Blizz is taking Rated BGs from the BGers & giving them to Arena people

[friedrice821]

So what is a "BGer" or who are "the BG people"? By your post it seems like BGers are people that like running around aimlessly in BGs and see how fast they can kill the weakest geared enemy.

10-man rated BGs = strategy.

[buttheal]

just now created an account so i could comment on this -> i completely agree with everything said.

bg's are so much more fun and involving, you never know what's going to happen. im a dedicated disc healer and seeing my engineering boots become USELESS for the very reason i lvl'd eng to 450 is extremely annoying. why else would i use those boots? i also noticed how they "nerfed" rated bgs into the 10man setup and killed 25man rateds. i really hope a blue/dev sees this, these changes are absolute garbage and a slap in the face to those who love bg's. all my hopes are now on world pvp, which i hope will be popular in cata

[Degenerator]

Structure has no real place in battlegrounds other than some basics. It should be pure chaos other than that.

You are describing PUG's. You said you ran many premades, how many did you win if you just went in there without any structure to what you were doing?

[Spraxle]

Sigh... that's extremely disapointing that they are disallowing Eng items. But does that mean you can't use the parachute cloak enchant? If so then GG blizz, GG.

[molinator]

Most 5s teams have extra players . 10 man BGs is essentially a full 5s arena team with everyone in the same game

5s was also the easiest bracket for players to be carried, as there are 4 other players on the team. Though it doesn't follow that every BGr is carried by other, better players, it does mean that in BGs (up until this point) it's been very hard to determine individual ability.

1. I like WSG actually but its much more structered than the other bgs. Its more 'Arenalike'. Its a nice change of pace but thats all it should be, a change of pace, not the norm

What's wrong with being structured? The whole point of rating a BG is to place you on a competitive ladder. Competitive ladders should be based around structured gameplay and not zerg-fests of 40 on 40.

The whole reason the BG/Arena argument will never die is because each camp has a completely different philosophy that they don't like to admit or spell out. Arena players like the punishment of competition. BG players want the fun to come back to Battlegrounds by the removal of bots. Blizzard is trying to make both happy at once by giving us rated BGs where no one will have a reason to bot, and players will be driven to play to win rather than play for honor.

Arenas are a boxing match with rules and fairly predictable results.
Battlegrounds are War where there are no rules. You do whatever it takes to win.

Arenas do not give fairly predictable results, and claiming that they do screams of inexperience. I've done serious arena for 4 seasons now, and the results are not nearly repeatable as you suggest, even if you face the same team on the same map. It happened to my 3s this season. We faced a team twice on Dalaran Sewers in a single night. Having lost the first match, we decided to go with a different approach by switching targets to someone else. It worked. We won.

Arenas are only predictable if the only prediction you're making is that you'll lose - because having no drive to win is the surest way to fail. Start calling classes, specs, or comps "OP" and you're on that slippery slope of self-fulfilling failure.

It's not that anyone that does arena would disagree with your vision of Battlegrounds. I wish Battlegrounds were "war zones" akin to matches in Battlefield 2 or Battlefield 1942. But they're not. And why? Because this is an RPG. This is a game where gear progression (or character progression of SOME SORT) must hold. We got our egalitarian PvP gear. Everyone is happy about that. Even the so-called "elitist" Arena players are happy that everyone is getting better gear. But the drive to gain the most points per hour has given us BG bots who can evade any sort of AFK detection, and apathy on the part of the players who are still controlling their characters. Why didn't this happen in Battlefield? Because there is a very light reward system that takes only a nominal amount of time to complete and has little effect on gameplay or competition.

The problem is not that we don't want to have fun, it's that if you tag something as "Rated" you are tagging it as competitive. Competitive comes with a lot of baggage. You can't risk silly game mechanics imbalancing gameplay to the point where everyone must exploit it (ie. consumables such as Free Action Potions in WSG). You also have to make sure that there is a high resolution on the Rating of players and teams. The only way to have a high resolution is to spread out the distribution of players. This necessarily means that you can't have masses of 40 on 40 fights to determine individual skill. There is nothing in a zerg-fest that will show you who has the best mastery of their class - as slinking out of being the focus and having a pocket healer is the best way to do well in a large-scale fight - which shows nothing of someone's mastery of their classes mechanics, for the most part.

2. I did arena in TBC and I only did it for the gear. Other than that I hated it.

I'm sorry for that. But I can relate because I didn't enjoy the challenge of arenas when I first started it. I was very stubborn about my class and spec (elemental shaman) and didn't want to respec to resto for arenas. Part of that stubbornness transformed into competitive drive and made me a better player, because I became very attentive to subtle mistakes. Another part of that stubbornness broke and I respec'd to resto, getting Rival with my brother in 2s with resto shaman rogue, a feat that I'm still proud of even though I'm far past it.

3. I am not some casual BGer. I ran in premades very very heavily before WOTLK and before premades were nerfed around S4. The best BGs werent premades vs pugs. It was premades vs premades. I LOVED the competition.

If you love competition, why do you later say that:
"Structure has no real place in battlegrounds other than some basics. It should be pure chaos other than that."?

Competition implies a ladder. Gladiators in Roman times surely didn't earn their notoriety by beating arbitrarily skilled opponents. If you want a competition, you need a system to support it. And any healthy competitive system has to have a way of mapping its players based on ability. Hence you can't have "pure chaos" or else you'd have zero competition.

And so I return to the conclusion that what "BGrs" really want is Battlegrounds that are fun and not competitive. You shouldn't have reason to be ashamed or defensive of that opinion. Wanting to have fun (with something other than competition) isn't causally linked to having no skill.

For that matter, I think most people are confusing the term "competitive" in the context of this game. Because they see the absolute horrid state BGs have descended into, they associate that the places of "competition" are the ones Blizzard is focused on maintaining and ones without "competition" are those that go to waste like BGs. This should not be the universal case, and I think you'd agree. Blizzard should have some focus on the purely fun aspects of this game. World PvP, and BGs without bots would be fun. However the former takes will power and leadership (which a large part of the current playerbase lacks or does not utilize due to the streamlined nature of the game in its current state. The latter takes considerable effort on the part of Blizzard, against the pressure being placed on them by innovative players who figure out ways to get around the monotony of BGs, exponentially increasing the Monotony. Awesome, right?

4. I PREFER smaller guilds. But you still will need a decent sized guild for the most part to run rateds. There is no way around it. Anyone thinking they will just have 10-15 people small guild and do well is living a pipe dream. Aint happening.

If you have 10-15 people that are on every day, that will certainly not be a pipe dream. As someone who helped form a PvP guild from an even smaller core than 15, I can sincerely say that what you really need out of people is regularity. Numbers just help to cushion the problem of irregular players. Numbers are the problem on any 5s team, as introducing scabs for a few weeks is probably the number one reason any 5s team has broken up or gone inactive. However having 10 people who are on at the same time every day is of course impractical. Balance your guild by adding people who are dedicated and motivated when they do log on.

5. I took engineering long before most of you were probably even playing. Who here can even tell me what the description of engineering used to be? Hint it basically called it the pvp profession. Anyone against consumables or engineering being in rateds is just scared to face the unknown and hates surprises that tend to blow up in their face. There is the Arena for you, its that way ->

As I've said before, rated implies competitive, which then implies that there is a healthy ladder system to sustain the competition. A healthy ladder system is made sick by exploits. As innovative and cool as using a largely unknown potion like Free Action Potion is, it would make the game imbalanced because it would quickly become a necessity at higher levels of competition. When consumables become a necessity (especially since this is an RPG) you detract from the competitive ladder's health.

6. Arena people will not do nearly as well in 15s as they think they will. Especially if they do it right and allow anything goes as it should be. Will be funny watching the Arena people qq when they dont understand how to handle some screwball specs and situations. Cant wait to see the crying over heals in large skirmishes.

The arena players that have succeeded in attaining high ratings have done so because of their ability to adapt to a wide variety of situations in split seconds. I don't see why something so simple as a "screwball spec" or "heals in large skirmishes" will be a nuisance - it's simply a different challenge to overcome and anyone with the drive to compete will find a way around it.

You know what really is pathetic? Is the Arena people CALLING for these changes to adapt the BGs to arena like conditions when they already have what they want in Arenas themselves. Its called failure to adapt and...fear. Stop being pussies. Either do the Rateds like normal BGs are or dont do them at all. Nobody is forcing you to do BGs. You have Arenas with the same rewards.

Kalgan has been screwing up pvp for a long time and in two different games. It needs to stop.

I'm beating a dead horse, but if you want to have a healthy competitive system then you have to have a surefire way of rating players and matching them. Without a precise way of rating players, there is very little consequence you can attach to matches, and you step the level of competition down several notches. Associating arena player's demands for higher standards in Rated BGs with some complex they developed in the arena is a little odd. The only thing that anyone develops in arena is a love for competition. Hopefully they also develop mutual respect for each other, but then again there are assholes out there who can't do that.

You shouldn't be ashamed to admit that what you really want are fun BGs that are played for their own sake, rather than the sake of Honor Points or rating. No one will look down on you for asking for that. They will look down on you for trying to paint caricatures of them for enjoying something you don't. That's a two way street. Any Arena player who thinks that because someone hasn't tried arena has zero potential is succumbing to the same tempting argument that they're better by some divine right and not by hard work to increase their potential.

In short, I think your vision of BGs as a place for unfiltered PvP is worthy of attention (and worthy reason to revamp the way PvP points work so bots are a thing of the past) but ultimately it is not what a rated system of any kind should be.

[buttheal]

i think a point that alot of ppl have overlooked is that alot of battlegroups suck, it's really crappy when you're with like 2-3 other competent people in a bg filled with undergeared and underskilled players. it's pretty common to look at the HK stats and see about 8 horde ontop (im ally). the idea is that with 25man rateds it WOULD have more structure from the lack of pug-pvp players in the bg. i think what alot of us want is to able to BG with people *on our own level* instead of having to spam heals on an 80 wearing blues with 0 resil, which happens to be the case ALOT for us poor allies...then again, maybe my battlegroup sucks. either way, i think you're taking his "chaos" bit a little far, he was just mentioning the lack of strategy in BG's as opposed to each and every movement and click having a serious consequence in arena. as for engineering, i agree that the arena kiddies are practically forcing US to adapt to their lame "lets fight in this 1 boring room" concept of pvp.

btw, reacting to his opinion like that is a good way to reveal yourself as one of those keyboard smashers that files tickets when you lose to ppl like me in a duel :P he wasnt crying, he was stating an opinion that many of us feel in tune with. get over it.

[TheBloodKrayze]

Unlike someone like you, probably just pop cooldowns and hopes to win.

Funny thing is...that's how 90% of arena matches go

Arena doesn't show skill, to an extent it does but for the most part it's the FotM re-rollers playing OP comps.

[Deleted]

ITT: people who think "BG playing people" = bad.

If you play BGs, does it make you bad? No.
If you play arena, does it make you good? No.

You CAN play arena and be as retarded as the "BG guys" you people think everyone playing em are.
You CAN play BGs and be as coordinated and skilled PvPer as the ones playing arena.

I know that in ALMOST every BG you join, you're doomed to have at least a few idiots just farming HKs and not knowing what the fuck to do, but that doesn't mean everyone who plays BGs rather than arena is like that.

I hate arena not because of the "competitive" side of it, but because it's all setup-whoring with FOTM classes in all brackets except 5v5, and there it's as zergrushing as 40v40 AV with everyone fighting in the middle might be.

[ScorchHellfire]

You act like rated bgs have gone live in order to be taken away from so called bgers... a feature has to be accessible in the first place before it can be considered taken away...

[Mafic]

I will state the case of how Rated BGs were stolen from BGers and is now being given to the Arena players. Following Ill give proof that this is the case.

This happened when it became clear that many many people liked that Rated BGs were being added and alot of old timers were reactivating their accounts for them. At this point Blizzard had what they saw as a problem because so many pvpers hate Arena that they were afraid the only ones doing Arena would be the diehard Arena fans.

Obviously this bothers the Devs because the main one in charge of PvP , Kalgan, is a huge advocate of Arena. But at same time they have to put in Rated bgs because so many people wanted access to top tier weapons via BGs because many prefer bgs over arena and felt they shouldnt be punished for it.

So what does Blizzard do? They get all the BGers excited about rateds and then proceed to work to bring back Isle of Que style world pv and add in another Wintergrasp. All things that the bulk of Pvpers prefer over Arena. So after everyone is excited and deciding to either stick around for Cat or reactivate? They start manipulating the Rateds to cater to Arena players. I give you proof

1. Battle for Gilneas: What should be a 40v40 BG is not. Its a 10 man which is just ridiculous. It should have been at least 15.

2. Twin Peaks: What should be a 15v15 BG is not. Its a 10 man. Its WSG rehashed and perhaps even made into a more of a stricter strat ala arena.

Let me explain. The only oddball in the bunch below is WSG as it should be.
WSG-10 man
AB -15 man
EOTS-15 man
SotA- 15 man
AV- 40 man
IoC- 40 man

Heres how this caters to Arena players. 10 man BGs are much more structered and require strict comps unlike 15 where you are more flexible and flexible doesnt mean lame it means it opens the bg to more randomness. Which is in fact HARDER to deal with than strict comps. 10 man BGs are much much more like Arena than 15s or 40s. Its basically 2 arena teams. Besides 15 would have made it easier for guilds to constantly run BGs most weeks.

3. No Consumables or Engineering items. WTF. I mean really. Why the hell would you do that unless you are catering to the Arena crowd.

4. Removing 25 man rateds. Again this caters to the Arena crowd. 2 less weeks of no ten man arena style bgs. I dont know how many of you have ever been in premade AVs squaring off but its the best BGing you will ever encounter. Sadly its pretty rare the past couple years.

Arena people hate randomness. They hate chaos. They hate anything other than strict comps with strict movements. Its a twitch game for them. They dont want to think they only want to react. In Arena for every Action there is a set reaction. Its garbage. In BGs you cant predict whats going to happen. Their is no set strat because you never know what you are going to face. Thats what makes BGs so much better than Arenas. Id say that Blizzard just doesnt get that but I dont actually believe that. I think they know exactly what they are doing. They are just trying to leech off the BGers by converting the BGs to cater to them.


Honestly I could probably stomach the 10 mans even though it really pisses me off that they manipulated the BG people like that but the consumables and engineering removal is too much. I am honestly not buying Cat for either one of my accounts until that is removed and my accounts will be canceled. I have no motivation to play nor have i for very long time but i kept my accounts active for no good reason. I was thinking of quitting wow for good until i heard about rateds.

Kalgan/Blizz...Get your Arena crap the f*** out of my BGs. Stop manipulating WoWs pvp landscape to cater to you personally, it was bad enough that you ruined UO pvp. Leave the BGs alone. Leave it as anything goes. Put the 2 new bgs to 15 per side. Then go sit with a few of your buddies and kill each other over and over in Arena.


BG Fans, Strike and Petition now or pay later. Tell Blizzard we dont want their Arena crap in our BGs. Demand the new BGs go to 15 man to Break the Arena mold. WSG should remain a niche bg like the 40s.

Some of you might disagree with me on this but I am telling you these moves are done ENTIRELY with Arena people in mind. Screw that. They already have Arenas.

All they had to do was create the illusion of an 'alternate choice" for people to gobble it all up, when in reality nothing has changed.

[Jimusmc]

all the elitist arena kids combine into one thread.

works everytime.

[Yooya]

Funny thing is...that's how 90% of arena matches go

Arena doesn't show skill, to an extent it does but for the most part it's the FotM re-rollers playing OP comps.

And 90%, clearly arbitrary number is arbitrary, of Starcraft 2 players ride on cheesy strategies. I guess there is no skill in Starcraft 2.

[bak00777]

i have always chosen BG as my prefered stlye of BG, I like feeling like im apart of a huge army fighting another huge army. When i heard of rated BGs i thought it would be a normal BG that i would get arena type ranks and points for contributing to the fight. I didnt think they would be the way they are now. I hate 10man BGs, 15 are ok, but i prefer the bigger ones. Think about it, we are fighting to gain controll of the land/resources, why would we send 10 people in to fight a war?

[Tyberes]

i agree more with the BFG (lolbackronym) part then anything, also it shoulda been an urban BG in the city.

[Mafic]

Blizzard says you don't need a static team, but the most optimal RBG group set ups will require static teams with maybe a few player being rotated in for utmost competitive play.

[Shoolace]

Main thing just give it a chance. Maybe you will like it. I'm like bg's and glad to see the rated bg. The worst thing about bgs now are the alts with no epics in there which will be done with once this hits.

[Briellas]

What did you think rated bgs would be?

im glad it wont be 5 afkers 4 rogues and a warrior.

or 9 other pugs none of them healers.

Put together a pro team and roflstomp 2 5v5 teams 4heals 2 utility 4 monster deeps.

[Mafic]

Basically they are sucking all the fun out of BG's, which is sad to see.

[Kevin2107]

They took out Engineering items because people who had them had a huge advantage over people who didnt. Do you know how many times I've won an arena simply because I've had boots, been able to do just enough damage just to kill an opponent because I had rocket gloves, barely won a match because of my alchemy potion?

These two professions gave a clear advantage to those who didnt had it, and in high rated matches everyone had it.

And im assuming this moron has never tried to have schedule 5s before, imagine trying to schedule 25v25 lul, we'll be lucky if we have 20 teams actually able to play in the entire battlegroup.

also who the hell is only a "BG player" you must be utter crap at the game if you are .

[Gratlim]

Just wait and see, but as soon as they said that the best rewards would be the same for Arena or BG, we knew what to expect. RBG are the new arena, BUT the main flow of arena was wotlk lolburst on 1 guy and finish the rest later, 2-3 min later it's finished (cleave teams etc). I did that as well and it takes no skills, just a focus macro, so saying arena=skill is just a joke.
This burstfest won't be possible in a RBG as you NEED to play objectives in order to win.

As a casual BG player, but ex-arena player, I am really happy about RBG and hope that I will be able to motivate pve players (some of them being skilled pvp players) from my little guild to give it a go.

The only drawback imo: wait times for premades, wait times for normal bgs will suffer.