Log in

View Full Version : Quite interesting...


Stim
23-01-2008, 11:52 AM
http://www.warcraftrealms.com/bg_list.php?id=14
Horde double owns alliance in Cyclown everywhere but quadruply loses AV... So balancing balanced nothing :>

TroldePus
23-01-2008, 11:59 AM
So I can gather 2 things:

1. AV is badly designed = favours alliance.
2. Horde pwns in the bg's that are the same for both factions - AB, WSG and EOTS.

Kathra
23-01-2008, 12:07 PM
1. AV is badly designed = favours alliance.

Thread over, pretty much.

Stim
23-01-2008, 12:09 PM
SO how does alliance loses it? Can we exploit it futher :P ?

malkor
23-01-2008, 12:17 PM
Would be interested to see your reasons as to why you think AV favours alliance.

Kathra
23-01-2008, 12:27 PM
Would be interested to see your reasons as to why you think AV favours alliance.


Ever taken a proper look at both bases and the approach leading up to them? Horde gets bottlenecked on the bridge leading up to Vandaar while alliance + archers from the towers mow them down. Whereas alliance just waltz up the small ramp dealing with about three seconds of archer fire before they camp nicely infront of Dreks door

soulshift
23-01-2008, 12:39 PM
I like how both sides claim it's in favour of the other side. I agree on the fact that Horde have to deal with more archer fire around the main base though. But the bridge is only "good" because we have people defending. Each time I do AV and go to the Horde base, I barely see any Horde defense.

Horde have an easier time with SH bunker than we have with towers for example, though.

Vegelus
23-01-2008, 12:40 PM
With shorter way from horde's entrance to Van than ally has from entrance to Drek (or Balinda / Galv if You wish) yes, AV favours alliance, really.

But Soulshift wrote.

malkor
23-01-2008, 12:51 PM
Ever taken a proper look at both bases and the approach leading up to them? Horde gets bottlenecked on the bridge leading up to Vandaar while alliance + archers from the towers mow them down. Whereas alliance just waltz up the small ramp dealing with about three seconds of archer fire before they camp nicely infront of Dreks door

Every AV i go in horde send druids and rogues to cap the bunkers in alliance base, archers take 2 mins maybe to kill off. Is rare any alliance can get back before archers are dead. And we dont have that anoying gate bit between the two towers in horde base, that your casters like to get on top off ;) And once you have capped a bunker, a well organized horde defence takes alot of alliance to mow down, simply as the bunkers are easier to defend, can target alliance easier, start dotting, casting etc before we even get to top steps, stealthers can stay out of aoe by going round outside etc

Tsarina
23-01-2008, 12:51 PM
Would be interested to see your reasons as to why you think AV favours alliance.
You can cap all towers without sapping/killing archers. Capping the two DB bunkers without being a stealther is lethal. As a resto druid, I can ride alone into FW and cap all three nodes in 40 seconds (also, the 4 guards at the GY node aren't linked and easy to pull 2 by 2). There are no 5million HP NPCs near FW relief hut/entrance to Drek.

The node at Iceblood GY is the "wrong" direction. Compare to SH, where everyone ressing runs past the node. That's not the case at IB, making it a lot easier to cap. Because of this, there's no natural bottleneck to get through on the way to FW. Sure, in a pre you can have people take the other way after ressing and block the passage next to IB tower, but that's next to impossible to organise in a PuG. On SH side you don't need to organise anything since that's the direction you're heading after ressing.
Should alliance have defenders at Stormpike GY, it's hard to get past, or even onto, the bridge. If you make it, there are archers shooting at you for half the length of the bridge.
If horde is defending FW GY, you can simpy ride around it, jump the fence, and not being shot at before you're out of the "fortress" thingy. This used to be a hard place to pass in the old days with loads of NPCs and being dismounted as you entered, but that's far from the case now.

Other things, not really to do with map imbalance: Horde has 0-15 seconds AV queues, making it a lot less important to win. There are limits to how hard you'll get PuGs to work for a win. I see "just let them win" after about 5 minutes on horde side, hardly ever on alliance side (I've been doing tons of alliance AV lately for S1 gear). While you have AFKing/botting people on alliance side, it's a lot worse on horde side. Double the number most of the time at a qualified guess.
When you queue for 10-30 mins, you want to make the most out of it.

soulshift
23-01-2008, 01:06 PM
Should alliance have defenders at Stormpike GY, it's hard to get past, or even onto, the bridge. If you make it, there are archers shooting at you for half the length of the bridge.


Alliance often gets pulled away south cause of their rambo-ish glory seeking habbits. Horde then takes it from behind and you'll have 10 minutes of happy Alliance fun of Alliance yelling at eachother if you're in a crappy group. :p

Tsarina
23-01-2008, 01:11 PM
I'm afraid I don't see any relevance. I'm talking about when/if the GY is defended. You are talking about when it's not.

Scouserlol
23-01-2008, 01:43 PM
Barely any Horde AFK for me the past week... just to add.

soulshift
23-01-2008, 02:07 PM
I'm afraid I don't see any relevance. I'm talking about when/if the GY is defended. You are talking about when it's not.

I'm talking about when it's defended as well.
I just see Alliance defending it and running after the few Horde who play decoy so others can sneak past or even take the GY. :P

Ruoste
23-01-2008, 02:13 PM
But why does horde generally do so much better in AB/WSG/EOTS? I've recently been doing bgs (in pugs) with alts for S1 gear and getting the BG daily quest done for AV often takes 5-10 matches when for others usually only one match is necessary.

Is it that most players only play on one side and certain ways of doing things have rooted in time (suggest something else and you are called a noob). For example at the start of EotS I've noticed that horde generally tries to cap 3 nodes while alliance goes for the flag.

The alliance:horde players ratio must be a factor as well. On most of the other battlegroups the win:lose ratio was similar to ours. I noticed that US-Nightfall for example has most of the numbers turned around. Then I checked the horde:alliance players ratio from the pvp servers there and almost all of them have more horde than alliance players.

With lower number of players you get less queue time and more time to actually play and practice.

Tsarina
23-01-2008, 02:31 PM
I'm talking about when it's defended as well.
It's quite obvious that you are not. You are talking about when it has been defended but no longer is. You're saying that sometimes defenders leave their nodes. That happens on both sides and has nothing to do with anything I mentioned.

malkor
23-01-2008, 02:40 PM
Alliance EOTS goes something like this, half the people jump from top losing 50% hp before they even meet horde, 2 maybe 3 go to MT and DR, rest to flag, we win 1st flag. By which time horde has come over the bridges and started taking MT and DR from us, then we spend rest of game fighting horde in between MT and DR. Ends up with horde on 4 bases and winning flag, whilst 15 alliance try to kill about 6 horde -_-

Kinshara
23-01-2008, 02:46 PM
Is it that most players only play on one side and certain ways of doing things have rooted in time (suggest something else and you are called a noob). For example at the start of EotS I've noticed that horde generally tries to cap 3 nodes while alliance goes for the flag.

Yeah, I've noticed that as well; it's damn hard to get people to come with me and cap either the BE tower or FRR. I always see about 5 people going to DR, 5 to the mage tower, and 5 to the flag. Horde caps theirs, then sends 8+ to one of the alliance nodes and smashes the defenders; alliance fail to adapt and lose horribly.

AB tends to be reasonably ok; alliance lose more often than not, but most of the games I've been in there over the past couple months have been 1700+ vs 2000 losses, rather than the 1000ish vs 2000 I often saw pre-TBC.

Warsong... too much flag hugging on the graveyards right now. On both sides.

soulshift
23-01-2008, 02:53 PM
AB is a bit better than it used to be a year ago. Alliance still leave nodes undefended way too much. When you ask for help, barely anyone comes to your rescue. But recently I've seen an increase of both defenders and people assisting.
EotS is way too horrible. I gave up on it ages ago. People kept ordering me to take flags and to learn to play cause I took a node and then asked for help in securing it. \o/
I love it how people in pugs that have 0 kb's, 0 flag returns, 0 nodes taken/defended and so on with tons of deaths call others noobs, though.

Senex
23-01-2008, 03:31 PM
Would be interested to see your reasons as to why you think AV favours alliance.
It favors both factions. The Horde has better midfield control (SH bunker is far more accessible than IB tower), while the Alliance has the Bridge of Doom.

The reason why our battlegroup's Horde loses so much in AV is because puggers have yet to figure out that, after 2.3, we can win the game *without* crossing the Bridge of Doom, by playing to our strengths instead of our weaknesses. Post-2.3., the optimal strategy for Horde is a defensive one (taken to the extreme, this results in the infamous 'Scorched Earth' tactic that has US alliance /wrist'ing en masse). All it takes is 15-20 people defending the Iceblood choke point for a few minutes at the beginning of the game...

...and yet, an average pugger would rather swallow a gallon of bleach than abandon the tried and true "KILL BALINDA-GET STORMPIKE-LOSE-QUEUE AGAIN" algorithm.