cathedral, a couple of Night Elves watch from the shadows as the sermon ends. Only humans are allowed inside the Cathedral these days...
    Edgy != interesting.

  9. #309
    Quote Originally Posted by MyWholeLifeIsThunder View Post
    Come on man, this is a child's idea of edge. Adding more grimdark cynicism to WoW won't fix the pretty simplistic issues of forcing your playerbase to pick a team.

    WoW's issue lies in wanting to create a team rivalry, but failing to make the Alliance appealing. The Horde favoritism has always come in the form of the developers thinking the Horde is cooler -because it is, by design, even. Cause it feels like the alliance was only put together to hit the same traditional fantasy notes that every other game/setting has, but without showing it the passion and love the Horde got on its worldbuilding.

    What the alliance needs is for someone that is actually excited for them to write them, someone that takes the potential and manages to crack at least one good story about the Alliance and what it *means* beyond its leaders and beyond reacting to what the Horde does.

    The alliance doesn't need division, arrogance or division; for that to even have any meaning on the first place we need a watershed moment where the value of the alliance as a faction is galvanized, where its the unity and trust between its people what shines.

    And what gets to me it's that it would be *so easy* to build on the War2 Nostalgia, showing how that "alliance" still exists and fights by each other's side. But as they cannot win alone, we get to see how all those that have joined since have made the alliance stronger.

    The alliance needs unity, it needs to make sense as a faction first and foremost.
    Only kind of “edge” Alliance needs now is the “victory but at the cost of morality” but played in the same nonsensical “cost onpy on paper” shtic Horde does.

    They should either show how neutral factions turn away (or even against) the Horde due to “bad rep” Horde acquired or make Alliance do the same shit and get no comeuppance.

    Cause judging from “neutral adventures” promised in Dragon Isles world still in general ignores what Horde does with surprising regularity.

    Also, if they want to play on “edgy” themes in Alliance itself best thing would be revanchism and uniting under the banner of “lets rip the Horde a new one for all they did to us” with factions united by how much they despise or hate the Horde instead of being disunited.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Aydinx2 View Post
    Edgy != interesting.
    Not necessarily, but Blizz made it a contest, contest they only “participating” in as Horde. So Alliance needs its own edge, but i dont think tearing it apart from inside will be a good idea considering how faction’s main issue is not its internal affairs (that too but only as a byproduct) but its complete and utter impotency in wars and external affairs.

  10. #310
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,373
    Quote Originally Posted by OwenBurton View Post
    One of the major complaints about players regarding the Alliance - and why they favored the Horde, even back in the original game - was the Alliance seemed too bland or uninteresting, while the Horde was much more nuanced and complicated.

    <snip>
    While I have no reason to doubt that this is the position of a bunch of players, it is entirely subjective, and a bunch of other players prefer the alliance the way it is. I simply don't believe that the faction imbalance problem really has anything to do with any of what you have written about, and everything to do with players gravitating towards to faction that will give them the biggest in-game competitive advantage.

    The real problem WoW has that leads to faction imbalance is that being on the more populous faction is an advantage. Which means that whichever faction is more numerous will tend to become more numerous over time. It's an inherently unstable system. Like trying to balance two marbles on top of top of each other. Just the slightest bias in one direction and it cascades. And this isn't even by design, it's simply a property of the game being multiplayer and having 2 factions.

    I reckon the only way to "fix" this problem is to create systems that counter the inherent advantages of being on the more populous faction. WoW players, being the creatures we are, will switch factions if we believe it gives us an advantage to be on a faction that gives better buffs against monsters and in PvP. And as long as the system adapts dynamically to faction representation, it will stabilise faction balance and keep it there. It's that simple.

  11. #311
    Quote Originally Posted by VladlTutushkin View Post
    Only kind of “edge” Alliance needs now is the “victory but at the cost of morality” but played in the same nonsensical “cost onpy on paper” shtic Horde does.

    They should either show how neutral factions turn away (or even against) the Horde due to “bad rep” Horde acquired or make Alliance do the same shit and get no comeuppance.

    Cause judging from “neutral adventures” promised in Dragon Isles world still in general ignores what Horde does with surprising regularity.

    Also, if they want to play on “edgy” themes in Alliance itself best thing would be revanchism and uniting under the banner of “lets rip the Horde a new one for all they did to us” with factions united by how much they despise or hate the Horde instead of being disunited.
    It's not that the alliance doesn't need more morally complex stories, it's just that, first and foremost, needs to be made appealing. They do need that "fist bumping moment" and much like it has happened for the Horde, the alliance needs a narrative about "what it means to be alliance", and have that be framed in a triumphant manner.

    You really can't subvert the alliance and its beliefs when there's nothing solid and strong to subvert on the first place. You should only play with the tropes when you have the bases down first.

  12. #312
    Quote Originally Posted by Raelbo View Post
    While I have no reason to doubt that this is the position of a bunch of players, it is entirely subjective, and a bunch of other players prefer the alliance the way it is. I simply don't believe that the faction imbalance problem really has anything to do with any of what you have written about, and everything to do with players gravitating towards to faction that will give them the biggest in-game competitive advantage.

    The real problem WoW has that leads to faction imbalance is that being on the more populous faction is an advantage. Which means that whichever faction is more numerous will tend to become more numerous over time. It's an inherently unstable system. Like trying to balance two marbles on top of top of each other. Just the slightest bias in one direction and it cascades. And this isn't even by design, it's simply a property of the game being multiplayer and having 2 factions.

    I reckon the only way to "fix" this problem is to create systems that counter the inherent advantages of being on the more populous faction. WoW players, being the creatures we are, will switch factions if we believe it gives us an advantage to be on a faction that gives better buffs against monsters and in PvP. And as long as the system adapts dynamically to faction representation, it will stabilise faction balance and keep it there. It's that simple.
    Well yeah. And Blizz specifically buffed Horde racials into stratosphere and then added “pretty” race to the Horde in BC.

    Imagine if they got goblins back then instead of blood elves and racials on the leven of gnome.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by MyWholeLifeIsThunder View Post
    It's not that the alliance doesn't need more morally complex stories, it's just that, first and foremost, needs to be made appealing. They do need that "fist bumping moment" and much like it has happened for the Horde, the alliance needs a narrative about "what it means to be alliance", and have that be framed in a triumphant manner.

    You really can't subvert the alliance and its beliefs when there's nothing solid and strong to subvert on the first place. You should only play with the tropes when you have the bases down first.
    Yeah, but such moment should only come either against the Horde or against faction that would completely tramp the Horde.

    For example, let Yrel invade with her crusade and tell Alliance that “its all good, just do what you were doing!” Before bouncing off to eradicate Horde on Kalimdor to the point where we actually see Orgrimmar being besieged and bombarded by Lightbound.

    Then she does something REAL bad like brainwashing Azerothean paladins or something, and Alliance crushes her. So indirectly they “beat” the Horde by beating the force Horde couldnt counter.

  13. #313
    Quote Originally Posted by Raelbo View Post
    While I have no reason to doubt that this is the position of a bunch of players, it is entirely subjective, and a bunch of other players prefer the alliance the way it is. I simply don't believe that the faction imbalance problem really has anything to do with any of what you have written about, and everything to do with players gravitating towards to faction that will give them the biggest in-game competitive advantage.

    The real problem WoW has that leads to faction imbalance is that being on the more populous faction is an advantage. Which means that whichever faction is more numerous will tend to become more numerous over time. It's an inherently unstable system. Like trying to balance two marbles on top of top of each other. Just the slightest bias in one direction and it cascades. And this isn't even by design, it's simply a property of the game being multiplayer and having 2 factions.

    I reckon the only way to "fix" this problem is to create systems that counter the inherent advantages of being on the more populous faction. WoW players, being the creatures we are, will switch factions if we believe it gives us an advantage to be on a faction that gives better buffs against monsters and in PvP. And as long as the system adapts dynamically to faction representation, it will stabilise faction balance and keep it there. It's that simple.
    I mean we can't deny the the facts tho, the developers did made the effort to make the Horde more appealing early on. Like as much as we can say that the Horde favoritism is subjective, you have many devs making clear their predilection for the Horde, as well as the meassures that were taken early on like Blood Elves and stronger racials.

    The problem is that they didn't realize how everything compounded and kept escalating to the point the imbalance went on the other side. It's not just the narrative or the gameplay, but a collection of issues that built into each other, born of a decision to make the Horde more appealing.

    You're right that most playerbase will just choose the faction that is most advantageous, and the Horde was that for a while and for several, intended reasons. The problem was they couldn't reach a new balance. By the time it became an issue the other way around, it was perhaps too late.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by VladlTutushkin View Post
    Yeah, but such moment should only come either against the Horde or against faction that would completely tramp the Horde.

    For example, let Yrel invade with her crusade and tell Alliance that “its all good, just do what you were doing!” Before bouncing off to eradicate Horde on Kalimdor to the point where we actually see Orgrimmar being besieged and bombarded by Lightbound.

    Then she does something REAL bad like brainwashing Azerothean paladins or something, and Alliance crushes her. So indirectly they “beat” the Horde by beating the force Horde couldnt counter.
    Perhaps. I do think that an scenario where the alliance succeeds in a place the Horde fails could be the easiest scenario to make it work, but then it has to be based inherently on the strengths of the alliance as the alliance, and the problem there is that it's a delicate tight rope between demonstrating what the alliance is best at without simply making the Horde incompetent -and thus, creating more animosity in the playerbase-

    So in a way, the best way the alliance needs to show its value might be on its own rather than in mere contrast to the Horde, Perhaps what the alliance needs its to define its worth by itself and not in relation to the Horde.

    Maybe the answer doesn't, or can't be, "The alliance is better than the Horde." Factions to really be compelling must stand on their own merits, not by the reflection cast on, or by, them.

  14. #314
    Quote Originally Posted by MyWholeLifeIsThunder View Post
    I mean we can't deny the the facts tho, the developers did made the effort to make the Horde more appealing early on. Like as much as we can say that the Horde favoritism is subjective, you have many devs making clear their predilection for the Horde, as well as the meassures that were taken early on like Blood Elves and stronger racials.

    The problem is that they didn't realize how everything compounded and kept escalating to the point the imbalance went on the other side. It's not just the narrative or the gameplay, but a collection of issues that built into each other, born of a decision to make the Horde more appealing.

    You're right that most playerbase will just choose the faction that is most advantageous, and the Horde was that for a while and for several, intended reasons. The problem was they couldn't reach a new balance. By the time it became an issue the other way around, it was perhaps too late.

    - - - Updated - - -



    Perhaps. I do think that an scenario where the alliance succeeds in a place the Horde fails could be the easiest scenario to make it work, but then it has to be based inherently on the strengths of the alliance as the alliance, and the problem there is that it's a delicate tight rope between demonstrating what the alliance is best at without simply making the Horde incompetent -and thus, creating more animosity in the playerbase-

    So in a way, the best way the alliance needs to show its value might be on its own rather than in mere contrast to the Horde, Perhaps what the alliance needs its to define its worth by itself and not in relation to the Horde.

    Maybe the answer doesn't, or can't be, "The alliance is better than the Horde." Factions to really be compelling must stand on their own merits, not by the reflection cast on, or by, them.
    They made Alliance both weak, military incompetent and dumb at the same time on several occasions to hype the Horde up.

    They wont lose their gonads if they do the same once for Alliance.

  15. #315
    Legendary! Lord Pebbleton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Pebbleton Family Castle.
    Posts
    6,051
    No ways unfortunately.

    I am Alliance at the heart as a proud dwarf player, but mine was a choice against gameplay. The horde has generally had the best racials, which always drew more people to it, which in turn drew friends and friends of friends. Add that the horde has race options for every taste, and people don't really have a reason to be alliance anymore.

    I still remember the talks about trolls being extra good in Throne of Thunder. That was in MoP, years after release.

    The only fix is to let everyone group cross-faction.

  16. #316
    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Pebbleton View Post
    The only fix is to let everyone group cross-faction.
    I firmly believe this is why Blizzard introduced Covenants. What we got in the Shadowlands wasn't exciting, but it was merely a prototype. The goal is to have the Covenants substitute factions.

    Horde and Alliance will still exist, will still have narrative relevance and the hostile NPC's will still send the guards on you. But for the end game, players can group together in battlegrounds and instances.

    When imagining this concept, try not to constrain yourself to how Shadowlands executed the Covenants, they can be much bigger and much more meaningful to a player. In Shadowlands they were 'chose your own adventure' as you could pick four flavours of running the story campaign, some cosmetics and that ability.

    In a more advanced version. The Covenants are competing against each other in PvE and PVP. They can claim territories in zones. They can have their own war effort like the Gates of AQ going on. And each week the best performing Covenants could be awarded with special perks and rewards.

    Because there's more than two Covenants, and players have some limited means of switching between them (like once per season, or even once per week at a penalty) the factions become more dynamic and easier to balance. The Covenant that outperforms the other Covenants one week can run into diminishing returns the next week. Smaller and weaker Covenants are incentivised to gang up against the dominating Covenant.

    For people who are sceptical such balance can be found; Look at Magic The Gathering's 'Commander' mode. In this game mode 4 players free for all against each other, but in order to stand a chance of winning, each player will have to target whichever player is in the lead and take that player down a peg.

    That same mechanic is how you balance competing Covenants in WoW. There's so much fun stuff you can do once players have this level of autonomy over with which group they associate with.

  17. #317
    Field Marshal Jacques's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    73
    Quote Originally Posted by Iain View Post
    I firmly believe this is why Blizzard introduced Covenants. What we got in the Shadowlands wasn't exciting, but it was merely a prototype. The goal is to have the Covenants substitute factions.
    Have you played Legion? We already had the order halls two! Add-ons ago.

  18. #318
    And before that we had Aldor and Scryer in Shattrath. Order Halls have many elements of the Covenants, and were largely more satisfying. But they're tied to a player's class and competition between them wouldn't be desirable as that's not what playing a class is about.

    The most potential a class Order Hall could offer is competition within the class itself, and that's definitely something I would love to see.

    The point of Covenants is that they provide a factions for players to align themselves with without being constrained to a faction or even this fixed server balance. The relative strength between Covenant will be dynamic and much more easy to balance than the Horde vs Alliance ratio which is ultimately a self-reinforcing server demographic trend.

  19. #319
    Elemental Lord
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    8,373
    Quote Originally Posted by MyWholeLifeIsThunder View Post
    I mean we can't deny the the facts tho, the developers did made the effort to make the Horde more appealing early on. Like as much as we can say that the Horde favoritism is subjective, you have many devs making clear their predilection for the Horde, as well as the meassures that were taken early on like Blood Elves and stronger racials.
    The introduction of the blood elves (and their huge popularity among Horde players) is a pretty strong counter to the notion proposed in the OP that players prefer the more savage races. And the fact that the devs felt the need to make the Horde more desirable would indicate that the Alliance was the more popular faction prior to that.

    Quote Originally Posted by MyWholeLifeIsThunder View Post
    The problem is that they didn't realize how everything compounded and kept escalating to the point the imbalance went on the other side. It's not just the narrative or the gameplay, but a collection of issues that built into each other, born of a decision to make the Horde more appealing.

    You're right that most playerbase will just choose the faction that is most advantageous, and the Horde was that for a while and for several, intended reasons. The problem was they couldn't reach a new balance. By the time it became an issue the other way around, it was perhaps too late.
    No, the problem isn't that they couldn't reach a new balance. It's that they failed to recognise that it is an unattainable goal. They tried to solve the issue of faction imbalance by trying to reach a new balance instead of recognising that they are dealing with an unstable system. In other words, their solution needed to address the instability, not the imbalance.

    Think back to Wintergrasp. They were close to the right idea there, but not quite. The big problem with Wintergrasp was that the fight always favoured the more populous faction. Simply put, having a numbers advantage in the battle made it more likely your faction would win. In order to address this Blizzard introduced the tenacity buff where, if one side was short on players, they would get buffed in order to compensate. The problem with their philosophy though was that the buff wasn't strong enough. It helped to mitigate the disadvantage to some degree, but being on the side with the bigger numbers was still advantageous. In other words, they made the system less unstable, but it was still unstable. What they needed to do was to make the tenacity buff stronger than a numbers advantage. This may sound unintuitive - because why would should the smaller army be stronger? But from a system design it would have made a LOT of sense. Because what it would have achieved is giving the players an incentive to balance the factions. And it doesn't matter which faction was numerically superior, such a system will always tend towards stability.

    It was the same thing in the battle of Naz'jatar in BfA. Those battles, while epic in theory, were just ridiculous because almost everyone used the group finder tool to find a battle in which their faction was numerically superior. And the nett result was that almost every battle was just incredibly one-sided to the point that it was appealing to neither side. I mean you were either desperately trying to find someone from the opposing faction just to get the HK you needed before the battle ended, just to qualify, or your faction was so outnumbered that it was pointless even trying to fight. The ideal of an actual battle with multiple players from both factions struggling for dominance simply never materialised. Or at least it was incredibly rare.

  20. #320
    Quote Originally Posted by OwenBurton View Post
    Agreed. An Alliance victory honestly always seemed so...tainted, honestly, and seemed like a false victory more than anything.


    https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comment..._war/?sort=new
    Yes and the alliance lost, not just that battles but the whole game, they give us xfaction grouping so they give up the balance issues.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •