Blizzard: Arenas were a mistake

[Necroxis]

Im not sure where to put this but since Arenas fall under PvP...here ya go.

WarCry interviewed WoW's Rob Pardo,Executive VP of Game Design, to say their greatest achievements and greatest mistakes of WoW:

WarCry Interviews Rob Pardo (http://www.warcry.com/articles/view/interviews/6773-Five-Years-of-Warcraft-Speaking-With-Blizzards-Rob-Pardo)


As for the biggest mistake? There's a lot of them that I think, were ... they just "fell out" of things. One example: I wish the servers were more stable when we launched, of course - there's a lot of that sort of thing. We have a lot of excuses for that - we didn't expect nearly the response - but we can't say it wasn't a mistake. If I was going to pick on a game design thing that I look back on and think was a mistake? We really never designed WoW to be a competitive e-sports game; it was something that we decided to start tackling because there was such a desire and demand to evolve it in that direction, to introduce competitive arenas. I'm not sure that that was the right thing to do with the game.

We didn't engineer the game and classes and balance around it, we just added it on, so it continues to be very difficult to balance. Is WoW a PvE cooperative game, or a competitive PvP game? There's constant pressure on the class balance team, there's pressure on the game itself, and a lot of times players who don't PvP don't understand why their classes are changing. I don't think we ever foresaw how much tuning and tweaking we'd have to do to balance it in that direction. Either I'd go back in time to before WoW ever shipped and change the rules to make the basic game more conductive for being an e-sport, or if not that, just say it doesn't make sense. Right now, WoW has a bit of a schizophrenic philosophy behind it, and we're trying to figure out how to guide it.

It's tricky, now that we've gone down that road, because we have a passionate, large audience that enjoys it - the Arena, the e-sport - so we can't just chop off that head. We can't just say, "We fouled up and will go back to how it used to be before," because we have a really passionate audience that wants it in the game.

If I could go back in time before we shipped WoW, I would have either made serious changes to basic class balance to facilitate that type of play, or if I went back to when we had the idea two years later, I would have said, "Maybe we shouldn't go there."

Not really trying to stir the pot or create tons of arguments, I just found this incredibly interesting. I think the reason I posted this is because PvPers have a tendency of thinking this game should revolve around them, when, in-fact, WoW was initially designed as a PvE game. I'm glad that Blizzard at least realizes that its a pain in the ass to try and change their entire game because some abilities are broken in PvP but not PvE

[Irontoe]

I think the reason I posted this is because PvPers have a tendency of thinking this game should revolve around them, when, in-fact, WoW was initially designed as a PvE game.

That is exactly the wrong conclusion to draw from what he said. World of Warcraft PvP was always designed with large groups in mind until arenas. He did NOT say "We should never have introduced battlegrounds" or "world PvP objectives really screw up class balance." He said specifically that arenas were the problem -- class balance started getting screwy when PvP stopped focusing on how well people worked together in a group and more on tweaking 1v1 and 2v2 play in highly artificial environments.

[Yatokth]

I've had this discussion with many people.

There's no reason it can't be both.

But in arenas, you have to balance abilities and counters around human reaction time and player skill, moving targets, and you can't predict what every player will do. It's more complex, there's alot more testing involved.

It would be easier, were they to re-design the game, to balance the PvP, and then build a balanced PvE system around that PvP, because you could tweak whatever numbers necessary of bosses and encounters.

Yes, you have to balance relative damage outputs which makes it more difficult, but I don't think Blizzard isn't up the task, they're pretty close as it is.

[Necroxis]

I've had this discussion with many people.

There's no reason it can't be both.

But in arenas, you have to balance abilities and counters around human reaction time and player skill, moving targets, and you can't predict what every player will do. It's more complex, there's alot more testing involved.

It would be easier, were they to re-design the game, to balance the PvP, and then build a balanced PvE system around that PvP, because you could tweak whatever numbers necessary of bosses and encounters.

Yes, you have to balance relative damage outputs which makes it more difficult, but I don't think Blizzard isn't up the task, they're pretty close as it is.

I agree, and Irontoe I should have clarified my point. You are absolutely right about the World PvP vs Arenas.

[Cristok]

I think what he said has long been 'felt' by the community. The e-sport thing is -alot- of what keeps folks grinding and playing and liking this thing.

Quoted:

WoW has all types of people who play it - a politician in Guam, lawyers, teachers, etc. Who do you think was the most unusual person you've ever encountered playing WoW? A "I would have never pegged you as the type" moment?

I don't know if I have a singular person, but the ones that always surprise me the most are the really elderly ones. The people who are not only new to games, but then here they are in Battlegrounds - 70-year-old ladies in BGs. They surprise me the most. We usually think that that generation doesn't play games period, let alone something that's on the PC, online.

End Quote:

My identity has been discovered...

[Fhenrir]

Relevant wall-o-text from MSN, with some of the fluff edited out for easier reading. Posted partly because it could add some interesting points to the thread, but mostly to spite Yat's desire to stay out of this discussion. Feel free to skip if you don't want to read a big discussion between me and Yat about this thread:


Fhenrir: This discussion that Necroxis posted is pretty interesting.

Yatokth: Not terribly surprised. But I've had that discussion so many times I probably won't post again, what I said are my views heh

Fhenrir: Makes sense. That's actually the first PvP-related topic I think I disagree with you on, though.

Yatokth: o rly

Fhenrir: Yeah. I believe the formula does not lend itself well to being both a competitive e-sports style PvP game as well as a PvE game, and believe strongly that (what I see as) the biggest flaws in both systems can be attributed to the existance of the other system.

Yatokth: Why do you say that?

Fhenrir: I think that, as things stand, it just doesn't work very well to have the ability to seriously compete in both arenas and PvE with one character. You have examples of racials that would fall into good but not retarded (EMfH), except that PvE trinkets can be substituted. You have classes like rogues that have always scaled with PvE gear in PvP, along with just the way melee in general tends to scale to retarded levels near the end of each expansion.

Yatokth: both of those problems are fixable though

Fhenrir: You also have the fact that most talents have to be balanced carefully around both aspects of the game. Classes like paladins are retardedly difficult for them to balance based on the desired versatility.

Yatokth: Prot spec is the only reason they're imbalanced, and the only reason it's imbalanced is cause it does so much fucking damage, and the only reason it does so much fucking damage is that for NO APPARENT REASON, they changed threat into damage. Holy/Prot is dead in the good brackets. Holy and ret are pretty balanced.

Fhenrir: Threat = damage was done for a good reason though. PvE versatility and the ability for those classes to function on their own. The same reason healing power was removed.

Yatokth: I somehow doubt Protadins need to be able to two shot all non-elites. Heroic/Non-heroic raids and ilvl scaling has put damage WAY beyond health pools.

Fhenrir: Right, my point is that these are all issues that have come about through the attempt to balance the game for two entirely different play elements.

Yatokth: That's because they started with the one where they can control more variables, then put the second one in, when it should be the other way around. From a practical standpoint, my love for PvP over PvE entirely aside.

Fhenrir: Right, for sure. The VP pointed that out in the interview too.

Yatokth: Exactly. I don't think they can't do it, it would just take some doing. They're PRETTY close, or at least closer than they've ever been.

Fhenrir: I'm not as quick to agree on that. I think, especially with the introduction of a new expansion, it would be incredibly difficult for them to pull off a more balanced synergy. The amount of work it would take to balance it for both types of play while introducing a whole new set of instances, PvP set ups, and their huge amount of reworking going into the classes already is just going to be hectic.

Yatokth: Ah, but think about this; PvP balance is nothing more than a series of class changes and prolonged testing. They're already reworking EVERY class. Now is the time to work stuff out to be more balanced.

Fhenrir: I agree, if they're going to do it, Cat is the time.

Yatokth: They essentially are halfway there. They just need to take the initiative and finish the job.

Fhenrir: How so?

Yatokth: I mean like, they're already redoing every class. Not entirely, but all of the talent trees. And to top it off, they will have EIGHT SEASONS of arena experience, which, in my opinion, with the exception of season 5, have for the most part improved in quality as they went along.

Fhenrir: I think that the rebalancing is going to make it a lot harder than you're considering, though. Keep in mind that they have a fuck load of work to do just keeping the PvE audience happy.

Yatokth: They know what the arena system needs. And I'll be honest, right now, the game is pretty damn close to being balanced. In fact I would go as far as to say from a pure BALANCE standpoint, we're the closest we've ever been. There are still glaring problems, but it's up there.

Fhenrir: It's just my opinion that WoW is much better suited to group-based PvP and large scale PvE, ala Vanilla. I love arenas, but I think the competitive style of them has damaged both styles of play considerably. The problem isn't that it -can't- support both styles of play, but that it was never intended to.

Yatokth: Well they said themselves they're not about to nuke one of the styles. So why not do extra work, and integrate them? Trust me, I agree, if WoW was a World PvP based game with 40 man raids still, I'd be playing the fuck out of it. But the direction they've taken the game is definitely a salvageable one, and it's also fun.

Fhenrir: I actually loved doing both things when I played, so I want to see them fix it. I also think it's plausible. My difference comes from the fact that I think it's a bit further off and harder to accomplish than you may be giving it credit for. In essence, I disagree that it is close.

Yatokth: So here's my question. Why do you disagree it isn't close?

Fhenrir: Because PvE has been a dismal failure this expansion.

Yatokth: Oooooh. I meant PvP balance. PvE has been a dismal failure because they made it too fucking easy.

Fhenrir: I'm talking the scope and balance of the whole game, as the discussion was based around trying to balance the game for both set ups. Perhaps I have approached the wrong man on the subject. 'Cause I'm one of those crazy fucks that loves PvE -and- PvP.

Yatokth: Well here was my stance. They're close on PvP balance right now. With a revamp of classes already happening, they can nail it. Or you know, get closer, as perfect balance is a pipe dream. Afterwards, they build a great PvE game in addition to that, because now that they don't have to worry about making too many changes and brainstorming all this crap. So they can worry about relative damage levels and such, and then design good encounters (not making stupid set bonuses like LOL BLOOD PLAGUE CAN CRIT would help too).

Fhenrir: Pretty much. I'd expect something like this on a much grander scale with the new MMO they're working on.

Yatokth: Yeah see I when I said close, I meant, close to making a great PvP game, which they can then balance off of to make a great PvE game, which makes a great PvE AND PvP game, where I might actually do both.

Fhenrir: Word. I'm not sure they'll make the effort to do it, though. I would love to see it, but I'm not expecting either scenario at this point. I've adopted a wait and see approach, basically.

Yatokth: Oh me neither. I'm certainly not expecting them to have the same thought process as me. It's just the ideal scenario.

Fhenrir: Agreed. And I think the ideal scenario sounds like a bitch for them to pull off. Since, at the same time, they'll have to try and make both PvP and PvE compelling enough to keep people interested. (Which, at least for PvE, they failed horribly at this expansion)

Yatokth: Yeah.



TL;DR: I believe PvP and PvE, while both having problems of their own, tend to see a lot more problems arise from the balancing team having to work on both systems. I feel the primary examples are PvE gear being brought into PvP, and PvP talent changes messing up PvE.

Yat smells funny.

[Yatokth]

Fhenrir is a terrible mod.

And I'll be interested to see what they'll do with this new MMO.

[Ryoku]

Fhenrir is a terrible mod.

And I'll be interested to see what they'll do with this new MMO.

I want them to go the opposite.

They have a casual game designed in it's origin to focus on PvE, why not have a game built up with PvP in mind, and maybe more geared to the less casual (though, I wouldn't mind another casual game. Nobody likes a grind)

Also, I'd like to see something more gritty with a mature rating.

[Jeedup]

I never understood why they didnt bother trying to just seperate what can be used in Arenas, and what can be used outside of arenas. Sort of like a seperate spellbook, same ablities, but with restrictions for 'fairness' (note the quotes).

Once arenas came into play, balancing 'OPness' in PvP and PvE gets harder and harder.

I will still stand by that WoW was (and is) a PvE game...BUT...it's evolved into a good PvP one as well. They're just having to sort out the mutated fetuses from the good ones.

[Rand_Shea]

Having modifiers that only work in arenas isn't that much of a step, either. They all ready do it with things like rocketboots not being able to be used along with potions and non-conjured food.

[Ryoku]

I never understood why they didnt bother trying to just seperate what can be used in Arenas, and what can be used outside of arenas. Sort of like a seperate spellbook, same ablities, but with restrictions for 'fairness' (note the quotes).

Once arenas came into play, balancing 'OPness' in PvP and PvE gets harder and harder.

I will still stand by that WoW was (and is) a PvE game...BUT...it's evolved into a good PvP one as well. They're just having to sort out the mutated fetuses from the good ones.

They do to a point.

Imagine an arena where a Paladin LoH's, or a Druid Rebirths his teammate.

[Chikt]

When you make a game, you make it with ideas in your head as to what could be added to it later down the line. What could you do to make it perfect. Blizzard had PvP in mind when they made WoW. I do not doubt Arenas were always in their mind from the get go, they just didn't know if there was an interest for them.

So when they knew there WAS an interest - a demand, even - they went and did it, even if the game currently didn't really allow for it. That's Game Design. It's an iterative process. You add and work on things over time and expect to get it right eventually, not immediately. A lot of it is experimentation.

Were Arenas a mistake? I think they were at the time. Are they a mistake -now-? No. But they still need a lot of work.

[Ansha]

Since I hate arenas and miss when BGs were the only forum for PvP, it should be obvious I think it was a mistake for Blizzard to add arenas to the game.

As for WoW's nature, I think it was far wiser for them to make a PvE game and add PvP to it than the reverse. WAR is a perfect example of a PvP game where PvE was just sort of 'tacked on'--and it's less fun for it. Conversely, LotRO is definitely a PvE, story-driven game and is doing much better than WAR. The fact that there is really only a small role for PvP does not bother the player base there.

I certainly hope they learn from others' mistakes and don't try to make WoW 2 a PvP-centered game. They'd lose a lot of potential subscribers that way.

[Yatokth]

Since I hate arenas and miss when BGs were the only forum for PvP, it should be obvious I think it was a mistake for Blizzard to add arenas to the game.

As for WoW's nature, I think it was far wiser for them to make a PvE game and add PvP to it than the reverse. WAR is a perfect example of a PvP game where PvE was just sort of 'tacked on'--and it's less fun for it. Conversely, LotRO is definitely a PvE, story-driven game and is doing much better than WAR. The fact that there is really only a small role for PvP does not bother the player base there.

I certainly hope they learn from others' mistakes and don't try to make WoW 2 a PvP-centered game. They'd lose a lot of potential subscribers that way.

You completely missed my point, I'm not saying "MAKE PVP MORE IMPORTANT AND TACK ON PVE!!" that's not it at all.

Design a PvP-friendly system first, because it is more challenging, and requires more variables and then build a PvE-friendly system about it, and you will have a game that supports both very well.

That's the simplified version, it'd still be hard, but it's very doable as long as you keep in mind that you will eventually want both.

[Ansha]

You completely missed my point, I'm not saying "MAKE PVP MORE IMPORTANT AND TACK ON PVE!!" that's not it at all.

Design a PvP-friendly system first, because it is more challenging, and requires more variables and then build a PvE-friendly system about it, and you will have a game that supports both very well.

That's the simplified version, it'd still be hard, but it's very doable as long as you keep in mind that you will eventually want both.

I was actually more replying to Ryoku:


I want them to go the opposite.

They have a casual game designed in it's origin to focus on PvE, why not have a game built up with PvP in mind, and maybe more geared to the less casual (though, I wouldn't mind another casual game. Nobody likes a grind)

Also, I'd like to see something more gritty with a mature rating.

Although I would actually like a grittier, mature-rated MMO. Dragon Age would be amazing on that count. (And no, Age of Conan doesn't count. If it's a fantasy MMO, it had better have elves in it or I ain't playing.)

[Necroxis]

You completely missed my point, I'm not saying "MAKE PVP MORE IMPORTANT AND TACK ON PVE!!" that's not it at all.

Design a PvP-friendly system first, because it is more challenging, and requires more variables and then build a PvE-friendly system about it, and you will have a game that supports both very well.

That's the simplified version, it'd still be hard, but it's very doable as long as you keep in mind that you will eventually want both.

Just out of curiosity...wasn't this what Warhammer aimed to do? I never played it but I kept getting told it was THE "pvp MMO" ...or tried to be.

[Yatokth]

Just out of curiosity...wasn't this what Warhammer aimed to do? I never played it but I kept getting told it was THE "pvp MMO" ...or tried to be.

Warhammer used a different PvP system than WoW, it required more numbers the game was able to sustain long-term, and it focused HEAVILY on a rock-paper-scissors system, which I personally despise, and enjoy the direction WoW's PvP has taken.

Plus WAR's lore doesn't grab me like WoW.

[Abric]

I can understand where Rob Pardo is coming from. I'm sure Blizzard would prefer to put all that man power they are wasting on class balance and put it into game content ... but unfortunately arena's did one great thing - it showed where the "I win" buttons were. The things that, when the game first came out, used to aggravate the shit out of everyone.

But of course, they have made new "I win" buttons. But now it deemed more fair because the statement "get more resilience" or "yeah, they can't do that in arena's" is put out there.

Unfortunately, from this point on everything they do is going to have to be revolved around PvP. But, some folks (Metzen) seem to be kicking and screaming and not wanting to go that route.

... I just got distracted by something shiny. I had another point to wrap into what he said to this, but I think I am off-track. Ah well - I'll jump on the thread in a bit about it. Nerf paladins.

[Rand_Shea]

Warhammer had a lot of potential and failed miserably to utilize any of it because they wanted to be so vastly 'different' from WoW and other MMO's.

Essentially they looked at what made everything else a success to whatever degree they were successful and said "Hey, let's do the opposite. A bunch of people want something different, they'll love that!", took a huge gamble, and lost.

WoW was initially made to be a PvE game, but with PvP in mind, and the first incarnations of pvp being made similar to PvE raids with 10-40 people working in tandem to accomplish a goal, with another 10-40 players acting as mobs, and there not being any actual bosses except for the ones in AV. Smaller-grouped pvp was secondary, though probably not unthought of.

Large scale pvp is much easier to balance than small scale pvp simply because of numbers. If one class has an ability to wipe out multiple other players without any noticeably higher level of skill, then it's easy to put a damper on that ability to make it less effective as an instant "I win" button.

Smaller scale pvp, though... most of that is centered around burst and overcoming burst. If a skill works fine in large scale pvp or in pve and is overpowered in small scale pvp, nerfing it is understandably just going to cripple the class in favor of trying to tone down its power in 2v2, 3v3, and 5v5s. And that is the problem Blizzard is dealing with when it comes to arenas, and why they're considered a mistake, because their implementation was done under the assumption that they would function the same way as large-scale pvp.

I don't think they regret arenas in general, just that they didn't find a better way of putting them into the game, since balancing PvE, large scale PvP, and small scale PvP has been a giant clusterfuck ever since.

[Skaadvik]

I fucking hate arenas. I do them because I get good gear from them.

[Jeedup]

Design a PvP-friendly system first, because it is more challenging, and requires more variables and then build a PvE-friendly system about it, and you will have a game that supports both very well.

I'm going to again, disagree with you here. And, at the same time...AGREE!

PvP isn't more challenging, or requires more variables than PvE, it just requires DIFFERENT ONES, which is where I feel Blizzard messed up (and as others have posted, me included, and yourself). I remember when you could tank in PvP gear cause Resilience did the same as Defence (though I think that was for Druids), as well as other bumbles in the past.

Oh great, Metzen hate. I'd really like to see a quote on that there Abric.

[Yatokth]

I don't see how you could claim that designing a potential battle where it is Player versus Computer (so you can balance all the DPS/Tank/Heal specs against each other to make everyone viable) would be just as difficult as Player versus Player (where you have to balance both relative damage (especially if you go with all DPS does about same damage formula) crowd control, utility, quicker reaction times, RNG is a bigger deal, and the plain old human factor where you don't know what one side is doing)

Not that PvE balance isn't intricate, it is, but if you start with a few basic tenents (Hybrid/Pure 5% damage rule, otherwise flatline damage in general, tank specs don't need to do massive amounts of burst damage, stuff like that that will keep both parts self-consistent) you should be able to build a good PvP and PvE game.

[Fynne]

To step in with the balance of PvE vs. the balance of PvP point...

A balanced PvP system will have limits, such as-- for example, having every class reasonably balanced with every other class.

A PvE system, however, does not have that constraint. Boss "gimmicks" allow encounters to be designed that intentionally throw that balance out the window to allow certain classes (or class groups, ex. "melee DPS", or "ranged magical DPS") to take a spotlight.

PvP also functions on a rating system, which lets players naturally create the flow of increased difficulty in relation to skill (because they'll be matched up against people who are also of increased skill, creating harder matches as they get better). With PvE content, this does not naturally occur; it has to be intentionally designed and then balanced (very carefully!) into the hard-mode versions of encounters.

[Sejarki]

I fucking hate arenas. I do them because I get good gear from them.

Pretty much this. The second the rewards get dropped is the second you'll see them die off. More so I've always felt that Battlegrounds always fit into the themes of Warcraft better than arenas did, which even conceptually felt tacked on.

Overall though I just think small scale fights are next to impossible to balance. Name me a fighting game where all characters are viable at high levels of play, you won't find one. Street Fighter 2 is closing in on being 2 decades old.

[Kredorian]

Arena is lame in the scope of Warcraft the way it stands. Slaves fight in arenas.... so you RC are all slaves.. except Lys, he owns the slaves. Damn Plebians.

Also PvE is just as difficult, because you have to coordinate 25 people against an enemy that doesn't make mistakes. If you make mistakes, you lose. If you make mistakes in arena, you lose. (Usually)

[Rand_Shea]

I don't see how you could claim that designing a potential battle where it is Player versus Computer (so you can balance all the DPS/Tank/Heal specs against each other to make everyone viable) would be just as difficult as Player versus Player (where you have to balance both relative damage (especially if you go with all DPS does about same damage formula) crowd control, utility, quicker reaction times, RNG is a bigger deal, and the plain old human factor where you don't know what one side is doing)

Not that PvE balance isn't intricate, it is, but if you start with a few basic tenents (Hybrid/Pure 5% damage rule, otherwise flatline damage in general, tank specs don't need to do massive amounts of burst damage, stuff like that that will keep both parts self-consistent) you should be able to build a good PvP and PvE game.

PvP by far is harder to balance, simply because each class plays differently from any other class, and you're trying to put them all on the same level in order to ensure fairness.

That's not something you need to worry about with PvE... Bosses can do all sorts of crazy shit that make them all but unkillable. It's a set dance that requires attention and precision to do right, at least until the raid is geared to a point where it just doesn't matter any longer.

PvP is also a dance, but it's a guessing game dance. Predicting what ability your opponent is going to use, watching bars, and plotting how to counter instantly to the point where skill ultimately surpasses gear, as a shitty geared but highly skilled player can outdo someone who has crap for skill but the best pvp gear in the game.

[Kredorian]

I think PvP is easy to balance, you make all classes do the same thing and then let em fight to see who is better. But that is lame, unfortunately, it is happening slowly as a lot of classes are beggining to see a lot of synergy.

Oh, and booze rocks. Just throwing that out there.

[Abric]

Oh great, Metzen hate. I'd really like to see a quote on that there Abric.

Me make a quote so you can sig me (gay), or a quote where Metzen is against PvP?

[Yatokth]

Arena is lame in the scope of Warcraft the way it stands. Slaves fight in arenas.... so you RC are all slaves.. except Lys, he owns the slaves. Damn Plebians.

Also PvE is just as difficult, because you have to coordinate 25 people against an enemy that doesn't make mistakes. If you make mistakes, you lose. If you make mistakes in arena, you lose. (Usually)

Opponent who doesn't make mistakes?

How about opponent who is predictable and you can download a mod to tell you when most (if not all, depending on the encounter) of his attacks or going to land, and even predict some of them?

Certainly Hard-mode PvE isn't easy-sauce, otherwise everyone would be doing it, but here's a difference:

Put a hardcore PvPer into a raiding situation. Give him everything material he needs to succeed, raiding gear cleared for the instance, and strategies for the fights he is going into.

Then put a hardcore PvEer into a 2600+ arena situation, give him everything material he needs to succeed, a good 3v3 team with a decent combo, and optimal gear setup for his class.

Which will do better?

I'm not saying PvE is a "lesser" part of the game, there are those who enjoy it and more power to them, but the essentials of high end PvE are much, much, MUCH simpler than the essentials of high end PvP, which includes most, if not all, of the essentials of PvE, sans the raiding gear.


To step in with the balance of PvE vs. the balance of PvP point...

A balanced PvP system will have limits, such as-- for example, having every class reasonably balanced with every other class.

A PvE system, however, does not have that constraint. Boss "gimmicks" allow encounters to be designed that intentionally throw that balance out the window to allow certain classes (or class groups, ex. "melee DPS", or "ranged magical DPS") to take a spotlight.

PvP also functions on a rating system, which lets players naturally create the flow of increased difficulty in relation to skill (because they'll be matched up against people who are also of increased skill, creating harder matches as they get better). With PvE content, this does not naturally occur; it has to be intentionally designed and then balanced (very carefully!) into the hard-mode versions of encounters.

Well good sir, then I say to you, balance the game around a PvP system where each class is balanced, then design boss encounters that may 'spotlight' some DPS, and huzzah, a PvP AND a PvE game, all in one.

And yes, PvE encounter balance is an intricate process, but it's one that you can entirely control, like you said yourself, there are less constraints, which means the designers have more room to work, whereas in PvP, you have to figure the human variable on BOTH sides instead of just one.


Pretty much this. The second the rewards get dropped is the second you'll see them die off. More so I've always felt that Battlegrounds always fit into the themes of Warcraft better than arenas did, which even conceptually felt tacked on.

Overall though I just think small scale fights are next to impossible to balance. Name me a fighting game where all characters are viable at high levels of play, you won't find one. Street Fighter 2 is closing in on being 2 decades old.

If arenas didn't reward me with the best PvP gear possible, or if there were another way to get it, I would still play arenas, and I'm sure many other people (who, admittedly, probably don't frequent this site and are rarely ever roleplayers, incidentally) would do the same, because they're fun to me, they require ALOT of skill, timing, and coordination, and it's fun to get better at my class and really push the limits of what me and my teammates can do.

I do, however, agree that it makes no logical sense that the top echelon of PvP in a World of Warcraft is going "hey gobbo am I good enough to have that shiny new sword yet?" BGs or World PvP would make tons more sense, and I personally support giving them just as much of a spotlight, as long as they can be competitive.


I think PvP is easy to balance, you make all classes do the same thing and then let em fight to see who is better. But that is lame, unfortunately, it is happening slowly as a lot of classes are beggining to see a lot of synergy.

Oh, and booze rocks. Just throwing that out there.

I don't see how this is happening at all, and if PvP is easy to balance, why isn't it? Because of PvE? I really don't think that's the case.

One could make an argument that Blizzard's stance of "All specs should be viable in both PvP and PvE" has caused a damage inflation leaving some specs with too much control AND too much damage, but with the way the game is currently evolving, I don't think it's really a problem. There are only a few remaining problems with PvP.

[Ryoku]

I see a lot of people saying how they hate arena, but I'm going to ask... Why?

I have always found small scale PvP found in 3v3 to be much more exciting, fun, and rewarding than large scale BGs. My heals and cooldowns actually matter.

I'm not trying to start trouble, I understand that everyone has their own preference, but nobody is really giving any reason as to why they hate arena except that "it sucks" and "I just do it for gear." I would, as an arena lover who isn't on an 1800+ team, just like some clarity.

[Necroxis]

Unfortunately, from this point on everything they do is going to have to be revolved around PvP. But, some folks (Metzen) seem to be kicking and screaming and not wanting to go that route.


They're probably kicking and screaming because WoW was designed as PvE game *points to article*

And about PvE vs PvP...I don't see why we can't just agree both take different skill sets.

...honestly...people always wanting to think their method of gameplay is better. Can y'all not be content with equality?

[Skaadvik]

Arenas frustrate and bore me. I can't break 1700, and maybe that's why I'm bitter, but I just do not enjoy arenas. That sort of competition does not interest me. I was in 3 straight AVs today where it was a massive turtle and we fought back and forth in a massive head on battle for 30 minutes and won by reinforcements alone. That, to me, is infinitely more fun than any arena matches I've ever had. I guess it's just difference of playstyle preference? I don't know. Large-scale chaotic battles have always been more fun to me than arenas. I'm good at what I do, for the most part, but I'm not so hot at arenas, and I've never felt a driving desire to be amazing in them. Other forms of PvP just interest me more.



Also, Cavanaugh's point concerning booze is valid and well worth recognition.

[Fhenrir]

Certainly Hard-mode PvE isn't easy-sauce, otherwise everyone would be doing it, but here's a difference:

Put a hardcore PvPer into a raiding situation. Give him everything material he needs to succeed, raiding gear cleared for the instance, and strategies for the fights he is going into.

Then put a hardcore PvEer into a 2600+ arena situation, give him everything material he needs to succeed, a good 3v3 team with a decent combo, and optimal gear setup for his class.

Which will do better?

I think you're getting a bit off track here. This is more relevant to a debate of "which takes more skill, PvP or PvE?" and has little bearing on the topic of balancing either field.

As an aside, I've always thought that that argument was silly to begin with. I've seen plenty of examples of PvP players doing terribly in PvE (not naming names, as I consider them pals, but they were top tier TN PvPers in BC). The difference between PvE and PvP is sustained awareness and competence over your own personal performance and that of your pals around you, versus high twitch reaction skills and knowledge of common tactics employed against your particular makeup.

A PvPer who steps into PvE and immediately excels has more to do with the player being intelligent than the content being easier. PvE allows more leeway for the occasional bum riding coattails, but the "best" PvE players are often able to step into PvP and perform just as solidly.


I'm not trying to start trouble, I understand that everyone has their own preference, but nobody is really giving any reason as to why they hate arena except that "it sucks" and "I just do it for gear." I would, as an arena lover who isn't on an 1800+ team, just like some clarity.

More often than not you find people disliking arenas based on a number of different reasons. Some common reasons I've found are the intense competition, twitch reaction necessity, and "organized duel" feel to them. Others involve the short duration, enclosed spaces, and heavy gear check to compete with other top teams.

The thing that makes me shake my fist at arenas (I don't say hate, as I've had a lot of fun times with them too) are definitely the way the ladder system is handled. Not only is it bad, but I feel it's gotten worse by the season. The fact that the final two weeks of games means more than the rest of the entire season is garbage, and I've seen it cost many deserving people their position as a Glad.

[Irontoe]

I think you're getting a bit off track here. This is more relevant to a debate of "which takes more skill, PvP or PvE?" and has little bearing on the topic of balancing either field.

Not to mention that it has been resolved already.

[Aleria Fadeleaf]

I see a lot of people saying how they hate arena, but I'm going to ask... Why?

I have always found small scale PvP found in 3v3 to be much more exciting, fun, and rewarding than large scale BGs. My heals and cooldowns actually matter.

I'm not trying to start trouble, I understand that everyone has their own preference, but nobody is really giving any reason as to why they hate arena except that "it sucks" and "I just do it for gear." I would, as an arena lover who isn't on an 1800+ team, just like some clarity.

The very concept of arenas, given their history in the lore, leaves a really bad taste in my mouth, and that's why I don't like them, and won't participate in them.

[Ryoku]

More often than not you find people disliking arenas based on a number of different reasons. Some common reasons I've found are the intense competition, twitch reaction necessity, and "organized duel" feel to them. Others involve the short duration, enclosed spaces, and heavy gear check to compete with other top teams.

The thing that makes me shake my fist at arenas (I don't say hate, as I've had a lot of fun times with them too) are definitely the way the ladder system is handled. Not only is it bad, but I feel it's gotten worse by the season. The fact that the final two weeks of games means more than the rest of the entire season is garbage, and I've seen it cost many deserving people their position as a Glad.

Are you sure about that last part? I recall a few people last season who reached 2500 in the first few weeks and sat on it and got glad.

However, thank you for your response, and I do agree that the system seems a bit skewed. Point distribution has been the thing that struck me funny.

Oh, Skaadvik, I get what you're saying. I especially know how it feels to try climbing rating and having little to no luck with it. I suppose, however, we just have a difference in drive and preference. I actually like PvPing with a small group of people I know and can trust my back with over PvPing in a large scale battle. They just get too clustered for my liking, and I feel like small scale puts me on the spot more. As far as drive, well I could say a fair portion of my good friends in this game have >2k rating. Perhaps the only thing driving me to aspire and work for greatness in arena is just to catch up to my bros?

Also, I probably should mention that I do not like 2v2, and don't even consider it to be real arena. Too many times have I lost to a Druid/War team where the Warrior bladestorms while I'm in a cyclone.

Okay, that only happened once, but that's one too many.

[Chikt]

The part I hate most about arenas is how the climb is constructed. Starting off, you are set on a path where you cannot lose rating. Then out of the blue, you go from losing no rating to getting barely any rating for a win and losing upwards of 5 times the average rating for a win when you lose.

We have one off night for our 5's team. And despite still leaving with a higher win than loss ratio, we lose 200 rating.

Fighting other, higher rated teams that we manage to beat gives barely any reward - but lose to them, and you are punished with a 15 point loss.

The system is really silly in that you are punished SO HARD for having a few hours of bad luck or bad play, because climbing back up is such a long, hard haul - and in all honesty, I've no desire to try and push to 2200 because of how the system works.

[Fynne]

I prefer battlegrounds to arenas because there is an opportunity to win at the strategic level instead of only the tactical.

[Rethius]

I'm really dumb, whats the difference between strategic and tactical?

[Fynne]

Strategy is your grand concept; tactics is how you execute it.

(Very generalized explanation, anyway)

Edit: In the context of PvP, what this means is that in a BG, you have the opportunity to win through better deployment and rotations through the bases (strategy), and while the need to be able to win a particular fight is still there (tactics) -- the entire victory doesn't depend on it as it does with an arena match.

[Kredorian]

Yat, isn't arena though, predictable too at high levels? And you can DL the mods that alert you to casts going off, who you are facing and what spec they are so you know exactly what your strat will be... and with the experience, they know yours as well and then isn't it sometimes who messes up first? Or who has a better comp?

I'm not saying PvP takes less skill, I am just saying they are equal but it is like comparing apples to oranges as the old folk say. Raids are easy when people know the fight and knwo their class and execute and the setup is optimized ( Hard modes.) For top end PvP, it is very similar it takes quicker reaction time but you know what you are dealing with in both cases and the mods thing is for both. You prob aren't hitting 2600 without the necessary mods, unless you are Yat and have been known to push shit in on a daily basis since 2007

**Edit - Oh, and I still IC can't justify arena's, sounds like slave work and killing for entertainment isn't very Paladin like, and being a noble, well, it just doesn't work out.

[Draekon]

Addendum:

Strategy - A plan devised before or during a battle. Example: You have Team A, Team B, and Team C, and a building held by Opfor. Team-A makes entry at the front of the building. Team B enters through the rear, and Team C is zip-lined from a Helicopter to the top of the building. They execute a tactical entry into the building to secure the hostages and kill or capture Opfor.

Tactics - Usually a set of rules applied during the strategy by the men making entry. They are skills trained rigorously into the men doing the mission. They're very static, and can be used in just about any situation. Example: The main force engages the enemy, while the other two forces move to flank them as they engage.

[Draekon]

**Edit - Oh, and I still IC can't justify arena's, sounds like slave work and killing for entertainment isn't very Paladin like, and being a noble, well, it just doesn't work out.

Well, considering that the combatants don't actually 'die' I'd just say they were incapacitated from their wounds and were saved after the battle by the Arena's healers.

[Kredorian]

Well, considering that the combatants don't actually 'die' I'd just say they were incapacitated from their wounds and were saved after the battle by the Arena's healers.

Don't you try and glorify slave work! SLAVE!

[Lysimachus]

QUITE RIGHT.

[Draekon]

....Then wouldn't you have a problem with the Tourney that is currently being held? I mean, you're fighting in the arena. Against monsters and even other combatants much like yourself (Faction Champs). Wouldn't that be exactly the same, just with a different name?

[Kredorian]

....Then wouldn't you have a problem with the Tourney that is currently being held? I mean, you're fighting in the arena. Against monsters and even other combatants much like yourself (Faction Champs). Wouldn't that be exactly the same, just with a different name?

Again I say... SLAVE.

And of course I have a problem with it! Just like Varian does ;-). But we need to do it to gain the support of the Argent Crusade for the upcoming assault, then so be it, we can put away our pride for the greater good... However, do not make a habit of it! It isn't a sport, it is to work towards the end of the Lich King who threatens all life, not to get a cool sword... SLAVE.

[Draekon]

Yet thats why most people do it. To get gear.

So, in the end, really, its the same as arenas. People are just glorifying it by giving it some supposed purpose.

I mean, whats the point of jousting? If we're assaulting a Citadel, it sounds to me that most of the fighting will be in a more 'urban' or interior enviroment. I think its kind of useless, really.

Oh, and from what I understand they're putting in another 'PvP/Arena style' boss fight in it as well. So, wouldn't that make arenas the same thing as preparing for our assault?

[Kredorian]

No, because fighting the factions is a waste... look at what Tirion says when the Horde and Alliance fight each other in ToC... that is why PvP arena is not the same as the ToC PvP event.

And if you say people do it to get gear, obviously, but that isn't IC. Notice what I actually said ;-). I am also being mostly sarcastic, so your logic and arguments are useless.... however, comparing the ToC arena to PvP arena is like comparing Fight Club to Gladiator. SLAVE.

[Yatokth]

Strategy is your grand concept; tactics is how you execute it.

(Very generalized explanation, anyway)

Edit: In the context of PvP, what this means is that in a BG, you have the opportunity to win through better deployment and rotations through the bases (strategy), and while the need to be able to win a particular fight is still there (tactics) -- the entire victory doesn't depend on it as it does with an arena match.

A solid point, my good man!

And I would love this about BGs, the problem being, that unless you get a drop-in-the-bucket lucky and fight another good premade while being on a good premade yourself, there's rarely any competition, and it's either herding cats with a PuG, getting rolled by another premade, or roflstomping in your own premade.

Rated BGs should fix this, and I definitely look forward to it.


Yat, isn't arena though, predictable too at high levels? And you can DL the mods that alert you to casts going off, who you are facing and what spec they are so you know exactly what your strat will be... and with the experience, they know yours as well and then isn't it sometimes who messes up first? Or who has a better comp?

I'm not saying PvP takes less skill, I am just saying they are equal but it is like comparing apples to oranges as the old folk say. Raids are easy when people know the fight and knwo their class and execute and the setup is optimized ( Hard modes.) For top end PvP, it is very similar it takes quicker reaction time but you know what you are dealing with in both cases and the mods thing is for both. You prob aren't hitting 2600 without the necessary mods, unless you are Yat and have been known to push shit in on a daily basis since 2007

**Edit - Oh, and I still IC can't justify arena's, sounds like slave work and killing for entertainment isn't very Paladin like, and being a noble, well, it just doesn't work out.

Certainly, strategies are learned and adjusted, and ALOT of arena is knowing how your opponents work as well. 2v2 had alot more to do with counter-comping than the other brackets, and I agree with Arokai, I don't consider it serious arena, and neither does Blizz as you can't get shoulders, T2 weaps, or any titles from it.

And actually Cav, all official high end arena tournaments (where a number of 2600+ players go) ban all add-ons to the game, so you get to play only with what the game gives you.

And I play with no mods excepting two:

ecastingbar - doesn't actually alert me to anything the game doesn't, it just makes the cast bar easier to see, and it has a focus cast bar. I COULD do without it, but it's nice.

Gladius - pretty much every live arena player uses this one, mostly for two reasons: You don't have to make a focus macro, you can just use the mod to right-click an opponent, suddenly it's your focus (which really just saves a button slot) and it's nice in like 5v5 if you want to switch to a target but aren't sure just where it is, you can target that class's frame.

Second reason for Gladius is definitely a crutch, and usually when I have to do that, we've already lost cause I wasn't paying attention to other awareness things that I needed to know (Warlocks casting, CC going out, etc) but I won't deny it helps.

BUT.

The fact that all arena tournaments ban add-ons means that no, you don't need the mods to succeed, you just need situational awareness, intimate understanding of your (and really at that level, ALL) class, quick reaction time, and experience.

Oh and a FANTASTIC fucking team that you know how to coordinate with.

And ICly, I actually just consider it very heavily ranked sparring matches, with a certain fatality rate of course. Yat enjoys sparring, and thus participates to keep his skills sharp, which is the same reason I do it, World PvP is usually more fun, though not that I don't enjoy arenas.

I've actually RP'd with Unulu where they would do 2v2 skirmishes and laugh about some of the ridiculous kills we'd get.

Was awesome.

But that's me, I know many characters wouldn't do that ICly, and arenas being the pinnacle of PvP DEFINITELY doesn't make sense lore-wise.

EDIT: Note that I make reference to 2600+ because that's usually the rating it takes for both Gladiator these days, and generally players at that level have been consistently good throughout the seasons and aren't just lucky. Some of them also attend tournaments. I am not at that level. Yet. :D

Let me also jump a page back and agree and question Fhenrir- I also dislike the ladder system sometimes, but I have definitely seen people coast 2500 within the first half of the season (In one particular case, because of lol12secondcharge Juggernaught in Warrior/Druid) and then sit on it for Gladiator.

Pretty lame.

The rating hike, however, is pretty foolish I agree, you can be in the rankings for glad in the third to last week, then when everyone makes new teams for no real reason and pushes it up, you might drop like 50 rank spots unless you climb as well.

EDIT2: The entire concept of stopping the war effort on the Scourge to plink at each other with sticks on horses and have the Lich King send the Black Knight in OVER AND OVER AND OVER again cause he can NEVER DIE LIKE A SATURDAY MORNING CARTOON VILLAIN is pretty fucking lame and makes no sense to me. Why doesn't the big dude just come in and roll you with his entire Scourge army?

Lame.

[Kredorian]

YAT.. you slave. Touche.

But when guilds do boss kills live and offically for Blizzard etc, they also do not use mods.

Any offical sort of thing bans mods, so although cute, that point is moot.

Most people use mods, a vast majority... you don't and of course that is commendable... slave... but most do and it is a huge advantage.

And don't sit there and give me a long winded excuse as to why you aren't a slave..... slave.

[Yatokth]

YAT.. you slave. Touche.

But when guilds do boss kills live and offically for Blizzard etc, they also do not use mods.

Any offical sort of thing bans mods, so although cute, that point is moot.

Most people use mods, a vast majority... you don't and of course that is commendable... slave... but most do and it is a huge advantage.

And don't sit there and give me a long winded excuse as to why you aren't a slave..... slave.

I was not aware that was the case! But mods are certainly not needed there either, though I can bet the healers are going crazy if that's the case. Raid healing looks hard to me and I wouldn't want to do it. ...in patch 3.3

I don't just because I don't want malware and it feels more legit. Plus my comp doesn't slow down.

...in patch 3.3

[Rand_Shea]

A PvPer put into PvE is more... 'twitchy' in a sense. They react faster, don't keyboard turn (if they've learned what that does to you in any pvp scenario), and are less likely to miss warning signs of "Your shit is going to be pushed in T-3...2...1...".

A PvEer in a PvP situation, though.... PvE fights allow for slower reaction times, keyboard turning, and one person getting killed by not watching what's going on around them sometimes won't destroy the entire raid... and even if it does, hey, you can run back and just do the encounter again for no consequence other than lost time and a repair bill. That's not the case in PvP.

So, ultimately... PvE is a simpler dance in that its patterns are consistent and there is some room for error in most fights. In pvp if you do so much as trinket out of the wrong bind or stun, you're fucked instantly.

But, balancing both requires two systems that don't work in tandem and don't interfere with each other. Blizzard is essentially beating their heads against a rock trying to use the same system for both large and small scale encounters when the approaches are completely different. It's like taking an offroad vehicle and a F-1 racing car and trying to balance out their inner workings so that the offroader can race and the F-1 can climb up steep trails. Physically, it's just not going to work.

Ultimately, PvP and PvE are not the same, so they can't be treated as the same. Personally, that's what I liked about both, is if I didn't feel like doing one, I could go do the other and not get bored to tears by it.

[Abric]

A PvEer in a PvP situation, though.... PvE fights allow for slower reaction times, keyboard turning, and one person getting killed by not watching what's going on around them sometimes won't destroy the entire raid... and even if it does, hey, you can run back and just do the encounter again for no consequence other than lost time and a repair bill. That's not the case in PvP.


... huh? Rand gets quoted because that is one particular statement I disagree with; but a statement made similar by many others before it.

Why, when in conversations between PvP and PvE, the PvPer (those who favor it) always compare the retarded raider to the elite of elites of PvP content? I mean, yeah, you do look a lot more talented dressed up in so much resilience a cockroach is taking advice on surviving a post-apocalyptic world from you ... when your comparison is the idiot in the corner drooling on himself banging his head against his shield while he continues to ask for health stones that were dropped right in front of him.

Pressing buttons is pressing buttons - regardless of if it is against some jumping lol-spamming night elf or some giant version of something you've already killed when grinding out your worm meat. One does not take "more skill" than the other ... you're either good at WoW, you are tolerable at WoW, or you suck and should go back to single-player consoles where you aren't damaging other peoples minds. Our talents may lie in a specific path (PvP or PvE), but all in all you either "get it" or you don't "get it".

Though, to be a hypocrite ... in PvP there is a lot more leeway to sneak beyond your talent. Arenas kind of nips that at the bud, but you still run into people stacking teams in a way where, unless you have something specifically to counter it, you're screwed.

Back in season 1-3, I had a 3v3 with Deathshadow and Duranor. While we did not get past 1900, that was more lack of play time than actual skill. We did pretty good as a Priest/Warrior/Rogue combo with PvE specs and a modest resilience rating. Yet, despite our own persona skills ... we were outclassed, literally, by a combination of classes. If a group had two paladins, we were screwed. If a group had a druid and warlock - we'd be toast if either of those people had an inkling of what their class was about. There was some other, but this is already too much typing... and that is old news and there have been enough changes to moot most of what I have in example.

Arena, in my opinion, has taken away the "difference" in the classes. If you don't have a crowd control, you want a crowd control. If you can't heal, then you want a way to heal. If you can't mitigate, then you want something to mitigate. And... for fucks sake, if you can't do anything ranged ... you want something ranged. In the realm of 'fairness' and 'e-sports', things that made us unique have been taken away and shared with the rest.

You know, without the idea that *maybe* the reason you didn't have ranged attacks, stuns, or mitigation was because... well ... you wear plate, you heal yourself, or you are a fucking cannon.

... and you have a rogue who used to PvP crying at you, pointing at you with an accusing glare on how you make him hurt on the outside with your fists.

[Yatokth]

A PvPer put into PvE is more... 'twitchy' in a sense. They react faster, don't keyboard turn (if they've learned what that does to you in any pvp scenario), and are less likely to miss warning signs of "Your shit is going to be pushed in T-3...2...1...".

A PvEer in a PvP situation, though.... PvE fights allow for slower reaction times, keyboard turning, and one person getting killed by not watching what's going on around them sometimes won't destroy the entire raid... and even if it does, hey, you can run back and just do the encounter again for no consequence other than lost time and a repair bill. That's not the case in PvP.

So, ultimately... PvE is a simpler dance in that its patterns are consistent and there is some room for error in most fights. In pvp if you do so much as trinket out of the wrong bind or stun, you're fucked instantly.

But, balancing both requires two systems that don't work in tandem and don't interfere with each other. Blizzard is essentially beating their heads against a rock trying to use the same system for both large and small scale encounters when the approaches are completely different. It's like taking an offroad vehicle and a F-1 racing car and trying to balance out their inner workings so that the offroader can race and the F-1 can climb up steep trails. Physically, it's just not going to work.

Ultimately, PvP and PvE are not the same, so they can't be treated as the same. Personally, that's what I liked about both, is if I didn't feel like doing one, I could go do the other and not get bored to tears by it.

I dunno, I think rated BGs are going to be awesome and benefit from the higher microscope balance that arena has placed on the game so far.

As for PvP vs. PvE, you can mostly get it to work, and then use some abilities that will work in PvE or not in PvP, or vice versa.

For example, most bosses are immune to Stuns and CC, and you can't use Curse of Doom in PvP. Small stuff like that could cover up the cracks in my opinion.

EDIT: And yeah I don't think you're giving the hard-mode PvEer enough credit Rand, their reaction time is probably just as good, there's usually just more to think about in PvP than just your one role in the encounter and what fire/ice/thunder/void to stay out of. I'm generalizing, I know it's more complex than that.

Also Abric, you're kind of behind the times.

Melee is crushingly powerful at the moment, and yes, combo matters, you need to cover your weaknesses, but as long as you're not RETARDED and running something completely illogical, you can overcome almost every opposing team regardless of combo, given enough timing, awareness, resourcefulness, and good execution.

And I can't believe you think 3 people vs. 25 people somehow allows a certain person to sneak beyond their talent in the first one more often.

People get carried in raids all the time, but the point is, at a high level of competition, nobody is.

[Skaadvik]

Don't you try and glorify slave work! SLAVE!


QUITE RIGHT.

You two are so cute.


I was not aware that was the case! But mods are certainly not needed there either, though I can bet the healers are going crazy if that's the case. Raid healing looks hard to me and I wouldn't want to do it.

I don't even use deadly boss mods or decursive. Never have.

However, Healbot=snore mode. With this mod, raid healing is caketown.

[Rand_Shea]

... huh? Rand gets quoted because that is one particular statement I disagree with; but a statement made similar by many others before it.


Alas, I probably don't give hardcore PvEers much credit because my times of running with some have shown that there's not as much of a dire need to be immediately reactive to their surroundings when they're fighting a boss. The most successful raids I've ever been on consisted entirely or at least mostly of people who were avid pvpers, whereas the worst ones were either PuGs or with people who were only very casually into doing a battleground a couple of times a week.

I won't even talk about mods in regards to PvE versus PvP. I participated in a number of raids where it was required to have a certain mod because it pretty much did tell you exactly where to go and what to do against a certain boss, some to the point where Blizzard went in and changed the encounter so that it didn't work anymore because it was making the encounter a complete joke. Ever hear of "Loot Reaver"?

There are no mods that do that for PvP and there never will be.

Also... melee has been raping faces for awhile now. They were only inconsequential during BC, and towards the end of that Blizzard finally took pity on them. It's been well over a year since.

Oh, and Yat... raid healing CAN be hard and can be exciting, but... I've nearly fallen asleep at my computer doing it and still gotten through the encounters just fine, and all I use is Grid and Clique.

Granted the times I did nearly fall asleep I was crashing from having consumed too much caffeine earlier those days.

[Yatokth]

Alas, I probably don't give hardcore PvEers much credit because my times of running with some have shown that there's not as much of a dire need to be immediately reactive to their surroundings when they're fighting a boss. The most successful raids I've ever been on consisted entirely or at least mostly of people who were avid pvpers, whereas the worst ones were either PuGs or with people who were only very casually into doing a battleground a couple of times a week.

I won't even talk about mods in regards to PvE versus PvP. I participated in a number of raids where it was required to have a certain mod because it pretty much did tell you exactly where to go and what to do against a certain boss, some to the point where Blizzard went in and changed the encounter so that it didn't work anymore because it was making the encounter a complete joke. Ever hear of "Loot Reaver"?

There are no mods that do that for PvP and there never will be.

Also... melee has been raping faces for awhile now. They were only inconsequential during BC, and towards the end of that Blizzard finally took pity on them. It's been well over a year since.

Oh, and Yat... raid healing CAN be hard and can be exciting, but... I've nearly fallen asleep at my computer doing it and still gotten through the encounters just fine, and all I use is Grid and Clique.

Granted the times I did nearly fall asleep I was crashing from having consumed too much caffeine earlier those days.Melee has actually been powerful since Season 3, the scaling of weapons has been a problem for awhile now.

[Jeedup]

I personally loved 2v2 arenas, cause it felt more intense and personal. Alittle disappointed that they're no longer required for rating or what have you. Then again, I haven't bothered to arena at all this expansion, when I used to be rather good in BC.

I still say a seperate spellbook personally, seems the most simplistic (in concept) idea, but probably the most time consuming (in application).

And Abric, I ment the Metzen Anti-PvP/Arenas quote. My 'Why'd You Kill My Daddy?' will always be my signature.

Plus the cake joke.

[Yatokth]

I personally loved 2v2 arenas, cause it felt more intense and personal. Alittle disappointed that they're no longer required for rating or what have you. Then again, I haven't bothered to arena at all this expansion, when I used to be rather good in BC.

I still say a seperate spellbook personally, seems the most simplistic (in concept) idea, but probably the most time consuming (in application).

And Abric, I ment the Metzen Anti-PvP/Arenas quote. My 'Why'd You Kill My Daddy?' will always be my signature.

Plus the cake joke.

I liked 2v2 the best as well, until I got above 1800 and realized how bloody annoying, imbalanced, and frustrating they were compared to the fun of the other two, more balanced brackets.

[Sejarki]

I prefer battlegrounds to arenas because there is an opportunity to win at the strategic level instead of only the tactical.

Pretty much. I also think it allows people to be more creative with their specs. There's more room to specialize in a role, so balancing survivability with burst isn't as important. Overall the class difference seems to be dampened, and tools that are useless in Arenas can shine. You also have to deal with a wider variety of situations rather than the pre-packaged Arena one.

Oh, and I can viably jump into BGs whenever.

[Yatokth]

Pretty much. I also think it allows people to be more creative with their specs. There's more room to specialize in a role, so balancing survivability with burst isn't as important. Overall the class difference seems to be dampened, and tools that are useless in Arenas can shine. You also have to deal with a wider variety of situations rather than the pre-packaged Arena one.

Oh, and I can viably jump into BGs whenever.

Eh, in the end, the cookie cutter specs will still do the best, cause the same PvP skills that are essential in arenas will give you a massive advantage in battlegrounds as well.

And as far as tools that are useless in arenas, only the long CDs that do huge things are available in BGs but not in arenas, which is a fair point, I guess.

And I wouldn't say there are more situations at all, it's just a different array of situations, there's ALOT of variety in arenas as well.

[Ryoku]

The part I hate most about arenas is how the climb is constructed. Starting off, you are set on a path where you cannot lose rating. Then out of the blue, you go from losing no rating to getting barely any rating for a win and losing upwards of 5 times the average rating for a win when you lose.

We have one off night for our 5's team. And despite still leaving with a higher win than loss ratio, we lose 200 rating.

Fighting other, higher rated teams that we manage to beat gives barely any reward - but lose to them, and you are punished with a 15 point loss.

The system is really silly in that you are punished SO HARD for having a few hours of bad luck or bad play, because climbing back up is such a long, hard haul - and in all honesty, I've no desire to try and push to 2200 because of how the system works.

Exactly. Even at around a 1500 rating, I never understood why I'd go up against teams with their relentless t1 weapons (in some case shoulders too) with my heroic weapon and shield and lose upwards of 19 rating, but fighting against teams in said gear and winning we'd achieve like.. 6-10 rating.

[Sejarki]

Eh, in the end, the cookie cutter specs will still do the best, cause the same PvP skills that are essential in arenas will give you a massive advantage in battlegrounds as well.

I really don't agree here. I think for instance the hit and run tactics of an Arcane Mage are going to be a lot more viable in Battlegrounds than Arenas. Frost Mages on the other hand very well rely on close quarters and in teammates to make up for lower burst, but depending on the BG you may be less likely to have teammates like that readily available.

I mean in the end the size of a fight can change a ton of things. There's a reason I can run around in my tank gear in the world as a Blood DK and rock faces 1 on 1, but if I took it to the highly controlled environment of an Arena it would be worthless.

[Yatokth]

I really don't agree here. I think for instance the hit and run tactics of an Arcane Mage are going to be a lot more viable in Battlegrounds than Arenas. Frost Mages on the other hand very well rely on close quarters and in teammates to make up for lower burst, but depending on the BG you may be less likely to have teammates like that readily available.

I mean in the end the size of a fight can change a ton of things. There's a reason I can run around in my tank gear in the world as a Blood DK and rock faces 1 on 1, but if I took it to the highly controlled environment of an Arena it would be worthless.

Arcane can work in arenas, but you see, a well played Frost Mage can fulfill his role in a BG of controlling the other team's melee, putting up CC, and then adding shatter combo burst, whereas an Arcane mage can still put up SOME CC, but will mostly just be a cannon in the back that we hope nobody notices.

And tank Blood DK is great for fighting 1 on 1, but you'll just get ignored in any sort of team effort until you're the last man standing, in which case you get vaped usually.

Exception being carrying the flag in WSG, which I agree, allows for tank specs to shine.

Although prot warriors and prot paladins are already pretty fucking amazing in arenas when geared right.

[Sejarki]

but will mostly just be a cannon in the back that we hope nobody notices.

Which is a perfectly fine and viable job in a BGs which isn't nearly as possible in Arenas where it's much harder to let people specialize that much. I've played my mage as both Frost and Arcane in BGs and always felt I did better personally and as a member of a team as Arcane. The CC element of Frost in a BG often equates to trying to stop a river with a twig, and me suicide bombing large groups with Frost Nova as we get overwhelmed.