User avatar
Posts: 104
Likes: 20
104 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 week ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
2 weeks ago

Therefore, the optimal strategy probably would have been to ignore other players and just run the geysers back to base camp one by one. I can see how this could be problematic, especially if there were too many geysers spawning. What would be a better solution then?
"I can see how this would be problematic and how my idea is just another repeat, but if I can just continue this thought for a moment..." Oh my...
On Kronos, the Silithus Geyser farming was so popular that the developers nerfed the honor gains from 200 to 19. They changed the 1.12 honor values to the retail values. I think that back in Vanilla many players were unaware of how efficient the Silithus turn-ins were. I think the issue was that you were only required to turn-in one geyser to earn the honor bonus. Players actually couldn't carry more than one at a time. Why would you bother attacking another player, when you couldn't even loot/carry the geyser that they might drop? It seems like it would have been far more effective to just ignore enemy players and collect geysers near your basecamp. The way to disrupt this would be to change the requirement for the turn-ins. Instead of requiring 1 geyser, what if it required 5 or 10? This would force players to roam across Silithus collecting 5 or 10 resources to complete the turn-in. This would also making killing another player more worthwhile, because you could actually add geysers to your total. If you had collected 3 geysers so far, then encountered an enemy player farming geyers, you could potentially kill and loot 7 geysers off them which would raise your total to 10.

The original system that Blizzard designed in Silithus, where you could only carry one resource at a time was part of the issue. If the requirement was 5 or 10 geysers, wouldn't that create more World PvP activity, since players would spend more time roaming the zone. Having no cap on how many geysers you could carry would also incentivize more PvP action, since you could add to your total. You couldn't do that in the original system, since you were limited to a single geyser. The way it worked in 1.12, was your faction need 200 geyser turn-ins to complete the objective. Players could only carry and turn-in one at a time. 200 honor was a fairly substantial reward, considering players were often collecting single geysers just yards outside of their basecamps. I mean what would be the solution to improve the The Silithyst Must Flow pvp objective that existed back in 1.12. You can read about it here
https://wow.gamepedia.com/The_Silithyst_Must_Flow (The honor for a turn-in was 200, not whatever is listed in that article)

Alterac Valley
User avatar
Posts: 163
Likes: 110
162 posts
Alliance
Druid
Alliance Druid 162 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Even if Silithus required more geysers to give you honor, people would rather safe it than risk losing them, just like we said about your idea.

The risk of losing everything is too high for it to be worth while in most cases once you take combat duration and run back into the equation.

 Blizzard Entertainment
You think you do, but you don’t
Mulgore
User avatar
Discord:

Erik#8716


Posts: 34
Likes: 31
34 posts
Tauren
Druid
Tauren Druid 34 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

NO

These "Ideas" is what eventually let to the game where it is today.

NO THANK YOU

Resto/Balance Druid - Horde - PvP - Europe - Sweden - Born in the golden year 1990
User avatar
Posts: 104
Likes: 20
104 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Tec wrote:
1 week ago
Even if Silithus required more geysers to give you honor, people would rather safe it than risk losing them, just like we said about your idea.

The risk of losing everything is too high for it to be worth while in most cases once you take combat duration and run back into the equation.
Why would some players not attack eachother though? If you only have 1-2 geysers, and you see an enemy player running back to camp with geysers why not attack them? That player would likely have at minimum 5 geysers since they would be completing the turn-in. The enemy player would have more to lose than you would. Ganking players in Silithus who are collecting geysers could also be a faster way to collect the geysers. In Vanilla, you had to run the geyser back to the basecamp, so you would always be at risk of being killed while returning to basecamp. Having to run back to basecamp from the edges of the desert would surely make you a target. You could have players who prefer scouting and ganking players returning to basecamp with geysers.

In the original system you could only carry 1 geyser at a time, so if you ganked an enemy player you couldn't even loot a second geyser. I can see why players would just avoid PvP combat and just collect them one by one instead. However, if the requirement is raised to 5 or 10, ganking players to collect geysers seems like it would be a viable playstyle. I am curious what other posters think or how The Silithyst Must Flow could have been improved. (https://wow.gamepedia.com/The_Silithyst_Must_Flow)

User avatar
Posts: 104
Likes: 20
104 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Erik wrote:
1 week ago
NO

These "Ideas" is what eventually let to the game where it is today.

NO THANK YOU
Erik this idea exists in Classic WoW. It is just an iteration of what already existed in 1.12. I am just finding a solution to improve the original feature.

Alterac Valley
User avatar
Posts: 163
Likes: 110
162 posts
Alliance
Druid
Alliance Druid 162 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Because the chance of dying a losing it all.
Like it’s been said it’s been tried in various versions and it mostly turn out the same.

   Stfuppercut
 Blizzard Entertainment
You think you do, but you don’t
User avatar
Posts: 104
Likes: 20
104 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Tec wrote:
1 week ago
Because the chance of dying a losing it all.
Like it’s been said it’s been tried in various versions and it mostly turn out the same.
You make some good points Tec, I am just trying to refine this idea. I understand why a player with like 10 geysers might not initiate combat. They probably just want to safely return to camp. However, what about a player with only 1 or 2 geysers? If they are roaming Silithus and see another player farming geysers, then why not attack them? You could loot like 10 geysers off them. There are situations where the enemy would be more vulnerable, and have a lot more to lose than you would, which is why the PvP happens. There could be players that focus more on ganking and looting geysers, instead of collecting them off nodes for example.

Hunter Marksman
User avatar
Posts: 515
Likes: 300
Orc Hunter 513 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Tec wrote:
1 week ago
Because the chance of dying a losing it all.
Like it’s been said it’s been tried in various versions and it mostly turn out the same.
But this time its different! I just know it!!!!

User avatar
Posts: 104
Likes: 20
104 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Each faction would need to collect 200 Silithyst to earn the faction rep buff. Each Silithyst rewards 200 honor. You need at least 10 Silithyst to complete the turn-in at your faction's basecamp. The turn-in stations only accept stacks of 10 Silithyst. Players would need to collect 10 Silithyst in order to complete the turn-in. The reward would be 2,000 honor. Players who carry Silithyst glow red. I don't think movement reduction is necessary on Silithyst carriers.
Because players would need to collect 10 Silithyst for a turn-in, they would need to roam Silithus searching for geysers.

Let's say you walk into Silithus and begin looting geysers. After roaming for 10 minutes you loot 4 Silithyst. You know you need 6 more to get credit for the turn-in, so you continue roaming the zone. A while later you are at 8 Silithyst, and begin heading towards the basecamp. You are then ganked by a player who has been watching you collect the Silithyst. You are killed and the enemy players loots 8 Silithyst off your corpse. The enemy player spent only a few minutes searching for Silithyst. They instead watching you collect it, and then ganked you to loot the 8 you were carrying.

You could walk into Silithus, gank a few players, then find yourself with 25 Silithyst. Just like that. A gatherer could spent 30 minutes gathering 10 Silithyst only to be ganked at lose them all in 30 seconds.

Below is a map with an example of Silithyst spawns in Silithus.

Alterac Valley
User avatar
Posts: 163
Likes: 110
162 posts
Alliance
Druid
Alliance Druid 162 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
Tec wrote:
1 week ago
Because the chance of dying a losing it all.
Like it’s been said it’s been tried in various versions and it mostly turn out the same.
You make some good points Tec, I am just trying to refine this idea. I understand why a player with like 10 geysers might not initiate combat. They probably just want to safely return to camp. However, what about a player with only 1 or 2 geysers? If they are roaming Silithus and see another player farming geysers, then why not attack them? You could loot like 10 geysers off them. There are situations where the enemy would be more vulnerable, and have a lot more to lose than you would, which is why the PvP happens. There could be players that focus more on ganking and looting geysers, instead of collecting them off nodes for example.
I wouldn’t say it’s making good points as much as it’s been proven again and again to be the wow players and people’s behavior in general.
Most people don’t like any sort of risk when trying to maximize profit, in this case honor.

They’ll just do the safe way because it’s a consistent way and therefore looked at as the most efficient way.

Yes, some will attack regardless, majority hardly will and it’s been tested and tried so many times I have absolutely no clue how you could salvage your idea in mind without a complete rework somehow.

I don’t think you can change that player mentality.
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 week ago
Tec wrote:
1 week ago
Because the chance of dying a losing it all.
Like it’s been said it’s been tried in various versions and it mostly turn out the same.
But this time its different! I just know it!!!!
Image

   Stfuppercut
 Blizzard Entertainment
You think you do, but you don’t
User avatar
Posts: 104
Likes: 20
104 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Tec wrote:
1 week ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
Tec wrote:
1 week ago
Because the chance of dying a losing it all.
Like it’s been said it’s been tried in various versions and it mostly turn out the same.
You make some good points Tec, I am just trying to refine this idea. I understand why a player with like 10 geysers might not initiate combat. They probably just want to safely return to camp. However, what about a player with only 1 or 2 geysers? If they are roaming Silithus and see another player farming geysers, then why not attack them? You could loot like 10 geysers off them. There are situations where the enemy would be more vulnerable, and have a lot more to lose than you would, which is why the PvP happens. There could be players that focus more on ganking and looting geysers, instead of collecting them off nodes for example.
I wouldn’t say it’s making good points as much as it’s been proven again and again to be the wow players and people’s behavior in general.
Most people don’t like any sort of risk when trying to maximize profit, in this case honor.

They’ll just do the safe way because it’s a consistent way and therefore looked at as the most efficient way.

Yes, some will attack regardless, majority hardly will and it’s been tested and tried so many times I have absolutely no clue how you could salvage your idea in mind without a complete rework somehow.

I don’t think you can change that player mentality.
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 week ago
Tec wrote:
1 week ago
Because the chance of dying a losing it all.
Like it’s been said it’s been tried in various versions and it mostly turn out the same.
But this time its different! I just know it!!!!
Image
I am making adjustments to the Silithus World PvP system that Blizzard implemented. I said that because you could only carry 1 Silithyst at a time, it was basically pointless to gank other players. If you ganked somebody, then you wouldn't even be able to carry the Silithyst they would drop. That is so flawed.

If the turn-in requirement is 10 instead of 1 it would force players to spend more time roaming the zone. Ganking other players and looting their Silithyst would be very viable, because the ganker might not have anything to lose. The player roaming around with 7 or 8 Silithyst can't always avoid just PvP conflict. The other World PvP systems that Blizzard created either had pointless rewards or were too easily controlled by zergs. The Silithus World PvP objective was so popular on Kronos, that the developers nerfed the honor reward. Some players found that it was more efficient to farm honor doing it. The issue was that players would avoid PvP, because you could only carry 1 Silithyst at a time. What would the point of killing another players and looting them, when you instead just walk outside of basecamp grab a Silithyst and walk back. My idea is to change the requirement to 10 Silithyst, so that players out farming have more at risk to lose, and also need to spend more time roaming the zone.

I am suggesting ways to improve The Silithyst Must Flow, particularly to encourage more World PvP during it. Do you think my proposed change would improve it?

Druid Feral
User avatar
Guild:

LFG


Bnet:

Selexin#1725


Posts: 626
Likes: 410
525 posts
Tauren
Druid
Tauren Druid 525 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

@RedridgeGnoll is a Blizzard mole, he is throwing changes at us that blizzard are considering, and taking our responses back to Irvine to implement. Although at this stage it's just been a big #nochanges response to all the crazy ideas.

Who's with me?

   MeatLumps
ImageImage
Warlock Destruction
User avatar
Guild:

Kor Kron Vanguard


Bnet:

Nym#21750


Posts: 254
Likes: 284
254 posts
Undead
Warlock
Undead Warlock 254 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
2 weeks ago
I think that World PvP in Classic WoW could use some improvements.
Nothing you said there has anything to do with World-PvP. The only thing you're arguing is for the implementation of another Honor farming system, similar to a Battleground. All of the arguments I've seen you write in favor of this relate to how it's good to give players a possibility to farm honor other than BGs, but World-PvP is really just about whacking other players senselessly for no big reason. The P2 incentive to do so will be enough to scar everyone forever.

The thing about World-PvP is that it's inherently unbalanced. A low honor gain on it means that whatever abuse of power you can pull has to be abused consistently and perfectly in order to gain an actual advantage over anyone doing BGs - and I reckon even then it wouldn't be enough. If it can/is balanced, then make it a BG. If it's not, then leave it at WPvP and don't make it appealing for Honor gains because we don't need it and it will ultimately be abused (just like BGs but to an even greater extent since it's not instanced).

In my opinion the only people who complain about needing more ways to farm Honor are those who suck at and shouldn't be farming Honor in the first place but still want a low-effort way of grinding their R10/R14 rewards because of their retail mindset.

   MeatLumps Erik
Warsong Gulch
User avatar
Discord:

MeatLumps#2742


Bnet:

MeatLumps#11603


Posts: 82
Likes: 48
Troll Rogue 82 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Selexin wrote:
1 week ago
@RedridgeGnoll is a Blizzard mole, he is throwing changes at us that blizzard are considering, and taking our responses back to Irvine to implement. Although at this stage it's just been a big #nochanges response to all the crazy ideas.

Who's with me?
I have to admit, the thought did cross my mind. :lol:

   Selexin
ImageImage
Alterac Valley
User avatar
Posts: 163
Likes: 110
162 posts
Alliance
Druid
Alliance Druid 162 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Selexin wrote:
1 week ago
@RedridgeGnoll is a Blizzard mole, he is throwing changes at us that blizzard are considering, and taking our responses back to Irvine to implement. Although at this stage it's just been a big #nochanges response to all the crazy ideas.

Who's with me?
Image

 Blizzard Entertainment
You think you do, but you don’t
User avatar
Posts: 104
Likes: 20
104 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Nymis wrote:
1 week ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
2 weeks ago
I think that World PvP in Classic WoW could use some improvements.
Nothing you said there has anything to do with World-PvP. The only thing you're arguing is for the implementation of another Honor farming system, similar to a Battleground. All of the arguments I've seen you write in favor of this relate to how it's good to give players a possibility to farm honor other than BGs, but World-PvP is really just about whacking other players senselessly for no big reason. The P2 incentive to do so will be enough to scar everyone forever.

The thing about World-PvP is that it's inherently unbalanced. A low honor gain on it means that whatever abuse of power you can pull has to be abused consistently and perfectly in order to gain an actual advantage over anyone doing BGs - and I reckon even then it wouldn't be enough. If it can/is balanced, then make it a BG. If it's not, then leave it at WPvP and don't make it appealing for Honor gains because we don't need it and it will ultimately be abused (just like BGs but to an even greater extent since it's not instanced).

In my opinion the only people who complain about needing more ways to farm Honor are those who suck at and shouldn't be farming Honor in the first place but still want a low-effort way of grinding their R10/R14 rewards because of their retail mindset.
The honor rewards from spamming battlegrounds are much higher than doing World PvP. That is why World PvP began to die out once battlegrounds were introduced. The purpose of this thread is to improve the World PvP Systems from 1.12, so that there is better World PvP and more ways to earn honor. Having rewarding and dynamic World PvP is something that would interest a lot of players. I understand why some players prefer battlegrounds, but they also have many issues which can lead to unrewarding PvP. The Silithyst Must Flow was one of Blizzard's attempts to reinvigorating World PvP after Battlegrounds were introduced. The Silithus World PvP System had potential, but also had some flaws, which I have outlined in the above posts. It isn't just about creating more World PvP, but creating quality World PvP. I explained some of the issues with the Silithus PvP System, which is why I made some suggestions on how it could be improved. I would appreciate some feedback on my proposed changes. I would like to delve into the specifics of The Silithyst Must Flow and how it could be improved.

Hunter Marksman
User avatar
Posts: 515
Likes: 300
Orc Hunter 513 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
The honor rewards from spamming battlegrounds are much higher than doing World PvP.
This is by choice. BG's are designed to be a balanced and competitive experience that rewards you for participating. Put in effort, get reward. World PvP is supposed to be an organic experience that enhances the overall world. This is a GOOD design decision! If grinding world PvP rep meant running around all day collecting geysers, this would RUIN world PvP. Most servers wont have a 50/50 faction balance. They never have and never will. One side will decimate Silithus and the other will be unable to compete in most circumstances. Improving this system means that Blizz would have to address all WHOLE host of new issues... Issues that they have never been able to solve, like bringing faction balances closer. Content like this are also not good pieces of group content. Typically one person will grind and the others will simply host their grind which only adds to the imbalance of such a system. Systems like this that have been implemented (which you still fail to realize - good lord man) have been implemented and it consistently fails.

This idea has been attempted MANY times. It fails EVERY time. THIS time it wont be any different. I would prefer if competitive battlegrounds gave rewards and world PvP was left unaltered. There is a certain prestige that comes from honor gear. Gear that is earned by decimating thousands upon thousands of enemies at your own level. World PvP is a tool. A tool to secure a questing area, a tool for securing a zone for a world boss or simple revenge and bloodshed without purpose. The reward is the kill itself... Dont sterilize that experience by putting in an unnecessary reward system that players can gain honor WITHOUT killing eachother.............. They will ALWAYS take the path of least resistance, just like AV trains that run beside eachother.
Nymis wrote:
1 week ago
All of the arguments I've seen you write in favor of this relate to how it's good to give players a possibility to farm honor other than BGs, but World-PvP is really just about whacking other players senselessly for no big reason.

The thing about World-PvP is that it's inherently unbalanced.
See this quote. Please read it until you understand it. Dont just read it to see the words and sound them out... Spend time understanding what @Nymis wrote. Every suggestion you have made in ALL of your posts would move the game in a COMPLETELY opposite direction of what Classic was. You cant seem to understand any of the major issues your implementations would have. You dont even seem to understand the difference of world PvP and instanced BG's or what implications come with changing the entire dynamic of high level honor farming...........
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
I would appreciate some feedback on my proposed changes. I would like to delve into the specifics of The Silithyst Must Flow and how it could be improved.
So first you would need to tell us how you plan to create a 50/50 faction balance on 100% of the servers. Without this solution your idea immediately sinks. Blizzard has never been able to achieve this consistently. Assuming you could maintain this balance, you would need to acknowledge that one faction will typically have a stronger playerbase, either due to population or the accomplished guilds and one of the two factions will almost ALWAYS control world events. We have seen this time and time again... How could you possibly negate the impact of one side that overpowered the other? This isnt as simple as encouraging players to retaliate and fight for the zone harder. This is WORLD PvP, which is inherently unfair... One side will overpower the other side. Allowing the STRONGER faction to isolate this zone and get stronger themselves without any drawbacks, making the strong stronger.

Next you would need to tell us how you think farming geysers from the rank of private to rank 14 would be compelling gameplay.

Next you would need to tell us how a MASSIVE change like enhancing the geyser system would add to overall fingerprint of Classic without causing a massive shift from the original gameplay designs.

Next I would be interested in hearing how gaining honor from a PvE action that does not require PvP is a compelling design choice for the future of PvP.

Next I would ask how you plan to sell this idea to those who prefer a more competitive experience in battlegrounds (most of the PvP community) and plan to earn their favor by incentivizing them to farm geysers for hours upon hours.

Furthermore, I would be interested in why you want to play Classic. Every post you make nitpicks a piece of Classic and then you offer a terrible solution to an issue that never existed... Your "solutions" are typically ridiculous. In this case, you want to incentivize world PvP. Instead of adjusting honor gain from world PvP, you want to revitalize a terrible geyser system. So why do you want to play Classic? Why aren't you playing on games like Warhammer that will accommodate most of your proposed changes? Why are you proposing changes on a forum designed for people who want to play a restoration project? Your changes aren't even subtle... Boat battles, treasure system, airdrops, player housing... You want a different game than the rest of us do. This is the equivalent of going into an ice cream store, not ordering anything, climbing onto one of the tables and preaching about how good pizza tastes. We don't care, we've all had pizza, we want iced cream... Vanilla iced cream.

You mentioned in the past that you were a part of the development process for Vanilla WoW (I'll play pretend and accommodate your story) why don't you network with some of your old colleagues and see what they have to say about your changes? Better yet, you could take these ideas and post them on the WoW forums where development will see them and can actually capture some of these beautiful ideas and incorporate them into Classic!?

I am not #nochanges. I am okay with propositions of tasteful changes. Updating the mailbox, putting in toggleable modern graphics, updating the functionality of the auction house... Lets be real, #nochanges died when changes were added! We are getting a whole lot of changes in Classic WoW. Based on what we currently know, Blizz are doing their best to keep the gameplay and core game design philosophies as close to the original game as they can. Your changes do the exact opposite of this. So my final question is, do you actually think anyone would be interested in designing and implementing such changes to a restoration project that has made every effort to stay as unaltered as it possibly can?

You are asking for specific criticisms for your idea, but your idea is awful. I cant give you specific critiques when the entire idea is terrible... The idea has failed MANY times in the SAME game that you are proposing to implement the idea into. "Im going to drink this poison, tell me how I can do it better or what issues you have with me drinking the poison?" My answer? Its a cup of poison. Poison is bad.

   Tec MeatLumps RedridgeGnoll Erik
Alterac Valley
User avatar
Posts: 163
Likes: 110
162 posts
Alliance
Druid
Alliance Druid 162 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Oh lawdy lawd.

Now that, that is a post :lol:

   Stfuppercut
 Blizzard Entertainment
You think you do, but you don’t
Hunter Marksman
User avatar
Posts: 515
Likes: 300
Orc Hunter 513 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Tec wrote:
1 week ago
Oh lawdy lawd.

Now that, that is a post :lol:
Ughhhh... right? So dreadful... Reading it was probably worse than writing it.

User avatar
Posts: 104
Likes: 20
104 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 week ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
The honor rewards from spamming battlegrounds are much higher than doing World PvP.
This is by choice. BG's are designed to be a balanced and competitive experience that rewards you for participating. Put in effort, get reward. World PvP is supposed to be an organic experience that enhances the overall world. This is a GOOD design decision! If grinding world PvP rep meant running around all day collecting geysers, this would RUIN world PvP. Most servers wont have a 50/50 faction balance. They never have and never will. One side will decimate Silithus and the other will be unable to compete in most circumstances. Improving this system means that Blizz would have to address all WHOLE host of new issues... Issues that they have never been able to solve, like bringing faction balances closer. Content like this are also not good pieces of group content. Typically one person will grind and the others will simply host their grind which only adds to the imbalance of such a system. Systems like this that have been implemented (which you still fail to realize - good lord man) have been implemented and it consistently fails.

This idea has been attempted MANY times. It fails EVERY time. THIS time it wont be any different. I would prefer if competitive battlegrounds gave rewards and world PvP was left unaltered. There is a certain prestige that comes from honor gear. Gear that is earned by decimating thousands upon thousands of enemies at your own level. World PvP is a tool. A tool to secure a questing area, a tool for securing a zone for a world boss or simple revenge and bloodshed without purpose. The reward is the kill itself... Dont sterilize that experience by putting in an unnecessary reward system that players can gain honor WITHOUT killing eachother.............. They will ALWAYS take the path of least resistance, just like AV trains that run beside eachother.
Nymis wrote:
1 week ago
All of the arguments I've seen you write in favor of this relate to how it's good to give players a possibility to farm honor other than BGs, but World-PvP is really just about whacking other players senselessly for no big reason.

The thing about World-PvP is that it's inherently unbalanced.
See this quote. Please read it until you understand it. Dont just read it to see the words and sound them out... Spend time understanding what @Nymis wrote. Every suggestion you have made in ALL of your posts would move the game in a COMPLETELY opposite direction of what Classic was. You cant seem to understand any of the major issues your implementations would have. You dont even seem to understand the difference of world PvP and instanced BG's or what implications come with changing the entire dynamic of high level honor farming...........
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
I would appreciate some feedback on my proposed changes. I would like to delve into the specifics of The Silithyst Must Flow and how it could be improved.
So first you would need to tell us how you plan to create a 50/50 faction balance on 100% of the servers. Without this solution your idea immediately sinks. Blizzard has never been able to achieve this consistently. Assuming you could maintain this balance, you would need to acknowledge that one faction will typically have a stronger playerbase, either due to population or the accomplished guilds and one of the two factions will almost ALWAYS control world events. We have seen this time and time again... How could you possibly negate the impact of one side that overpowered the other? This isnt as simple as encouraging players to retaliate and fight for the zone harder. This is WORLD PvP, which is inherently unfair... One side will overpower the other side. Allowing the STRONGER faction to isolate this zone and get stronger themselves without any drawbacks, making the strong stronger.

Next you would need to tell us how you think farming geysers from the rank of private to rank 14 would be compelling gameplay.

Next you would need to tell us how a MASSIVE change like enhancing the geyser system would add to overall fingerprint of Classic without causing a massive shift from the original gameplay designs.

Next I would be interested in hearing how gaining honor from a PvE action that does not require PvP is a compelling design choice for the future of PvP.

Next I would ask how you plan to sell this idea to those who prefer a more competitive experience in battlegrounds (most of the PvP community) and plan to earn their favor by incentivizing them to farm geysers for hours upon hours.

Furthermore, I would be interested in why you want to play Classic. Every post you make nitpicks a piece of Classic and then you offer a terrible solution to an issue that never existed... Your "solutions" are typically ridiculous. In this case, you want to incentivize world PvP. Instead of adjusting honor gain from world PvP, you want to revitalize a terrible geyser system. So why do you want to play Classic? Why aren't you playing on games like Warhammer that will accommodate most of your proposed changes? Why are you proposing changes on a forum designed for people who want to play a restoration project? Your changes aren't even subtle... Boat battles, treasure system, airdrops, player housing... You want a different game than the rest of us do. This is the equivalent of going into an ice cream store, not ordering anything, climbing onto one of the tables and preaching about how good pizza tastes. We don't care, we've all had pizza, we want iced cream... Vanilla iced cream.

You mentioned in the past that you were a part of the development process for Vanilla WoW (I'll play pretend and accommodate your story) why don't you network with some of your old colleagues and see what they have to say about your changes? Better yet, you could take these ideas and post them on the WoW forums where development will see them and can actually capture some of these beautiful ideas and incorporate them into Classic!?

I am not #nochanges. I am okay with propositions of tasteful changes. Updating the mailbox, putting in toggleable modern graphics, updating the functionality of the auction house... Lets be real, #nochanges died when changes were added! We are getting a whole lot of changes in Classic WoW. Based on what we currently know, Blizz are doing their best to keep the gameplay and core game design philosophies as close to the original game as they can. Your changes do the exact opposite of this. So my final question is, do you actually think anyone would be interested in designing and implementing such changes to a restoration project that has made every effort to stay as unaltered as it possibly can?

You are asking for specific criticisms for your idea, but your idea is awful. I cant give you specific critiques when the entire idea is terrible... The idea has failed MANY times in the SAME game that you are proposing to implement the idea into. "Im going to drink this poison, tell me how I can do it better or what issues you have with me drinking the poison?" My answer? Its a cup of poison. Poison is bad.
I appreciate your thorough response. As many realize, PvP is a major aspect of Classic WoW, especially from a streaming standpoint. World PvP in particular is what distinguishes Classic from the expansions. It will be very interesting to see how Phase 2 plays out. The introduction of the Honor System without battlegrounds will bring tons of World PvP. Will faction imbalance make Phase 2 a flawed and miserable experience? This remains to be seen. I myself am optimistic about the prospects of Phase 2. The reason I have made suggestions on improving the state of World PvP in Classic, is because I do not think Battlegrounds will keep players interested very long. Warsong Gulch, Arathi Basin, and the Alterac Valley baserush have been played to death over the last 15 years.

I realize that battlegrounds are a core feature of Classic WoW. I am not suggesting that alternative honor farming methods should be more effective. However, I am concerned about the combination of crossrealm and capital city battleground queueing. These features, which were not present in Classic until the very end, will likely result in behavior similar to that on Retail. Players will stay in the Capital Cities all day spam queueing battlegrounds. That is basically how Retail is. I am well aware of the failures of Blizzard's World PvP systems. Then again, can you name one PvP MMORPG that worked? Please don't say Warhammer Online. Even Dark Age of Camelot was so flawed.

The reason World PvP fails in MMORPGs is for a multiude of reasons. The most apparent being player population imbalances. Most of the time fights are not fair. Whether due to group or faction size inequalities, there consistently exist deterrents to fulfilling World PvP. One particular World PvP Objective, The Silithyst Must Flow was actually Blizzard's best effort. Unfortunately, it was undermined by several misguided design decisions. Rather than encouraging World PvP, players were incentivized to avoid it instead. I have outlined a potential solution to the problems which were inherent in the original design of The Silithyst Must Flow. The faction imbalance issue is not one which can be wholly remedied, since it is an open world game afterall. However, having mechanics like underpopulation honor bonuses can be helpful. To not create a conflict with Battlegrounds, an event such as The Silithyst Must Flow could take place a few times a day to break up the monotony of battleground queues. It shouldn't be forced upon the playerbase to disregard battlegrounds and solely rank up doing World PvP objectives. However, I think an alternative PvP system that allowed players to farm honor is healthy for the game. I went into detail about how I would improve The Silithyst Must Flow, and any criticism of my proposed changes is always welcome.

If you make the honor rewards too high for The Silithyst Must Flow, then that can lead to what happened on Kronos, where many players quit battlegrounds to collect sand instead. However, if you keep the honor rewards high, but perhaps make the event occur only occassionally, then it could work out better. I know that my iteration on Blizzard's World PvP Systems is not infallible. However, I have suggested some changes to what they implemented, and am looking for specific feedback about why my offerings wouldn't be improvements. This is important, because I think World PvP matters a lot for the success of Classic. The potential of mechanics like loot-pvp were not fully realized in the original game, but it is commendable that Blizzard attempted it. I don't know if it is fair to say that my updated The Silithyst Must Flow would suffer from the same failures of the original system. I would like to be shown otherwise.

Hunter Marksman
User avatar
Posts: 515
Likes: 300
Orc Hunter 513 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
I realize that battlegrounds are a core feature of Classic WoW.
Then dont make suggestions to change that by devaluing them.
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
I am not suggesting that alternative honor farming methods should be more effective.
If alternative farming methods are not effective, no one will do them. Certainly not players who are looking down the barrel of HUNDREDS of hours of farming. Why would a PvP player who needs to farm to rank 14 opt to farm less honor per hour, by performing a PvE action farming geysers til their eyes bled, if your proposed system wasn't more effective than farming with a premade? Have you even took the time to think out your argument?
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
However, I am concerned about the combination of crossrealm and capital city battleground queueing. These features, which were not present in Classic until the very end, will likely result in behavior similar to that on Retail. Players will stay in the Capital Cities all day spam queueing battlegrounds. That is basically how Retail is. I am well aware of the failures of Blizzard's World PvP systems. Then again, can you name one PvP MMORPG that worked? Please don't say Warhammer Online. Even Dark Age of Camelot was so flawed.
You know what other system would help encourage modern WoW features? Having an open world PvP collection system that DEPENDS on an equal faction balance. What change do you think a system like this requires to function? How do you think an MMO will offer consistent faction balance? Perhaps they could do some form of sharding to ensure that population counts remained competitive...? Hmmmm, that seems likely doesnt it?
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
The reason World PvP fails in MMORPGs is for a multiude of reasons. The most apparent being player population imbalances. Most of the time fights are not fair. Whether due to group or faction size inequalities, there consistently exist deterrents to fulfilling World PvP. One particular World PvP Objective, The Silithyst Must Flow was actually Blizzard's best effort. Unfortunately, it was undermined by several misguided design decisions.
Right. But you know how to fix it right? You're the guy that can make this work! We have watched this idea fail for well over a decade spanning across a plethora of games designed by numerous developers. Blizzard has single-handedly tried to implement variants of this system on MANY occasions and failed, but THIS time will be different right? Because you're a smart guy! Right?
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
Rather than encouraging World PvP, players were incentivized to avoid it instead.
Just like they would do with geysers. Want me to give you a guiding principle that you can carry forward into future world PvP ideas? I'll give you a core game philosophy that you can apply to any new idea you might come up with. We will share it, just the two of us; Never reward honor for an action that does not DIRECTLY require players to engage in combat with one another. Honor may only be rewarded for honorable actions and thus can only be rewarded for actions that result in another player dying. Collecting items, touching geysers, looking for treasure chests, etc, will NOT reward honor. While certain actions may incentivize PvP, like world bosses or zone control for questing items, those same instigators will NOT reward honor themselves.
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
The faction imbalance issue is not one which can be wholly remedied, since it is an open world game afterall.
And so your idea is dead on arrival.
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 week ago
I don't know if it is fair to say that my updated The Silithyst Must Flow would suffer from the same failures of the original system. I would like to be shown otherwise.
The risk is too high. This change could(would) negatively impact PvP and has been proven to fail repeatedly. I'd like to introduce you to the term "wisdom"...

Wisdom:
-the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise
-the soundness of an action or decision with regard to the application of experience, knowledge, and good judgment
-the body of knowledge and principles that develops within a specified society or period.

Do you think your idea is wise given the wide body of knowledge and experience we have with such systems? How many times does something need to fail for you to acknowledge that it does not work? Learn from the past so as not to repeat the same mistakes that have been made. Be wise.

Mulgore
User avatar
Discord:

Erik#8716


Posts: 34
Likes: 31
34 posts
Tauren
Druid
Tauren Druid 34 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Besides "original" world pvp, has there ever been any sort of successful world pvp/big scale pvp scenarios?

Let me give you some examples that I personally found was no fun other then first week or two:

Eastern Plaguelands towers, Silithus, Hellfire (TBC), Zangarmarsh (TBC), Terokkar Forest (TBC), Nagrand (TBC) (even though the TBC ones are very similar to one another) Then we have wintergrasp, Tol'barad, Ashran etc. Same goes for Battlegrounds where the main focus to win is not just killing players. Like Strand of the ancients, you could win that without being in combat or killing any players. Hence the popularity of WSG and AB.

The purest form of world pvp (Giving there is a relatively even split in factions) is the most fun hands down, no new idea that hasn't already been thought of is gonna be better.

Please for the love of god stop with these "New ideas" for an old version of the game and instead focus your ideas to current retail if you want change.

#nochange

Resto/Balance Druid - Horde - PvP - Europe - Sweden - Born in the golden year 1990
Alterac Valley
User avatar
Posts: 163
Likes: 110
162 posts
Alliance
Druid
Alliance Druid 162 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

@Erik I found the Tarren Mill vs Southshore BG/Scenario they added in legion? to be pretty great.
40v40 deathmatch and first to 150.

It’s got like a fast style WPvP feel to it.
I loved it.

 Blizzard Entertainment
You think you do, but you don’t
Mulgore
User avatar
Discord:

Erik#8716


Posts: 34
Likes: 31
34 posts
Tauren
Druid
Tauren Druid 34 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Tec wrote:
1 week ago
@Erik I found the Tarren Mill vs Southshore BG/Scenario they added in legion? to be pretty great.
40v40 deathmatch and first to 150.

It’s got like a fast style WPvP feel to it.
I loved it.
Well it's just a remake of how the WPvP is in Classic, so it won't be needed in actual Classic.

It was decent because it was TM vs Sshore like in vanilla, but with "retail" classes, which made it worse.

It was also only during a certain time and event.

   Stfuppercut
Resto/Balance Druid - Horde - PvP - Europe - Sweden - Born in the golden year 1990
User avatar
Posts: 104
Likes: 20
104 posts
1 week ago (Beta)
1 week ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Stfuppercut wrote:
1 week ago
Then dont make suggestions to change that by devaluing them.
The idea is to provide an alternative to battlegrounds, not eliminate then.
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 week ago
If alternative farming methods are not effective, no one will do them. Certainly not players who are looking down the barrel of HUNDREDS of hours of farming. Why would a PvP player who needs to farm to rank 14 opt to farm less honor per hour, by performing a PvE action farming geysers til their eyes bled, if your proposed system wasn't more effective than farming with a premade? Have you even took the time to think out your argument?
Most players are not trying to reach rank 14. Most players are also not in premade groups farming honor ranks. Giving these players other ways to farm honor would be welcome. Obviously, the players looking for the fastest honor rewards will only do premade battlegrounds. However, the PvP Resource Battlezone could give high honor rewards, but only be active a few times a day. This way players would be incentivied to do both.
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 week ago
You know what other system would help encourage modern WoW features? Having an open world PvP collection system that DEPENDS on an equal faction balance. What change do you think a system like this requires to function? How do you think an MMO will offer consistent faction balance? Perhaps they could do some form of sharding to ensure that population counts remained competitive...? Hmmmm, that seems likely doesnt it?
Playing on the underpopulated faction in the battlezone would have its advantages. There would be more enemies to gank, and the more outnumbered your faction is, the bigger honor bonus you would receive from turnins.
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 week ago
Right. But you know how to fix it right? You're the guy that can make this work! We have watched this idea fail for well over a decade spanning across a plethora of games designed by numerous developers. Blizzard has single-handedly tried to implement variants of this system on MANY occasions and failed, but THIS time will be different right? Because you're a smart guy! Right?
Just because Blizzard has implemented poorly designed World PvP objectives time again, does not mean there aren't some positives to take away from them. I explained why The Silithyst Must Flow was a failure. I have made some suggestions on how it could be improved.
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 week ago
Just like they would do with geysers. Want me to give you a guiding principle that you can carry forward into future world PvP ideas? I'll give you a core game philosophy that you can apply to any new idea you might come up with. We will share it, just the two of us; Never reward honor for an action that does not DIRECTLY require players to engage in combat with one another. Honor may only be rewarded for honorable actions and thus can only be rewarded for actions that result in another player dying. Collecting items, touching geysers, looking for treasure chests, etc, will NOT reward honor. While certain actions may incentivize PvP, like world bosses or zone control for questing items, those same instigators will NOT reward honor themselves.
Capturing bases in AB or flags in Warsong Gulch all reward honor. Look at Alterac Valley, avoiding player combat is the fastest way to win. Killing faction leaders awards honor. In Open World PvP you just can't make the rewards a result of killing other players. The resource objectives serve a specific purpose of splitting up players and reducing the zerg potential.
Stfuppercut wrote:
1 week ago
The risk is too high. This change could(would) negatively impact PvP and has been proven to fail repeatedly. I'd like to introduce you to the term "wisdom"...

Wisdom:
-the quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise
-the soundness of an action or decision with regard to the application of experience, knowledge, and good judgment
-the body of knowledge and principles that develops within a specified society or period.

Do you think your idea is wise given the wide body of knowledge and experience we have with such systems? How many times does something need to fail for you to acknowledge that it does not work? Learn from the past so as not to repeat the same mistakes that have been made. Be wise.
The system I am suggesting has never existed in WoW, but rather only kernels of it. You say the risk is too high? What risk is there for a player roaming a Battlezone carrying none or few geysers? They have nothing to lose by engaging in attacking another player collecting geysers. The risk is not always equal, but there are times when players will risk a lot. That is why World PvP will happen.

Similar topics
to 'Battlezones: World PvP Battle for Resources Idea'
Posts ViewsLast post