Log in

View Full Version : AV in 2.4


Senex
04-02-2008, 08:36 PM
Alterac Valley will see a few very significant improvements in the next patch and we wanted to share the details of what we have planned.

The first change will be to move the Horde's starting tunnel back to a more equal distance from the first objectives, which will help evenly distance the starting points for each side across the terrain when the battle commences.

In addition, the General and Warmasters for each faction will receive a stacking buff from each other that boosts their health and damage. The more of them that are still in the battleground, the more dangerous they will all be. This will put a greater focus on destroying (and defending!) the towers that remove the Warmasters as players work toward defeating the appropriate General and conquering the land.

Also Balinda Stonehearth has been studying her spellbooks to become a more challenging opponent to the Horde and will do more damage with her spells. The additional health we recently added to Balinda and General Vanndar Stormpike will no longer be needed with these improvements and will be changed back to their previous amounts with the patch.

With these improvements teamwork and strategy will be more important than ever from beginning to end as the Alliance and Horde battle for victory in Alterac Valley. We'll see you on the battlefield.
Summary: Blizzard still has no bloody clue whatsoever. :(

Warlee
04-02-2008, 10:28 PM
Well, their work is still not finished, but I like where it's going . Makes it a bit more interesting. So after playing on both sides, I'd say its not gonna be easier for Alliance.
Mostly imo it's problem about ' horde way', which should be repaired, so there I agree they do not solve problem, just change other things. They could change place of some bunkers though.
Im not sure how it looks in other bgps, but from I read in past it's same everywhere. AV rush of Alliance simply makes a win.

Bleetman
04-02-2008, 10:30 PM
Link the nodes, thanks.

Đightrain
04-02-2008, 10:49 PM
I was half expecting it to say "removed the remaining npcs. Also Horde and alliance now have seperate paths blocked off from eachother and a straight rush to the generals".

Margelatu
04-02-2008, 11:36 PM
In my opinion the change should be made to force the 2 zergs to meet in the same place in the middle. Right now every zerg keep their right side and they can avoid the fight very easy.

Now , using the zerg strategy , people avoid to play pvp . There is no pvp in stomping flat 2 lonly defenders who forgot to join their zerg. lol Force them all to meet in the middle to fight.
Also , using the zerg strategy horde will loose 75% matches due to terain. But stupidity = doing same thing every time and expecting different results.

Mischief
05-02-2008, 10:01 AM
With these improvements teamwork and strategy will be more important than ever from beginning to end as the Alliance and Horde battle for victory in Alterac Valley. We'll see you on the battlefield.
This makes Baby Jesus cry.

Stim
05-02-2008, 10:10 AM
So bunkers still > towers?
Nice.

Kinshara
05-02-2008, 10:26 AM
So bunkers still > towers?
Nice.

Towers are easier for alliance to attack, but also easier for horde to retake. A couple well geared healers dodging around the pillars in an alliance bunker makes it insanely difficult to recap without a decent numerical advantage.


As far as the bases go, they still need adjusting... but horde do need to start defending. A few of the US battlegroups had nearly 100% horde win rate when they choked off IB with about 20-25 people and took out Balinda/SH with the rest. This may change a bit now that horde don't have an initial distance advantage and Balinda's a bit meaner.

vattghern
05-02-2008, 10:27 AM
They always were and always will be (bunkers > towers). I fail too see how the changes will actually change anything - ie. the way people are playing AV.

It's not like anyone gives flying fuck about Horde towers anyway in this BG and there's still no hint for like 90% of the Horde players out there that actually cockblocking IB/Galv area may be a good idea (just a random observation - the majority of AV's pre 2.3 that I won in pugs had some nice defense set at Galv).

vattghern
05-02-2008, 10:43 AM
Towers are easier for alliance to attack, but also easier for horde to retake.

Have you ever tried retaking Tower when your only viable cc is fear? Good luck with targets running ooLoS. It's also a perfect spot to whirlwind/cleave/aoe/whatnot if you are defending. I fail to see any advantage for the attacker the Towers present except that the archers cannot hit you when you are inside and capping the flag. Narrow ramps, stuff you can get stuck into, visibility issues. Amazing for retaking. Not.


As far as the bases go, they still need adjusting... but horde do need to start defending. A few of the US battlegroups had nearly 100% horde win rate when they choked off IB with about 20-25 people and took out Balinda/SH with the rest. This may change a bit now that horde don't have an initial distance advantage and Balinda's a bit meaner.

I doubt it will change anything. You can still ride to Balinda without meeting any member of the opposing faction and lowering her hp hints that she's easier target after all. Besides, it has been said previously, the placement of IB graveyard (in fact it never forces people/gives them hint to defend there) and in general the terrain around Horde graveyards (not to mention lolbase) is just ridiculous. Add to this how annoying to retake the Towers are and I actually see why people are not so much intereseted in defending.

What might change things a bit is changing the honor value for towers/bunkers (both destroyed and saved) in relation to honor obtainable from kills. So far for majority of people it seems to be better idea to kill some players than to reatke tower/bunker.

Đightrain
05-02-2008, 11:01 AM
I dont get it, it's just as easy for alliance to cap a tower as it is for horde to cap a tower, same for the bunkers. Infact the horde get an advantage with the towers cause unless you're a shadowstep rogue you HAVE to run up the ramp (You can walljump round the bunkers and jump in teh windows ;) ).

Also yes you're right it's harder to avoid AoE in the towers... and since the towers are on the horde side of the map, try defending them with AoE classes? The arguements given so far are crap.

vattghern
05-02-2008, 11:03 AM
You missed one point. Archers do not hit you when you tag the Tower. Try this in bunker. I have also covered the defending/retaking issue. Any questions? Also since I find your comment somewhat offensive - save word crap for better ocassions as you might run out of viable words pretty quickly.

Đightrain
05-02-2008, 11:04 AM
Your arguement about how hard it is to recap a tower i meant was crap xP

Kinshara
05-02-2008, 11:05 AM
Have you ever tried retaking Tower when your only viable cc is fear? Good luck with targets running ooLoS. It's also a perfect spot to whirlwind/cleave/aoe/whatnot if you are defending. I fail to see any advantage for the attacker the Towers present except that the archers cannot hit you when you are inside and capping the flag. Narrow ramps, stuff you can get stuck into, visibility issues. Amazing for retaking. Not.

Funnily enough, all those issues you mention hinder the attackers as well; and many times I've seen a single priest retake against 3-4 attackers. Fear once and they trinket, survive till you can fear again, recap while they're all running around like headless chickens. I've tried avoiding the second fear, but it never seems to work quite right; may be a lag issue. In a bunker it's quite possible to outrange it, and you'll usually still have LoS when feared to fire off an instant after it ends anyway; not so in the towers. I appreciate a warlock won't be able to pull that off, but I've never seen a single alliance priest recap a bunker that easily.

In general, bunkers make it easier for people(especially ranged attackers) to focus fire dps and heal, whereas towers allow CC/AoE to wreak havoc.

Đightrain
05-02-2008, 11:09 AM
Also isn't it possible to cap the flags in the bunkers out of LoS of the archers by hiding behind the wall and rotating the camera round so you can click the flag?

Kinshara
05-02-2008, 11:11 AM
Also isn't it possible to cap the flags in the bunkers out of LoS of the archers by hiding behind the wall and rotating the camera round so you can click the flag?

I think it's just out of range; you'll still have to take down at least one archer that way anyway.

Alverion
05-02-2008, 11:14 AM
Also isn't it possible to cap the flags in the bunkers out of LoS of the archers by hiding behind the wall and rotating the camera round so you can click the flag?

Always have to take out at least 1 archer, in South bunker it's 2

Ogrosh
05-02-2008, 11:39 AM
You can take Stonehearth and the Dun Baldar North bunkers without killing any archers, you need to kill one archer to take Icewing and Dun Baldar South bunkers.

vattghern
05-02-2008, 01:38 PM
Your arguement about how hard it is to recap a tower i meant was crap xP

Different perspective and experiences I guess. Doesn't mean they are crap.

vattghern
05-02-2008, 01:47 PM
You can take Stonehearth and the Dun Baldar North bunkers without killing any archers, you need to kill one archer to take Icewing and Dun Baldar South bunkers.

Actually the issue is not killing them. It's how awesome it is to defend it when there are defenders incoming and you haven't killed the archers yet, whereas you can sit in a tower not being bothered with this kind of stuff (pierced by arrows, moreover archers in a tower are on 2 different levels meaning you have only to deal with those on top - if at all). Now this is actually good illustration of what I have meant.

Kinshara
05-02-2008, 02:31 PM
Actually the issue is not killing them. It's how awesome it is to defend it when there are defenders incoming and you haven't killed the archers yet, whereas you can sit in a tower not being bothered with this kind of stuff (pierced by arrows, moreover archers in a tower are on 2 different levels meaning you have only to deal with those on top - if at all). Now this is actually good illustration of what I have meant.

On the other hand, ranged attackers in a bunker get plenty of opportunity to fire at defenders coming into the bunker, especially melee; towers shield the defenders until you're right next to the attackers.

Both have advantages and disadvantages... since I'm mostly playing melee these days, I prefer defending towers to defending bunkers. My opinion may change when I get a bit more AP and respec, though. *shrug*

Bleetman
05-02-2008, 07:18 PM
Neither should be cappable by one or two people, really. I miss when they were capable of defending themselves to a decent extent.

Chou
06-02-2008, 08:21 AM
fighting for towers and killing generals is fun aye, but it was WAY more fun with ram and wolf riders !!

i didnt see any rider since TBC, and im sure only few AV contained some. aswell as ivus and lokho, maybe 5 or 10% of AV summons them.

and they could also improve the goblin machine so we can also use it ! and gief more special units rush from the mines materials

Đightrain
06-02-2008, 04:42 PM
You mean ppl still actually do summons? i've not seen any since lvl 60 =[

Bleetman
07-02-2008, 01:38 AM
I tried clearing out the Irondeep mine fully before taking it once. By the time I was done, the rest of the alliance was at the Frostwolf towers.

There's just no time for summoned re-inforcements anymore. Hell, I bet the game would end before Ivus/Lokholar even started moving in rather than stomping around the field of strife even if they were there from the start.

Again. Link the nodes. And hey, maybe add an impenetrable door to Vanndar/Drek'thars bunkers that only opens upon destruction of the final line of defence, the Dun Baldar/Frostwolf towers.

Đightrain
07-02-2008, 10:01 AM
Sounds like a good plan, or if the entrance to the base itself could be opened only by ivus/lokholar. Or just reduce the amount of time and items required for the summons since as they are atm, they're useless.
I did hear the call in AV for the primalists last week and was the only one in trade going OOO Z0MG THEY'RE SUMMONING! =D and doing lonely happydances, but they never made it out their base before it was all over =[

Bleetman
07-02-2008, 05:16 PM
Sounds like a good plan, or if the entrance to the base itself could be opened only by ivus/lokholar.
Both the summoned bosses and the NPCs that spawn them are a bit too easy to kite away and kill for them to be that crucial, though.

Đightrain
07-02-2008, 08:24 PM
make it so they cant be kited? or not kited full distance. I don't care, i just want longer AVs with tactics and summons again. Couldn't care less if it takes over nine thousand attempts at summoning them per match!

Rey
07-02-2008, 10:49 PM
They should just make a /random 100 based system. Fast games, even faster queues and AV wouldnt have anything to do with pvp, just like now.

Senex
07-02-2008, 11:52 PM
fighting for towers and killing generals is fun aye, but it was WAY more fun with ram and wolf riders !!

i didnt see any rider since TBC, and im sure only few AV contained some. aswell as ivus and lokho, maybe 5 or 10% of AV summons them.

and they could also improve the goblin machine so we can also use it ! and gief more special units rush from the mines materials
It still happens, but only in 51-60 bracket.

Senex
15-02-2008, 11:04 PM
Looks like Blizzard finally realized how to fix everything that is wrong with AV:

http://i59.photobucket.com/albums/g290/senex31337/AVPTR.jpg