Too much WSG?
Too much WSG?
Hey,
We have that mechanism in place that ensures the battleground that pops is always WSG when there are few players queuing. However, given the events of lately it's happening more often than it usually would. I believe it has started to wear people off, so I wonder if the idea of also having AB, and even maybe EOTS more often would be interesting?
Leaving a poll,
Regards
We have that mechanism in place that ensures the battleground that pops is always WSG when there are few players queuing. However, given the events of lately it's happening more often than it usually would. I believe it has started to wear people off, so I wonder if the idea of also having AB, and even maybe EOTS more often would be interesting?
Leaving a poll,
Regards
- blagovest_tonev
- Posts: 288
- Joined: 09 Oct 2013 17:26
Re: Too much WSG?
Yeah, personally gave up on battlegrounds because of the 24/7 WSG.
Re: Too much WSG?
I'd like to see more AB. It actually requires cooperation and tactics compared to WSG and EOTS.
EOTS is all about playing ring-around-the-rosie in a clockwise or counter-clockwise motion on the map to capture bases (that too in the most boring manner possible - by standing around) while some random bloke runs the flag to one of the 4 corners (or dies trying).
WSG is all about capturing the flag with FAP or just pvp'ing to the death at any x,y point on the map.
So more AB. Definitely.
EOTS is all about playing ring-around-the-rosie in a clockwise or counter-clockwise motion on the map to capture bases (that too in the most boring manner possible - by standing around) while some random bloke runs the flag to one of the 4 corners (or dies trying).
WSG is all about capturing the flag with FAP or just pvp'ing to the death at any x,y point on the map.
So more AB. Definitely.
Re: Too much WSG?
I personally wouldn't enjoy playing 3v3 AB or EOTS, since you would spend more time capping flags than actually doing PvP. I don't know how many people at the moment is exactly needed for AB/EOTS to start, but, it would need at least 5v5/6v6 to be somewhat viable.
- benzviliran
- Posts: 1342
- Joined: 16 Mar 2013 05:46
- Location: Israel (the Jewish state)
Re: Too much WSG?
agree, eots and ab cannot reach its fun potentional without a minimum of 10 players each group.Boxis wrote:I personally wouldn't enjoy playing 3v3 AB or EOTS, since you would spend more time capping flags than actually doing PvP. I don't know how many people at the moment is exactly needed for AB/EOTS to start, but, it would need at least 5v5/6v6 to be somewhat viable.
starting eots or ab with less than that other than starting WSG is the worst idea ever.
I am the swarm
Re: Too much WSG?
The funny act is few weeks ago i asked about less requrment players for bg's to pop more ab / eots / sota / av / ioc
and everyone rejected it , .. now a staff is asking for it
REKT
and everyone rejected it , .. now a staff is asking for it
REKT
Beating Everything In WoW -> Ghost <-
Get Rekt , Get Rekt , Get Rekt = RBG
Get Rekt , Get Rekt , Get Rekt = Not RBG
Get Rekt , Get Rekt , Get Rekt = RBG
Get Rekt , Get Rekt , Get Rekt = Not RBG
Re: Too much WSG?
I prefer Warsong Gulch over the larger battlegrounds when there are less than 10 players. Often, I just end up AFK defending a base in Arathi Basin, because there is no player in sight.
With the line of sight 'fix', Arathi Basin is the only map that doesn't feel strange when it comes to LoS-issues. Eye of the Storm is a mess (none of the rocks provide LoS), so I would most certainly prefer Arathi Basin over Eye of the Storm.
I don't play too many battlegrounds, so the more active players might have a different opinion about it.
With the line of sight 'fix', Arathi Basin is the only map that doesn't feel strange when it comes to LoS-issues. Eye of the Storm is a mess (none of the rocks provide LoS), so I would most certainly prefer Arathi Basin over Eye of the Storm.
I don't play too many battlegrounds, so the more active players might have a different opinion about it.
Re: Too much WSG?
I actually prefer WSG over all. It's my favorite and have been since... Forever
Never heard a complaint about it either
Never heard a complaint about it either
.
“ There's things that never will be right I know, and things need changin' everywhere you go.
But 'til we start to make a move to make a few things right,
You'll never see me wear a suit of white. ”
- J.R Cash
“ There's things that never will be right I know, and things need changin' everywhere you go.
But 'til we start to make a move to make a few things right,
You'll never see me wear a suit of white. ”
- J.R Cash
Re: Too much WSG?
Yeah, obviously not 3v3 AB as that would be awful But 5v5 or 6v6 could be consistent considering more players could join later. I thought about Eots, but perhaps Eots may indeed feel a bit dull.Boxis wrote:I personally wouldn't enjoy playing 3v3 AB or EOTS, since you would spend more time capping flags than actually doing PvP. I don't know how many people at the moment is exactly needed for AB/EOTS to start, but, it would need at least 5v5/6v6 to be somewhat viable.
Re: Too much WSG?
We need more Strand of the Ancient. /thread
- Justicelight
- Donor
- Posts: 1130
- Joined: 05 Dec 2011 21:47
- Location: Romania
Re: Too much WSG?
Due to having small population, WSG is the best bg that can happen, ofcourse putting aside the fapping druids. In a PVP world, you would want more often player vs player interaction, and WSG offers the grounds for it, better than any other bg.
I would even recommend starting a second WSG instead of SOTA, a lot of players avoid queueing because it is SOTA. Just imagine a 9vs9 WSG compared to SOTA or EOTS. AB is great bg, so I would like WSG more often then AB and then SOTA.
I would even recommend starting a second WSG instead of SOTA, a lot of players avoid queueing because it is SOTA. Just imagine a 9vs9 WSG compared to SOTA or EOTS. AB is great bg, so I would like WSG more often then AB and then SOTA.
"I write about the power of trying, because I want to be okay with failing. I write about generosity because I battle selfishness. I write about joy because I know sorrow. I write about faith because I almost lost mine, and I know what it is to be broken and in need of redemption. I write about gratitude because I am thankful - for all of it."
Re: Too much WSG?
120 people online at peak hours, who the fuck cares what bg is going on? i'm surprised there's a bg to begin with
Re: Too much WSG?
there isnt bg you are right, there is 120 online but .... 85 are hordes and 35 are ally, but from those 35 ally are only 10 lvl 80Cocopuffs wrote:120 people online at peak hours, who the fuck cares what bg is going on? i'm surprised there's a bg to begin with
Re: Too much WSG?
Boxis wrote:I personally wouldn't enjoy playing 3v3 AB or EOTS, since you would spend more time capping flags than actually doing PvP. I don't know how many people at the moment is exactly needed for AB/EOTS to start, but, it would need at least 5v5/6v6 to be somewhat viable.
Re: Too much WSG?
WSG is annoying sometimes bcuz of FAP but its the closest to real pvp ...
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests