Ashenvale
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1040
Likes: 785
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Why do you think I post all these topics?
Considering that you have failed to convince anybody into agreeing with any of these ideas yet push on regardless, I'm just going to assume you're shitposting to farm post count. Kind of like I am :lol:

   Mythric Dolamite
Warlock Affliction
User avatar
US Kirtonos
Posts: 475
Likes: 227
Horde
Warlock
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Kuro wrote:
1 year ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Killing players for little to no reward in World PvP is a bad system.
I never played vanilla, but as I can see Blizzard never intended World PvP to be a fully-fledged PvP mode. Bingo!
World PvP wasn't a system with no rewards!!!

Your reward was killing that scum bag rogue that ganked you at level 40!
Or killing that stupid Warrior that charged you and stunned you while his jerk Priest friend mind controlled you into the lava!
Or killing that best known warlock that kills everyone in searing gorge and thinking your better than him!
Or helping out a level 26 ally that is getting jumped by a level 60 and camping him while he is leveling!
Or battling it out at Tarren Mill, fighting 15 level 60's, which all started by that 60 jumping and camping that ally level 26 leveling!
Or just killing the other faction because you hate Alliance or hate Horde

Your reward is enjoyment!
Your reward is fun!
Your reward is being honored by helping out your allies getting ganked!
Your reward is have the other faction loath you and seek you in the world!
Your reward is having a reputation, whether it is good or bad!

Don't (don't know if we can curse) F* with World PvP!

   Mythric
Image Image
Image Image
| Nýxt - Affliction Warlock | Kirtonos PVP | Level 60 | =-|-= | Awkaran - Resto Druid | Kirtonos PVP | Level 27 |
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Nyxt wrote:
1 year ago
Kuro wrote:
1 year ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Killing players for little to no reward in World PvP is a bad system.
I never played vanilla, but as I can see Blizzard never intended World PvP to be a fully-fledged PvP mode. Bingo!
World PvP wasn't a system with no rewards!!!

Your reward was killing that scum bag rogue that ganked you at level 40!
Or killing that stupid Warrior that charged you and stunned you while his jerk Priest friend mind controlled you into the lava!
Or killing that best known warlock that kills everyone in searing gorge and thinking your better than him!
Or helping out a level 26 ally that is getting jumped by a level 60 and camping him while he is leveling!
Or battling it out at Tarren Mill, fighting 15 level 60's, which all started by that 60 jumping and camping that ally level 26 leveling!

Your reward is enjoyment!
Your reward is fun!
Your reward is being honored by helping out your allies getting ganked!
Your reward is have the other faction loath you and seek you in the world!
Your reward is having a reputation, whether it is good or bad!
That is nostalgia talking. Take off the goggles. When battlegrounds came out, World PvP went into the dustbin pretty much. It will likely even more the case in Classic. The lack of reward is one of the reasons WPVP died in the expansions. Players realized the reward was low honor.

User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Pippina wrote:
1 year ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Why do you think I post all these topics?
Considering that you have failed to convince anybody into agreeing with any of these ideas yet push on regardless, I'm just going to assume you're shitposting to farm post count. Kind of like I am :lol:
Blizzard tried to improve World PvP after they introduced BGs. The Silithus and EPL PvP objectives were examples of that. They failed terribly. I have been making suggestions that will improve the state of World PvP once battlegrounds are released. I still do not see the downside of having two honor system??

Ashenvale
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1040
Likes: 785
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

@Nymis already typed up why and I'm not going to waste words just re-stating what he already wrote a page ago. So let's just leave the main points here again.

No changes
Bad philosophy
Unforeseen impact
Unintended consequences


Game is fine as it is.

Paladin Retribution
User avatar
Posts: 61
Likes: 20
Human
Paladin
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Pippina wrote:
1 year ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Why do you think I post all these topics?
Considering that you have failed to convince anybody into agreeing with any of these ideas yet push on regardless, I'm just going to assume you're shitposting to farm post count. Kind of like I am :lol:
Blizzard tried to improve World PvP after they introduced BGs. The Silithus and EPL PvP objectives were examples of that. They failed terribly. I have been making suggestions that will improve the state of World PvP once battlegrounds are released. I still do not see the downside of having two honor system??
Why would you suggest it for the Classic WoW? The idea is to recreate the vanilla WoW from back in the day. I think you might have better luck at retail WoW official forums.

Warlock Affliction
User avatar
US Kirtonos
Posts: 475
Likes: 227
Horde
Warlock
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
That is nostalgia talking. Take off the goggles. When battlegrounds came out, World PvP went into the dustbin pretty much. It will likely even more the casw in Classic.
Naw! I call it competitiveness!
You may PvP to seek stats and gear and shiny new objects!
I seek PvP to be better than my opponent, rewards are nice and all, but I want to be the best not care if i suck or not!
Kinda like sports, I dont play just for the trophy, I play to beat my opponent and be good at what I do!

Get that nostalgia shit out of here!
I don't play like that...if i see some dick rogue out in the world that ganked me, you bet your ass Im gonna go get him!
Nostalgia my ass! If i see that rank 14 shadow priest running around stirring shit up, I want a piece of that and try and take him down...

Image Image
Image Image
| Nýxt - Affliction Warlock | Kirtonos PVP | Level 60 | =-|-= | Awkaran - Resto Druid | Kirtonos PVP | Level 27 |
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Kuro wrote:
1 year ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Pippina wrote:
1 year ago
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Why do you think I post all these topics?
Considering that you have failed to convince anybody into agreeing with any of these ideas yet push on regardless, I'm just going to assume you're shitposting to farm post count. Kind of like I am :lol:
Blizzard tried to improve World PvP after they introduced BGs. The Silithus and EPL PvP objectives were examples of that. They failed terribly. I have been making suggestions that will improve the state of World PvP once battlegrounds are released. I still do not see the downside of having two honor system??
Why would you suggest it for the Classic WoW? The idea is to recreate the vanilla WoW from back in the day. I think you might have better luck at retail WoW official forums.
Because there were many versions of Classic WoW. There was a version of Classic WoW where ranking in World PvP was the only way. We will get that in Phase 2. The issue is that it is temporary. Battlegrounds will be the only way to rank up once Phase 3 hits, and I think it is a mistake to remove World PvP ranking. The best solution is to just have 2 systems, so players can rank up doing either one.

Ashenvale
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1040
Likes: 785
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Kuro wrote:
1 year ago
Why would you suggest it for the Classic WoW? The idea is to recreate the vanilla WoW from back in the day. I think you might have better luck at retail WoW official forums.
You mean a recreation of a 15 year old game designed to be done without any changes from the original experience shouldn't be completely different and change all the time? :lol:

Paladin Retribution
User avatar
Posts: 61
Likes: 20
Human
Paladin
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Because there were many versions of Classic WoW. There was a version of Classic WoW where ranking in World PvP was the only way. We will get that in Phase 2. The issue is that it is temporary. Battlegrounds will be the only way to rank up once Phase 3 hits, and I think it is a mistake to remove World PvP ranking. The best solution is to just have 2 systems, so players can rank up doing either one.
But it's not a recreation of that particular Classic WoW. It's a recreation of the vanilla AND the changes that followed in a similar order. These changes included Battlegrounds. To me it just makes no sense suggesting changes to a recreation of a game from 2004.

Paladin Retribution
User avatar
Posts: 61
Likes: 20
Human
Paladin
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Pippina wrote:
1 year ago
Kuro wrote:
1 year ago
Why would you suggest it for the Classic WoW? The idea is to recreate the vanilla WoW from back in the day. I think you might have better luck at retail WoW official forums.
You mean a recreation of a 15 year old game designed to be done without any changes from the original experience shouldn't be completely different and change all the time? :lol:
Yeah I just made the same point :D

User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Pippina wrote:
451 years from now
Kuro wrote:
1 year ago
Why would you suggest it for the Classic WoW? The idea is to recreate the vanilla WoW from back in the day. I think you might have better luck at retail WoW official forums.
You mean a recreation of a 15 year old game designed to be done without any changes from the original experience shouldn't be completely different and change all the time? :lol:
What original experience? Most of Vanilla had serverwide BGs. Part of Vanilla had honor ranking through World PvP. Crossrealm was not even added until right before TBC. Did you know Vanilla actually had Arenas?

The point is there are many versions of Vanilla WoW. I understand that we are getting 1.12, but that does not mean it is the best version for everyone. I am suggesting a change that would make World PvP matter like it did in early Vanilla.

Ashenvale
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1040
Likes: 785
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
What original experience? Most of Vanilla had serverwide BGs. Part of Vanilla had honor ranking through World PvP. Crossrealm was not even added until right before TBC. Did you Vanilla actually had Arenas? They were added in a final patch before TBC.
I sure didn't see air drops, bounty PvP nodes or separate parallel honor systems inside contested territory back in 2005. In fact I seem to remember a lot of battlegrounds.

The last few days pre patch 2.0 doesn't count. We're not getting arenas.
RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
I understand that we are getting 1.12, but that does not mean it is the best version for everyone.
This isn't a lunch buffet, you don't get to pick the dinner plate. You get the same version of 1.12 as the rest of us.

Paladin Retribution
User avatar
Posts: 61
Likes: 20
Human
Paladin
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Blizzard's idea of World PvP is that in the beginning you level in your starting zones and then suddenly there are zones where players from the opposite faction can level too. So you have to fight for your survival and ability to actually do quests and level up your char. That's the reward!

Warrior Fury
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1218
Likes: 808
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

I will say this... I have added Gnoll on my discord and chatted with him, and while he is clearly out of touch with the game, he is not trolling. This man is 100% serious. So we can put the idea that hes just trolling to rest... If anyone wants to double down and recheck that theory, add him on discord yourselves.

   Selexin
g0bledyg00k wrote:
10 months ago
Never making a single investment again until I 100% know it pays off.
2000 IQ :wink:
Ashenvale
User avatar
US Fairbanks
Posts: 1040
Likes: 785
Gnome
Warrior
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

I don't think he's trolling either. I don't like his ideas on adding crap to the game, but I don't think he's trolling.

   Selexin
Tirisfal Glades
User avatar
Posts: 176
Likes: 131
Undead
Priest
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Rank14/High Warlord system is and should stay as is. We aren't redesigning raids...

The grind of classic, whatever it may have been for is WHY we've been asking for it to get re-released. Not re-designed.

   Selexin
<Extreme>
Council Chairman
US-Horde
Blaumeux
Druid Restoration
User avatar
OC Yojamba
Posts: 969
Likes: 773
Tauren
Druid
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

@RedridgeGnoll I know you are looking to change Classic WoW, so I thought I would help provide some info on what Classic WoW is for most people.

If you visit the official Blizzard page for Classic WoW (here) you will see the following:


As you can see, the intention of this project is to recreate the old original World of Warcraft experience as it was. No one is looking to change it, no one is looking to add to it. Blizzard are recreating original World of Warcraft - they are not making WoW 2 or Classic+. I hope this helps you understand why some of the responses here and in your other threads may come across as quite abrupt. People have been waiting a long time for Classic, not Classic+ Ashran Edition.

   Mythric
ImageImage Lvl 60
ImageImage Lvl 43
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

Selexin wrote:
1 year ago
@RedridgeGnoll I know you are looking to change Classic WoW, so I thought I would help provide some info on what Classic WoW is for most people.

If you visit the official Blizzard page for Classic WoW (here) you will see the following:


As you can see, the intention of this project is to recreate the old original World of Warcraft experience as it was. No one is looking to change it, no one is looking to add to it. Blizzard are recreating original World of Warcraft - they are not making WoW 2 or Classic+. I hope this helps you understand why some of the responses here and in your other threads may come across as quite abrupt. People have been waiting a long time for Classic, not Classic+ Ashran Edition.
Read the fine print: World of Warcraft Classic is a faithful recreation of the original World of Warcraft—it runs a bit smoother on today’s computers, but the game still looks and feels like you’re playing World of Warcraft from 2006.

The game was released in 2004. There were many version of Classic. The version we are getting only existed for a few months.

Hunter Marksman
User avatar
EU Zandalar Tribe
Posts: 85
Likes: 74
Night Elf
Hunter
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
Read the fine print: World of Warcraft Classic is a faithful recreation of the original World of Warcraft—it runs a bit smoother on today’s computers, but the game still looks and feels like you’re playing World of Warcraft from 2006.

The game was released in 2004. There were many version of Classic. The version we are getting only existed for a few months.
And yet none of those versions contained any of the ideas you pitched. Its a stupid idea, just because you only want to do something when a reward is attached to it doesn't mean its a good idea to attach a reward to it. Try to view other peoples point of views.

   Selexin
Druid Restoration
User avatar
OC Yojamba
Posts: 969
Likes: 773
Tauren
Druid
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

RedridgeGnoll wrote:
1 year ago
but the game still looks and feels like you’re playing World of Warcraft from 2006
Patch 1.12. You say you had involvement in the development of Vanilla WoW. Please elaborate.

Edit: words.

   Stfuppercut
ImageImage Lvl 60
ImageImage Lvl 43
Burning Steppes
User avatar
Posts: 1
Likes: 1
Mage
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

@RedridgeGnoll I'd like to see kills be worth more. It should be a viable tactic to rank up chasing those pesky Grand Marshals out in the wild. But what can you do, the system is flawed. Honor from killing players in the world doesn't even compare to bg farming. That being said, a parallel honor system would be nothing more but a band-aid fix ignoring the real issues in the system.

IMO the greatest flaw of the system lies in the very nature of honor farm: honor gain from bg objectives is king. In my experience, it's irrelevant who you face when your bg queue pops, the only thing that matters is how much AB points or WSG flags or AV objectives you can grind per hour. Not only do those objectives award bonus honor at the end of the bg, but you also get tokens for the repeatable quests from winning or losing, which further amplifies this issue.

Thus, one thing I'd change is make the bg objective honor scale depending on the average rank of the enemy team, and make the game try match-make you against enemy teams roughly around your rank. The most efficient way to earn honor should absolutely not be curb-stomping green-geared players in 5 min AB games, but rather actually playing the game against worthy opponents regardless of how long the games take. For example, beating an enemy team with an avg rank of 10 in a 30 minute game should always give you substantially more honor than crushing a team with an avg rank of 3 in just 5 minutes six times in a row. Of course, you could always just spam 5 min ABs against low-ranked players all day (by forming a premade with low-ranked players for example), as long as you're willing to pour in the extra time. I know, this suggestion would change the dynamic of the honor grind completely and it would not be vanilla like. "Like why not just put rbgs in the game lololol!" But that's not my point. I believe the original honor system had potential despite of being poorly implemented. Too bad it was abandoned with TBC.

Just my 2 cents. Personally, I'm happy as long as I get to play the game, but what do you guys think?

Westfall
User avatar
US Pagle
Posts: 84
Likes: 78
Dwarf
Priest
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

I agree, RedridgeGnoll is extremely out of touch with what Blizzard's goal is with Classic. He's a staple case of a vocal minority that's trying to change a game to what HE wants, not what the majority of players want.

   Dolamite Nyxt Mythric Selexin
User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

TeamRemix wrote:
1 year ago
I agree, RedridgeGnoll is extremely out of touch with what Blizzard's goal is with Classic. He's a staple case of a vocal minority that's trying to change a game to what HE wants, not what the majority of players want.
You are no different than the people on the WoW forums who fought with me during the TBC Beta when I ridiculed the changes. Stuff like Crossrealm battlegrounds are what led us on the road to retail.

User avatar
Posts: 285
Likes: 47
1 year ago (Beta)
 •  Unread

verychill wrote:
1 year ago
@RedridgeGnoll I'd like to see kills be worth more. It should be a viable tactic to rank up chasing those pesky Grand Marshals out in the wild. But what can you do, the system is flawed. Honor from killing players in the world doesn't even compare to bg farming. That being said, a parallel honor system would be nothing more but a band-aid fix ignoring the real issues in the system.

IMO the greatest flaw of the system lies in the very nature of honor farm: honor gain from bg objectives is king. In my experience, it's irrelevant who you face when your bg queue pops, the only thing that matters is how much AB points or WSG flags or AV objectives you can grind per hour. Not only do those objectives award bonus honor at the end of the bg, but you also get tokens for the repeatable quests from winning or losing, which further amplifies this issue.

Thus, one thing I'd change is make the bg objective honor scale depending on the average rank of the enemy team, and make the game try match-make you against enemy teams roughly around your rank. The most efficient way to earn honor should absolutely not be curb-stomping green-geared players in 5 min AB games, but rather actually playing the game against worthy opponents regardless of how long the games take. For example, beating an enemy team with an avg rank of 10 in a 30 minute game should always give you substantially more honor than crushing a team with an avg rank of 3 in just 5 minutes six times in a row. Of course, you could always just spam 5 min ABs against low-ranked players all day (by forming a premade with low-ranked players for example), as long as you're willing to pour in the extra time. I know, this suggestion would change the dynamic of the honor grind completely and it would not be vanilla like. "Like why not just put rbgs in the game lololol!" But that's not my point. I believe the original honor system had potential despite of being poorly implemented. Too bad it was abandoned with TBC.

Just my 2 cents. Personally, I'm happy as long as I get to play the game, but what do you guys think?
Great post Verychill! Winning battlegrounds gave 3x as much honor as killing players in battlegrounds. This was partly due to the diminishing returns of killing the same player over and over. It is a reason AV was unpopular. It gave less honor, because player kills eventually gave no honor over the course of a long battle. Battlegrounds for most of Classic were serverwide, meaning players often had long queue times. This led to players roaming contested territory to bolster the honor gains while they waited in queue. In Classic we will have crossrealm battlegrounds, which means players are unlikely to even leave the capital cities. Winning 5 minute battlegrounds against green geared players is what ends up happening. How is that a good thing?

It is true that Honor in World PvP was too low. Blizzard actually increased it in a later patch, but it still made little difference. They could have just increased Honor a lot more, and made World PvP the fastest way to reach Rank 14. However, it would force players to participate in the system which gave the fastest honor. Players trying to reach Rank 14 would be forced to World PvP, if in fact that was the most efficient way to honor grind.

The reason I am suggesting having two honor systems, one for world pvp and one for battlegrounds, is because players would be able to reach rank 14 doing both. Players wouldn't be forced to farm the system that gave the fastest honor, because acheiving Rank 14 would be possible in World PvP and Battlegrounds. Otherwise, if you only have one Honor system, then players feel obligated to Rank up using the most efficient way to farm honor. If World PvP honor was increased, then players would have to choose which type of honor farming method was faster. In Classic there is no choice, because Crossrealm Battlegrounds are by far the fastest way to hit Rank 14. If there were two separate systems, then players wouldn't be forced to choose or change systems, because both systems would enable players to reach Rank 14. World PvP in Classic WoW offers almost no reward once battlegrounds are released. That is a huge issue.

Similar topics
to 'The Grind of the Honor System'
Posts ViewsLast post

Latest Blue Posts

View all
  • Screenshot of the Month

    View gallery