Battleground Horde/Alliance Win Ratio, Setup of the Month

[Deleted]

I'll start with a reminder: the opposite od "to win" is "to lose", NOT "to loose". Please translate "loose" to your native language.

Whatever. I just made my own bar graph to show how it is bad and (intentionally?) misleading.
It's AV from the first OP picture.

Sorry for bad quality, I was too lazy, but you probably get my point. The difference is about 1%, but it still makes ppl like OMG THEY ALWAYS WIN WTF M GONNA REROLL.

PS: I personally hope these graphs will make ppl reroll horde. They'll get a hard lesson.

[Felyna]

very informative graphs there! I had been curious about it all. I would also have asked for battlegroup breakdown, but since all BG's are region-wide there's no point.

They're all within acceptable amounts, no real run away in any battleground for either side, which is good to see. EotS is a 16 point spread, but it's still far from the days in Vanilla where it felt like I would win WSG maybe 20% on alliance side.

Also remembering the old flamewars about Horde base vs Alliance base in AV, ah good times those. I do miss those long 12 hour battles. I wouldn't stay for the whole thing of course, but there was something epic about fighting tooth and nail to keep them off your GY and Towers. They werent the most fun I've ever had, but it's better than the rushfest that it turned into.

[Deleted]

Hmm looks abut right takes 7-8 BGs before i see a win normally on one day

[Vervaine]

The heights are deceiving.

[Keosen]

/fixed

Waaaaay better now.
Thanks

[Gruffertus]

Weird - when I was last PVPping from both sides (about 3-4 years ago now) the server I was on had a sizable Alliance population imbalance, a definite tendency for Horde to win BGs, and much shorter queues on the Horde side. I always thought that made sense - if you have 20 Horde players vs 40 Alliance for a 20-person BG, the Horde will get to go as soon as they want, and half the alliance will always be waiting for the other half to finish.

We assumed that the difference in quality was partly due to the fact that the average Horde PVPer would simply have played more than the equivalently keen Alliance, and partly due to what Rilec was saying about new people coming to the genre and sticking with the 'good guys'. Certainly the teamwork on the Alliance side was horrible compared with the Horde.

[QQingshaman]

Ok due to the samples being so big, i doubt that the hord win ratio is due to a different, possibly more skilled and mature player base. With such a big amount of players its more then likely that the different types of players is spread out between factions. In my opinion such a difference in win ratios is down to the difference in racial abilities between Hord and Alliance. Thats the only logical reason for such a difference. And has you can see in AV where the racials are not so game braking due to the huge teams the difference is not there.

different looks for the races, different lore behind the races, even just casting animations can be a deciding point for which race to play. there are many reasons why different types of people would go to different factions.

[Deleted]

2 seconds of silences or stuns is nothing in pvp

2 seconds is actually a lot in pvp if you know how to appropriately use and chain disruptive cooldowns. 2 seconds is all it takes to get someone from 10% to 0, have them drop the flag they're carrying (or kill the supporting healer) - and return it to base to score.

Its not 'just' 2 seconds, its 2 seconds on top of other forms of CC (varying in efficiency depending on the classes involved - yes). And that can make a significant difference when used appropriately. Now fortunately, a lot of horde (including you seemingly) don't use them that well - and its not infrequent I find myself getting torrented (in particular) completely unwarranted, even in 1v1s. But when used by a good player - it can be incredibly potent. Is it situational? Yes. But those situations are going to occur every now and then - and when they do, those racials are incredible. Alliance does not have any comparable racial which can equally influence 'the moment' like that.

[Conceptx]

In my experience, this data has must have a large portion taken from lower level Battlegrounds. Either way, quite interesting.

[Eddyz]

Aly always failed at BG, because aly queue so fast, and too many people AFK and bots, other players dont care report AFK and bots => epic failed

[Zaydin]

Aly always failed at BG, because aly queue so fast, and too many people AFK and bots, other players dont care report AFK and bots => epic failed

I dunno. Whenever I'm in a BG and I see someone jsut sitting at the spawn point, I report them AFK. They never get booted, though; must do something to avoid getting kicked out.

[Paulosio]

Those graphs are horrible. If you don't take the time to actually read them properly they make it look like horde is massively winning in all BG's except for AV....

For the record the results for the past years BG's show 54/46 win ratio in favour of the horde.... in other words it's very close to perfectly balanced. If alliance won an extra 2 BG's out of 100 it would be perfectly balanced and that really is nothing. Even something as small as the horde having slightly better racials could be enough to explain the slightly better results for horde....

Guess this ends all the "horde always win all the BG's debate".

P.S a mod should really update this post and sort out those graphs.... or get rid of them and just state the results in % numbers as even that would be clearer.

[Deleted]

Now I know I will probably be flamed for that, but here is my analysis of the numbers:

- Horde dominates because of inherent people orientation disparity. In short, more pvp-oriented people play horde because they think Horde is more bad ass. Which means the percentage of people who are "mediocre +" at pvp is higher in Horde than Alliance. This in itself explains that statistically, you have less "really bad" players on the horde side in a battleground.

- Because it is the only map not following that pattern, it is safe to say that Alterac Valley is an unbalanced map. It has been for 5 years, so nothing new here. It just gives proof of it. All in all, it's not that bad since it gives at least one map where Alliance has an easier time farming achievements !

[lockos]

Well this statistic graphic tells me what i already know from the 5 years i play wow
hordes wins more in all the bgs excep av i think that most of the ppl that doing pvp for a long time they know this.

But even it is nice to have a picture of what happens in bgs in general i don't think that it is really accurate one.
i am saying this because my stats have bugged since i downloaded the last patch before cataclysm.

so my win ratio is about 75% on my main char.but if you check my stats on armory it says that i have a win ratio 50%
also since cata was launced every win i do it counts as a lose......
i talked with a lot of gms and did what they told me to do ( delete wtf and other folders delete addons do rpr etc.)
nothing fixed it and my stats are bugged.

so i don't think i am the only one that has this issue propably more ppl from both sides have it so i am afraid the stats from the graphic might not be so accurate.

from my PERSONAL experience and only from that which means it is a tiny sample of bg games horde have a 25% higher win ratio on every bg except av.

[Richtea]

Nice, liking the info.
Now if we could only see TB as well...

Also remembering the old flamewars about Horde base vs Alliance base in AV, ah good times those. I do miss those long 12 hour battles. I wouldn't stay for the whole thing of course, but there was something epic about fighting tooth and nail to keep them off your GY and Towers. They werent the most fun I've ever had, but it's better than the rushfest that it turned into.

Just five people can completely screw the "zerg" tactic, and we generally do if we're running BGs in my guild. Just hang about and recap your bunkers/towers, move between them often. The fight really bogs down and you end up going for a reinforcement victory (one or two people taking mines is good as well). Not quite the "epic" fights of vanilla, but makes the whole experience in AV much better than the PvE race it became.

Also, I've never agreed with the (apparent) ally bias in AV. I always found it much easier to ride all the way into the alliance base on my horde toon, remember when the horde gate dismounted you (great times...), and the bottleneck on the alliance side meant they could effectively be contained in the top half of the map while no such bottleneck exists on the horde side (granted this works both ways, but it always seemed easier to take and hold that point as horde despite it being in the ally half of the map).

[Deleted]

But even it is nice to have a picture of what happens in bgs in general i don't think that it is really accurate one.
i am saying this because my stats have bugged since i downloaded the last patch before cataclysm.

The total BGs won / played is bugged, thats easy to verify - but I'm not sure that the stats for each individual BG is, and its those that MMO pulled.

[crayven]

Or it may be the fact AV brings in best amount of honor and is the only one that feels like a large scale battle and not random idiotic skirmish with 10 ( wtf ) people running around.
Alliance folks tend to be very pragmatic about their choices. Not getting involved if they don't see a clear finality in things.
PvPing just for the sake of it and running into "middle duelers" is not a good incentive enough.

[lockos]

The total BGs won / played is bugged, thats easy to verify - but I'm not sure that the stats for each individual BG is, and its those that MMO pulled.

well i hoped they did that:0 and propably they did it because they have seperated stats for each bg and anot the total result:0
i didn't noticed that

[Mandrew]

good data but very misleading chart

[theturn]

Request: can you make the same graphs with the vertical (Y) axis going from 0 to 100 since we're talking about percentages? The graph as it is shows great differences where they are actually quite minor.

Minor???? 54 v 46 is minor?????

If this were an election the word landslide would be used. And add that the sample size is probably in the millions.

FYI this doesn't surprise me at all