Rated BGs will Fix and Kill PvP

[Winfernal]

So it hit me. Rated BGs..something I have always wanted. Instant-Queue premade on premade action. F-ing A right? No more OP comps dominating the pvp scene, no more being forced into canned deathmatches to get gear.

But think about it...as awesome as it may be, what about skill in pvp being reflected? I was doing 5s and the utter faceroll that bracket can sometimes be, had be screwing up later on in 2s because I wasn't playing nearly defensive enough. Now what about when all thats needed to be done is go into a 10-40 on 10-40 match, where it doesn't matter if you die, because you come back in a few seconds with full life? I guess it'll be more fun and less stressful, but the skill needed to play successfully is gonna go down the shitter.

Guess I'll keep my 2s and 3s teams going to stay sharp eh?

You will need tactics to compete and WIN against high ranked teams. You cant just "rush van" etc.
Dont compare rated bgs to random bgs.

[Bakis]

Yea arena never had anything with fotm, zerg setup etc to do... pure skill 110%.. or not

[Vidur]

You kinda forgot that BG's won't be 10v10, 15v15, or 25v25 (those will be the new match-ups, I think) arena matches. Why? Because BG's involve objectives, which unlike arenas won't be 'kill the other side faster'. If anything, BG's will require far more skill. The shear amount of coordination and teamwork needed to be successful is pretty large. If you just focus on killing the other team, the objectives won't be completed and you'll lose. Focus too hard on the objectives and the other side will destroy you. I really don't think the whole 'sky is falling' attitude is apt - not to mention we are still in beta, things can change.

Also, all the 'lesser skilled' folk still have non-rated BG's. You likely won't pick up randoms for your rated BG's. Like someone said, rated BG's =/ random BG's.

[Seditian]

You kinda forgot that BG's won't be 10v10, 15v15, or 25v25 (those will be the new match-ups, I think) arena matches. Why? Because BG's involve objectives, which unlike arenas won't be 'kill the other side faster'. If anything, BG's will require far more skill. The shear amount of coordination and teamwork needed to be successful is pretty large. If you just focus on killing the other team, the objectives won't be completed and you'll lose. Focus too hard on the objectives and the other side will destroy you. I really don't think the whole 'sky is falling' attitude is apt - not to mention we are still in beta, things can change.

Also, all the 'lesser skilled' folk still have non-rated BG's. You likely won't pick up randoms for your rated BG's. Like someone said, rated BG's =/ random BG's.

I'm not sure whether rated battlegrounds will require the team playing in it to be a lot more skilled than arena players to be succesful. Sure, you need to pay attention to some other things, but hiding behind objects will be a lot less important, since 1) every healer has magic dispells 2) you will have a lot more healers than in an arena match. Since most of the crowd control is magic, you can pretty much just stand there and nuke while watching the flag/base.

I really do think people make it sound like it's very hard to watch a flag/base while fighting or running to another base: it isn't. You're not playing with random people anymore (at least, the more serious players out there won't), you're playing with friends or people you know for a while or know that they're good.

TLDR: Battlegrounds won't be harder than arena's, I would go so far to actually say it's easier, because you have more teamplayers thus you can't be beaten purely by set-up. People underestimate the intelligence of non-puggers.

[Bakis]

Rated BG's will share one of the prime reasons why so many players enjoy raiding.
Having to work with others, many others.
Now im talking about the highrated bg's not the casual ones we got today and the lower ratings in Cata.
It will be much harder to succeed in those than in arena cos you can add up as a party of 5 and still there might be up to 40 all together which demand teamplay, tactics not just 5 ppl in a sandbox arena who says on vent "we go for the X, you know what to do" and 5 secs later the X id gibbed.

[ComputerNerd]

Rated battlegrounds are simply a poor fix for a horribly broken mechanism they have no intention to fix.
Normal battlegrounds should have a real incentive to actually win, instead of being honor farms.
You should get very little out of a loss, to the extent that those who cannot be bothered will be wasting their time and leave it to those who are genuinely interested in playing to win.

The problem is gaining of honor from random kills in the middle, which are nowhere near any objective or repeated rushing of a base you know you cannot keep hold of for no reason other than for the sake of it.
You can already get increased honor gains while defending a base, so that method of the aura should be applied to all objectives.
You should only get honor from kills when within range of one.
You kill opponents near your or their flag carrier and you get honor.
You zerg someone in the middle when they are capping your flag, you should get nothing.
Extend as applicable to all battlegrounds and that would mean you need an understanding of how to play, and where you should be to actually gain any honor.

[gaymer77]

i love arena's i dont see how it went wrong u either play areana or u do a BG for your pvp..

Says a deathknight...a class that dominated like what the first 1/2 of Wrath if I'm not mistaken AND has been a viable class in every 2's FotM combo. I wonder why you would say you love arena & don't see how it went wrong.


Anyways, on topic....

I can't wait for rated BGs to come out because that is where I prefer to do my pvp at. I have my Legionnaire on my priest, Knight on my now deleted druid, and Sergeant/First Sergeant on 4 other toons all because I love the playstyle of BGs. I personally detest arena because it doesn't measure your skill at all. It measures if you picked the right FotM combo. Back in the day, pvp actually took skill to win instead of the zergfest that most battlegrounds have turned into (exception is WSG that is, always was, and always will be 90% of the players in the midfield and the other 10% guarding/running flags). I'm hoping to god that rated BGs will bring back the pvp of old and in return mostly kill arena in the process.

---------- Post added 2010-08-18 at 12:24 PM ----------

You should get very little out of a loss, to the extent that those who cannot be bothered will be wasting their time and leave it to those who are genuinely interested in playing to win.

The only problem with this suggestion is that on battlegroups where one side completely dominates in one/most/all battlegrounds will make the losers not want to queue up which will make the winners time in queue rise exponentially. Its already bad enough on most battlegroups that one side has instant pops while the other side has to wait 30-60 minutes.

I know they have said that come Cata the battlegrounds will be WoW-wide instead of battlegroup-wide but I still see what I said happening. If the Alliance start dominating BGs and the losers (the Horde) get little to no reward from winning then that means less and less Horde will queue up because they don't get jack crap for their time which makes the Alliance have to wait in queue longer and longer because there are fewer and fewer Horde that queue up. If you want to see how it is currently working like that, make something on the opposing faction on your server and queue for a BG and compare the queue times. You'll be shocked at the difference.

[ComputerNerd]

The reason for one side dominating is for the reason I mentioned.
It is the mentality, the reason they are there which dicates how they play.
If one faction is orientated around honor farming and ganking, then will will lose.

[Puck]

I think it'll be fun.

I just dont want to see:

"LFM WSG premade Link rating Gearscore and resilence PST"

[Deleted]

no i see 1 feral druid and 9 priest pulling him to the room in 5 sec

[bantu]

just more ppl to coordinate, and more to do.

[Razariel]

Says a deathknight...a class that dominated like what the first 1/2 of Wrath if I'm not mistaken AND has been a viable class in every 2's FotM combo. I wonder why you would say you love arena & don't see how it went wrong.

If you don't know anything about arenas then don't comment on them. DKs were completely overpowered in S5, strong in S6, fairly competitive in S7, and relatively weak in S8. The end of FotM DK/X setups ended in S6, and that was mostly because of the healer rather than the DK.

I can't wait for rated BGs to come out because that is where I prefer to do my pvp at. I have my Legionnaire on my priest, Knight on my now deleted druid, and Sergeant/First Sergeant on 4 other toons all because I love the playstyle of BGs. I personally detest arena because it doesn't measure your skill at all. It measures if you picked the right FotM combo. Back in the day, pvp actually took skill to win instead of the zergfest that most battlegrounds have turned into (exception is WSG that is, always was, and always will be 90% of the players in the midfield and the other 10% guarding/running flags). I'm hoping to god that rated BGs will bring back the pvp of old and in return mostly kill arena in the process.

Really? Arena doesn't test skill? In the brackets (according to the Armorys available in your sig) you play at, any comp can be competitive. Do FotM comps prosper in Arenas? Yes, of course they do. But what makes you think Rated BGs won't be full of FotM comps? All the cool kids will run 10 prot warrior/10 rdruid or whatever comp is overpowered in order to win easily.

Also, while BGs may test cooperation and tactics better than Arenas, there doesn't stand a better test of "skill" in WoW than Arenas. I hate to take off your rose-colored glasses, but "back in the day," a group of T2 geared people easily zerg through any BG they wanted to.

[gaymer77]

If you don't know anything about arenas then don't comment on them. DKs were completely overpowered in S5, strong in S6, fairly competitive in S7, and relatively weak in S8. The end of FotM DK/X setups ended in S6, and that was mostly because of the healer rather than the DK.

Since when is DK/HPally or DK/RDruid NOT a viable comp for 2's?

Really? Arena doesn't test skill?

For the most part, no it doesn't. It matters more if you are part of the better comp than it does your skill. Being able to burst down a healer in a healer/dps comp or forcing that pally healer to bubble takes no skill if you have high enough dps to allow it (aka the correct comp). Arena is focused more about, and mind you Blizzard has even said this repeatedly, finding the right partner that compliments your class more than it does anything else. How does that NOT translate into FotM comps will win out when all other things are equal?

In the brackets (according to the Armorys available in your sig) you play at, any comp can be competitive.

LMAO so you're judging my skill in arena off a hunter alt that's on a different server than I play on that has never stepped foot in arena and isn't even on an arena team & a DK tank that is also on that same server that I don't play on that also has never stepped foot in arena. WOW. Glad to see my alts on an alt server that don't pvp show my experience with arena. Really, glad to know that.

Do FotM comps prosper in Arenas? Yes, of course they do. But what makes you think Rated BGs won't be full of FotM comps? All the cool kids will run 10 prot warrior/10 rdruid or whatever comp is overpowered in order to win easily.

The sheer fact that there are 10-15 (not sure how they're going to deal with the 40 man BGs) people to deal with compared to 2, 3, or 5 for arena teams. The less people you have to put together just showcases the weakness/strength of classes which is why FotM comps exist. A 5's team has more diversity than a 3's team which has more diversity than a 2's team in viable comps. Shadow is a viable spec in 5's but after that you better be disc if you want a 2's or 3's team that is viable. That will be how it is with rated BGs too...shadow (my spec that I've played since I was lvl 10) will be viable instead of forcing me to go disc.

Also, while BGs may test cooperation and tactics better than Arenas, there doesn't stand a better test of "skill" in WoW than Arenas.

Explain again how arena tests your skill and not your ability to have the correct class/spec?

I hate to take off your rose-colored glasses, but "back in the day," a group of T2 geared people easily zerg through any BG they wanted to.

I'm well aware of how pvp was back then & it wasn't a group of T2 armored people that could easily zerg through any BG it was T3. Mages who had trinkets could blow through anybody they wanted as long as their trinkets & CDs were up (hense the term 2 minute mage). A completely naked warlock could solo any class in the game with just a wand & fear. Shadow priests were your biggest threat in pvp because of the amount of healing we gave with VE and the ability to take a beating while being able to kill nearly all classes out there (hense facemelting was born). 99.999% of druids were resto so when they went into pvp...well we all know about how powerful druids are in pvp. Macelock ftw! Yeah as crappy as some of the things were back then it allowed undergeared players the same chance that geared players had to be competitive in pvp if their class was able to be powerful. I wish I still have all the videos of me & my friends going into AB, WSG, and AV with our twill set (incase you forget what that was, it was the highest level grey armor from vanilla) & MC weapons (we all had BWL or Naxx weapons but switched to MC ones for that) and completely wiping the floor of everyone we came across. Skill > gear.

[Bobzor]

Since when is DK/HPally or DK/RDruid NOT a viable comp for 2's?


The sheer fact that there are 10-15 (not sure how they're going to deal with the 40 man BGs) people to deal with compared to 2, 3, or 5 for arena teams. The less people you have to put together just showcases the weakness/strength of classes which is why FotM comps exist. A 5's team has more diversity than a 3's team which has more diversity than a 2's team in viable comps. Shadow is a viable spec in 5's but after that you better be disc if you want a 2's or 3's team that is viable. That will be how it is with rated BGs too...shadow (my spec that I've played since I was lvl 10) will be viable instead of forcing me to go disc.

Yea shadow is so bad in 3s and it's reaaallly bad in 2s for sure.. Oh please.

[Naraga]

Rated bg's will indeed require alot less skill, besides for the premade leader, for him it will require skill, but a different type of skill.

Oh, and Gaymer77 you are bad, shadow is R1 viable in both 2's and 3's.

[Bobzor]

OH i can't wait for Rated BGs! I'm so eager to stomp on all arena haters face proving they were bad all along. ;D

[Razariel]

Since when is DK/HPally or DK/RDruid NOT a viable comp for 2's?

You said FotM, not viable. For instance in S8, LSD is FotM while RMP is viable. In S6, ProtHPal/DK was FotM while Rogue/Priest was viable. Please learn your terms.

For the most part, no it doesn't. It matters more if you are part of the better comp than it does your skill. Being able to burst down a healer in a healer/dps comp or forcing that pally healer to bubble takes no skill if you have high enough dps to allow it (aka the correct comp). Arena is focused more about, and mind you Blizzard has even said this repeatedly, finding the right partner that compliments your class more than it does anything else. How does that NOT translate into FotM comps will win out when all other things are equal?

You do realize that I'm more likely to bubble in a BG with 8 Alliance attacking them rather than in 2s, right? The strategies to zerg something prevail far better in BGs where numbers can be the sole determining factor of a fight. No, I prefer a fair fight with pre-determined abilities unavailable and places to drop LoS. Arenas are more or less 'ol fashioned gun duels in a sense, whereas BGs are all out brawls where even the most skillful of players can be unlucky and die.

LMAO so you're judging my skill in arena off a hunter alt that's on a different server than I play on that has never stepped foot in arena and isn't even on an arena team & a DK tank that is also on that same server that I don't play on that also has never stepped foot in arena. WOW. Glad to see my alts on an alt server that don't pvp show my experience with arena. Really, glad to know that.

Then show me your arena experience since the links on your signature are unavailable. Oh wait, no need to because you show your knowledge by saying...

The sheer fact that there are 10-15 (not sure how they're going to deal with the 40 man BGs) people to deal with compared to 2, 3, or 5 for arena teams. The less people you have to put together just showcases the weakness/strength of classes which is why FotM comps exist. A 5's team has more diversity than a 3's team which has more diversity than a 2's team in viable comps. Shadow is a viable spec in 5's but after that you better be disc if you want a 2's or 3's team that is viable. That will be how it is with rated BGs too...shadow (my spec that I've played since I was lvl 10) will be viable instead of forcing me to go disc.

L.
O.
L.

Really? Shadow isn't a viable spec for 2s and 3s? Shadow is, by far, more than capable of R1 in every bracket of Arena. Hell, the Disc I used to do 3s with on my Holy Paladin switched to Shadow for 2s, and we averaged around 2.2k MMR on BG9. And let me make it clear that Hpal/Spriest is a shit comp, so Bullshit it's not a good spec.

Let me queue you into something that will absolutely break your heart that'll unfortunately make me look like an asshole. Most of the people who are good at PvP succeed in Arenas because it's the avenue Blizzard has provided for competitive PvP. So when Cataclysm comes around, those Gladiators/Duelists/Arena Masters that you hate will adapt to Rated BGs. They'll be the new High Warlords and such, while you'll be a Scout complaining that Rated BGs are ruining the game.

[Bobzor]

Luls, never played 5s, I see. You try picking a target and zerging it without intelligent CC or switches. You'll get decimated. If one person in a 5s match gets played on all game, the healers are having a field day as they can sit there with said person targeted and smash their faces on their keyboards until the other team is dead.

This pretty much.

[Seditian]

Luls, never played 5s, I see. You try picking a target and zerging it without intelligent CC or switches. You'll get decimated. If one person in a 5s match gets played on all game, the healers are having a field day as they can sit there with said person targeted and smash their faces on their keyboards until the other team is dead.

Even though he exaggerated it, you're wrong as well. 5v5 IS easy, zerg 1 target down, swap to a second target when the opposing team uses important cooldowns on your first target. Blanket silence healers while Bloodlust/Heroism is up: win.

TLDR: 5v5 = kill or be killed, which is like every other arena match, but then in 1 minute.

[Sworded]

I think rated bgs will be awesome.

but

I think the level of skill between the top team and bottom team will be HUGE. Like at least 2-3x greater than the difference in current arena.

A properly organised, experienced, geared team with the ability to communicate on the spot (with vent), could be more-or-less unbeatable once they got an upper hand in for example AB. RT Communication via Vent is useful in arena no doubt, but the tactical advantage it would give to BG teams would be immense.

Especially with a great leader. I can actually envisage games of AB where one player is specifically assigned to stand around in stealth at the LM where they can see the whole map (except the GM) and give orders to the rest of the team. It would become like actual warfare where Commanders 'stand on the hill' (sit behind lots of monitors in a bunker these days) and deliver orders - it would be insanely powerful.