4.3 Battleground Conquest Rewards

General Discussion
Prev 1 8 9 10 26 Next
I'm still amazed that a company so concerned with mass participation chose to "Arena-fy" BGs in the first place, effectively turning them into 10v10 Arena matches. Is Blizzard honestly surprised at what happened to their overall numbers?

At least there is some hint of recognition that what most people wanted out of their BGs (i.e. meaningful individual progression, no hard organizational constraints) is something very different from what most people want out of their Arena "progression". The planned Resilience change for MoP is a particularly good example of this.
I like this change. I have always thought it was strange you could do 5-mans to get raid quality gear, but you really couldn't earn rated/arena gear doing bgs very effectivly due to the slow rate of acquisition. I am interested in doing rated battlegrounds, but until I can earn more current pvp gear, I'm reluctant to go in just to get blown up. With the resilience change in MoP and this, I might finally, after having played this game continually since BC launch, get to enjoy more than casual pvp! Exciting :)
11/17/2011 01:51 PMPosted by Jooshbag
I put money on it, if we had the same type of "change" added to PVE content, top world guilds would cry out.


Actually the change to PvE is to increase coordination.

Valor Points Changes to 4.3 PTR

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/3595371172#1

They are trying to reduce Valor farming at the same time they increase Conquest farming.
11/17/2011 01:25 PMPosted by Tyrven
This is going to destroy RBGs on low population servers or non pvp servers. The work that goes into running RBGs will not be worth the extra CP per win even more so when RBG wins and losses take so much longer then normal bgs do. The one benefit that will remain from RBGs is being able to raise your CP cap. Again with a smaller player base doing them it will be harder to find teams to get to 1700+ or wherever the cap starts to go up.


I wish I had seen this before - well put sir - I wish more people had true pvp guile in them!
If it has not already been mentioned, (Did not read 9 pages) please consider having non-rated BG's to have the same weekly cap of 7 like the PvE dungeons. It would be greatly appreciated by those of us who can't always do a "daily" BG but can group a few together on the days we do play.
11/17/2011 01:57 PMPosted by Irishfelix
If it has not already been mentioned, (Did not read 9 pages) please consider having non-rated BG's to have the same weekly cap of 7 like the PvE dungeons. It would be greatly appreciated by those of us who can't always do a "daily" BG but can group a few together on the days we do play.


That's a great suggestion. They definitely should follow the PvE model for this.
11/17/2011 01:59 PMPosted by Charax
If it has not already been mentioned, (Did not read 9 pages) please consider having non-rated BG's to have the same weekly cap of 7 like the PvE dungeons. It would be greatly appreciated by those of us who can't always do a "daily" BG but can group a few together on the days we do play.


That's a great suggestion. They definitely should follow the PvE model for this.


Don't let botters win!!!
EDIT: Lol quoted wrong person.

The point of PvP isn't the gear. PvP gear doesn't signify progression, unless there is a Ratings requirement attached to it.

The point of PvP is the competition.
Also, I forgot to mention the pve resilience change as well. I believe PVP is now at the bottom of the Fail Sea. Pretty much is now dead. TY bliz
"The point of PvP isn't the gear, it's the competition. Equal gear facilitates this."

Equal gear also deflates the value of PVP - hence why PVP is now officially dead.
"The point of PvP isn't the gear, it's the competition. Equal gear facilitates this."

Equal gear also deflates the value of PVP - hence why PVP is now officially dead.


but there's dat better looking pvp gear you can get if you get a high arena/bg ranking :O

that's still prestige aint it?
11/17/2011 02:09 PMPosted by Xisa
The point of PvP is the competition.


Yes because we all know random BGs is "competition" lol. This change only reduces incentives to participate in competitive play.
The point of PvP is the competition.


Yes because we all know random BGs is "competition" lol. This change only reduces incentives to participate in competitive play.


TY Webster. I am curious if I was to do the same with PVE - Lets make PVE instances with tear gear botable ? The luster of 2200 gear is nice however not everyone can make it to 2200. The lines between pve and pvp are going to be so blurred, what is the point?

This is the reason private "FREE" servers make more money the sub accounts. Grind is still there and reaching your goal means more.
This sounds like a great idea for people who play on Battlegroups that share 50/50 wins and/or on the "winning side" but some battlegroups are horrendously bad and filled with baddies which makes wins so rare, its almost laughable. The battlegroup Turalyon is in is definately one of these bad battlegroups where during the afternoon / primetime, Horde winning is like an Act of God and the only time it feels stable or 50/50 is after Midnight EST til late into the morning and almost tips the scale onto the side of Horde.

Should seriously re-think having an imbalance like that with Conquest being awarded out because you're basically awarding the winners which is fair... but further unbalancing realm vs. realm in gear ilvl. ie. If Alliance wins 8 out of 10 fights, this will become more and more prominent a feature because more Alliance will have better gear.

I hope Blizzard has an answer to the overwhelming number of bots that currently roam in random bg's as this change will make them ever more rampant.

At least prior to this change bots left the bg scene once they had their honor gear completed, but now I will have to endure these cheaters for an additional 2+ months as they farm their conquest gear.

Does Blizzard have any plans to at least make the reporting of players easier and more effective then reporting player AFK or putting in a ticket? Here is what normally happens and why it's so hard to report players in a BG:

1. Why report player afk isn't effective: Most bots that I have encountered can heal, fight, CC just like a real player, just at a much reduced capacity. They are also lacking any battleground IQ with regards to the flag/node but regardless they are still moving and putting up numbers so the report player AFK function is defeated.

2. Why putting in a ticket isn't effective: I have to take on the cumbersome task of writing down the player name and server into the ticket explaining their behavior while I am trying to play a battleground. As much as I don't mind reporting botters, the issue of having to pause in a battleground to open up a ticket and spend at least a minute writing a report just isn't worth my time when I encounter 3-4 bots every battleground I join. So I have had to suck it up and try to ignore the bots because they eat into too much of my gametime, I also negatively impact my factions chance of winning when I spend 1-2 minutes writing a ticket, and then I never see that player banned anyways. What is the players incentive to take all of this time to help you Blizzard?

Please if you are going to implement this change consider this issue I present. I fear allowing bots to cap conquest is going to make for some ugly battlegrounds in 4.3
11/17/2011 09:13 AMPosted by Hanners
nice pvp gear shouldnt be hard to earn anyway pvp is about skill not about gear =P



this.

Most sensible thing I've read for awhile.
This is an awful change. Unless you plan on making valor give hard mode level content gear, or make 2200 players get access to ilvl gear that is equivalent to hard mode gear, there is no "parallel" to choosing how you play. Honor gear ALREADY gave you superior ilvl gear to normal pve. Honestly, what the hell is even the point of honor gear now?

Overall, I don't really care about noobs getting gear because they're bad or lazy, but there's going to be almost 0 incentive to do rbgs or arena now, and that is ultimately going to be the reason why I quit. I play MMOs for the organization of group pvp and progression, something you can't get in other games.

I waited 4 years for you to implement RBGs, then you took less than a year to destroy its. Good job.


If gear's the only reason for you to do RBG or Arenas you should quit - just because you have some superiority complex and belong to a minority doesn't mean you should ruin game play for the majority.

Arena / RBGs should be done to test your skill, get the exclusive rewards - be generally awesome. If you're doing it solely for gear no one cares.

I think it's great I have an incentive along with everyone else to win random bgs now - to feel that they don't suck anymore.

You're also doing RBGs / Arena for rating and increased cap - so nothing changes, just faster gear / more skill needed.
This will definitely break down the incentives to do Rated BG's, and is contrary to the other announcement about VP.

I get 400 points for a rated BG win, and, by design of the MMR system, my intended win rate is 50/50. Matches tend to run nearly the full duration. I will say an average of 30 minutes. So that's an average of 200 pts per 30 minutes or 400 pts per hour.

On the other hand, if I take five of us and queue for a random, I can almost guarantee a win. But let's say I would win 3 out of 4. These games tend to be quick - maybe 10 minutes each on average. That's 50 points x 6 = 300 @ 75% = 225 pts per hour.

Yes, Rated BG's are more efficient, but not a ton in relationship to how much time I need to cap. Where is the payout for all the additional skill and logistical work required?


The payout is that you need a greater than 1500 rating to push your conquest cap up - which you can't do in anything other than Arenas or Rated BGs.
11/17/2011 02:33 PMPosted by Failmage
This sounds like a great idea for people who play on Battlegroups that share 50/50 wins and/or on the "winning side" but some battlegroups are horrendously bad and filled with baddies which makes wins so rare, its almost laughable. The battlegroup Turalyon is in is definately one of these bad battlegroups where during the afternoon / primetime, Horde winning is like an Act of God and the only time it feels stable or 50/50 is after Midnight EST til late into the morning and almost tips the scale onto the side of Horde.


I thought battlegrounds weren't in battlegroups anymore since Cata was released? Only arena's still have battlegroups? Correct me if I am wrong?
This sounds like a great idea for people who play on Battlegroups that share 50/50 wins and/or on the "winning side" but some battlegroups are horrendously bad and filled with baddies which makes wins so rare, its almost laughable. The battlegroup Turalyon is in is definately one of these bad battlegroups where during the afternoon / primetime, Horde winning is like an Act of God and the only time it feels stable or 50/50 is after Midnight EST til late into the morning and almost tips the scale onto the side of Horde.

Should seriously re-think having an imbalance like that with Conquest being awarded out because you're basically awarding the winners which is fair... but further unbalancing realm vs. realm in gear ilvl. ie. If Alliance wins 8 out of 10 fights, this will become more and more prominent a feature because more Alliance will have better gear.


You forget the botting average as well.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum