High Level Guards Ruin World PVP

General Discussion
Prev 1 4 5 6 26 Next
03/17/2011 4:21 PMPosted by Schoolsterz
Remember back in the day when a group of horde would pillage a town and you could not quest. Blizz doesn't want it that way.


Then a group of alliance would have to actually fight for the right to quest.

/gasp World PvP


Can't fight a battle that you can't win.

There is a difference between "fighting" and "being annihilated".
03/17/2011 4:10 PMPosted by Bashiok
Everyone harkens back to TM/SS as the holy grail of world PvP


This is true....

why do I feel like the only person who recalls the epic battles at The Crossroads!?

I stopped playing for a few years and when I logged back in on this toon, she was standing near the Crossroads. It reminded me that the last thing I had done before logging out for 4 years was some epic PvP. I'm guessing that's the only reason I got to keep my title of Private and ended up with the FoS from it....even though I stopped playing before achievements and FoS's existed.

On topic:
I think the guards could be toned down slightly...but I get the feeling the main reason people complain is because they are invading in small groups or by themselves. I saw a thread where a rogue was complaining that she couldn't invade Stormwind BY HERSELF because of the guards.

If people weren't so interested in griefing, Blizzard may not have made the guards the way they are. People are forgetting that many of the folks making this "nerf the guards" request are the folks that want to make the game difficult or annoying for new or low level players.

From what I understand, if you have a large enough raid group with you...the guards aren't that bad. I have only heard that though, and do not actually know from personal experience. As it is, I'm sure the devs are taking both sides of the argument into consideration. They will do something eventually if something does need to be done. After all, they made the guards stronger in the first place due to people complaining about all the griefing and NPC/Auctioneer killing.
one of the best world pvp events

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmOBWM2T_1o
Hrm, I reckon it's rewards that ruined world PvP. Everyone harkens back to TM/SS as the holy grail of world PvP, and that was before and maybe slightly after the honor system was implemented (but before real rewards existed from it). I think you can encourage world PvP all you want, and if there aren't rewards behind it you'll keep people interested for about as long as it takes them to realize there are other things to do that give real power increases. Why would anyone spend any amount of time just pushing back and forth for no reason when you can spend your time toward actual rewards and character improvement? Maybe there are some of you, but I guarantee it'd be short lived.


Flying mounts killed world pvp. When everyone is up in the air, you cannot attack them. When escape is too easy via air travel, world pvp becomes too much of a hassle. Rewards are partly true, but SS/TM had no rewards in BC or LK, other than the straight fun of it.

Raiding a capital city in BC had no reward to it other than being able to gloat that you killed their leader. Which turns out to be fun.

Rewards come into play when you offer a place to encourage world pvp. Such as, Isle of Quel'Danas, or Tol Barad which we have now. A quest hub, that introduces both factions to quest in the same zone, without flying mounts means somewhere, sometime, someone will gank another person, and thus world pvp is born.

I mean shoot, you have Isle of Quel'Danas or even quest hubs in Cataclysm where people are literally forced together, and there's complaints that they just want people to stop PvPing so they can get their stuff done so they can get their rewards. That's kind of unfair because I know many did enjoy those situations, but somehow it never meets the awesomeness of TM/SS, and I reckon it just never could again.


Not everyone can be made happy. Person A wants this, person B hates this. There is no middle ground. Either A will be unhappy, or B will be unhappy. I personally say, if they don't like it, don't go there. Or learn to adapt to the play of the world. True someone could say the same about me towards something I dislike, which is hardly fair. The differences in this case is world pvp was around, then killed later on, and the majority of those who enjoyed it crave it again. It's how the game was designed long ago. When pve is made easier, that goes against the very makeup of the game, and is disliked.

If wow was originally designed to have no world pvp, and to have easy dungeons, even in Vanilla, and then world pvp changes, as well as harder dungeons were implemented, then hardcore players now would not have a word to say about it.

The best I can think that you could do is create a specific world PvP zone where you don't allow flying mounts, give some objective to tug-o-war over, and so you can justify giving some semi-meaningful rewards and keep people interested you'd need to find some way to even up the sides (because world PvP is inherently going to be unfair). I think you do all that and you probably have the best working solution for bringing back world PvP.


World pvp will always be unfair. But that's the beauty of world pvp. It resembles the feeling to the most true of a real battle in a real settling. Something a battle ground does not have, and probably never will. It's too much of a symmetrical playing field, without reason to defend a city or territory of innocents, and factors in objectives such as flag carrying. Such does not exist in a real battle. Battlegrounds are more of a sport than a battle.

While this game is in a virtual world, the lives players live is very real in that, real work is done farming materials because it requries real time, real effort and real though to some degree. Because there are reasons to be out in the world and with 2 factions, there will be conflict. And because of that, there are no rules set. You are given the choice to gank that level 25 in southern barrens because of the lack of rules.

To draw an equivalent, suppose you're in a war setting, and in another country, and you are scouting for your army. You see a worker over there, and he is not in uniform or has a weapon in hand besides a knife she shearing his sheep. You decide you want to kill that peasant, and so you do. And you are able to do so with little to no consequence. World pvp is similar to this. Except the only consequence you encounter is the possibility of him getting reinforcements and then return the favor towards you instead.


Bottom line, world pvp is desired strongly because of the free choice, and real world experience that a battle ground lacks.


Flying mounts killed world pvp.


Why do people say that? Flying mounts were only available in Outlands and Northrend for a VERY LONG time. They only recently were added to Azeroth as a whole. People have been complaining about the lack of world PvP for YEARS.

I know for a fact people were complaining about a lack of world PvP just a few months before Cataclysm was released.

World PvP has been gone for a looooong time and flying mounts had very little, if anything at all, to do with it.

World PvP hasn't existed in places where flying mounts couldn't even go for so long I don't understand why people blame flight for the death of World PvP. You couldn't fly over Stormwind or Orgimmar 6 months ago.....where was the World PvP then? You couldn't fly over Tarren Mill, Southshore, or The Barrens....where was world PvP then?
Did the blue just preview the next battleground? Spoiler alert!
The best I can think that you could do is create a specific world PvP zone where you don't allow flying mounts, give some objective to tug-o-war over, and so you can justify giving some semi-meaningful rewards and keep people interested you'd need to find some way to even up the sides (because world PvP is inherently going to be unfair). I think you do all that and you probably have the best working solution for bringing back world PvP.



World pvp will always be unfair. But that's the beauty of world pvp. It resembles the feeling to the most true of a real battle in a real settling. Something a battle ground does not have, and probably never will. It's too much of a symmetrical playing field, without reason to defend a city or territory of innocents, and factors in objectives such as flag carrying. Such does not exist in a real battle. Battlegrounds are more of a sport than a battle.

While this game is in a virtual world, the lives players live is very real in that, real work is done farming materials because it requries real time, real effort and real though to some degree. Because there are reasons to be out in the world and with 2 factions, there will be conflict. And because of that, there are no rules set. You are given the choice to gank that level 25 in southern barrens because of the lack of rules.

To draw an equivalent, suppose you're in a war setting, and in another country, and you are scouting for your army. You see a worker over there, and he is not in uniform or has a weapon in hand besides a knife she shearing his sheep. You decide you want to kill that peasant, and so you do. And you are able to do so with little to no consequence. World pvp is similar to this. Except the only consequence you encounter is the possibility of him getting reinforcements and then return the favor towards you instead.


This, making WG a 1 on 1 fight killed it. If your group can't bring more people to the fight than the other group. you will lose. it's not fair, its a battle.
It might of been said already, but the guards in TB hit like 6 trucks wielding each other... It kind of defeats the purpose of world PvP in those zones when people hide behind superman guards.
03/17/2011 4:10 PMPosted by Bashiok
The best I can think that you could do is create a specific world PvP zone where you don't allow flying mounts, give some objective to tug-o-war over, and so you can justify giving some semi-meaningful rewards and keep people interested you'd need to find some way to even up the sides (because world PvP is inherently going to be unfair). I think you do all that and you probably have the best working solution for bringing back world PvP


Take a hint you guys: Here's a Firelands preview for you all ;-)


The best I can think that you could do is create a specific world PvP zone where you don't allow flying mounts, give some objective to tug-o-war over, and so you can justify giving some semi-meaningful rewards and keep people interested you'd need to find some way to even up the sides (because world PvP is inherently going to be unfair). I think you do all that and you probably have the best working solution for bringing back world PvP.


Hey that sounds just like Tol B-

Oh wait, I get it now.
game would be so much more fun for errbody if you could go ambush questing lowbies and conquer their towns without a hint of resistance in peace cmon Blizz
03/17/2011 4:10 PMPosted by Bashiok
Hrm, I reckon it's rewards that ruined world PvP


This and the godawful implementation of DHKs.... I mean who wants to raid a town and risk some griefer lowering the rank of the whole raid because they can?... DHKs were about the worst idea to be ever implemented in the realm of wow pvp.
In my opinion, Hellfire Peninsula and Terokkar had the best world PvP (hell, you still see people fighting over Broken Hill / Overlook / Stadium)


Do that same thing but in Cataclysm raid zones. People would be fighting all the time for an extra 5% damage/healing/health buff for BWD or BoT or TotfW, or a rep gain bonus or something. DOOO EEET BLIZZ. Throw in a couple towers or bunkers or something in the zones (Twilight Highlands, Uldum, Blackrock Mountain) to control. Fighting inside of Blackrock Mountain again would be a blast.

A 5% bonus wouldn't be a requirement to progress, it would just make it easier assuming you control whatever-it-is.
No you can't go grief lowbies. Learn to PVP your own level range.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum