Will the real battleground statistics please stand up?
ke...@spamsucks.com
I decided to compile my own stats. All of these are the results of farming 20
marks from each BG. I am on the Whirlwind battleground server.
EOTS: 17 loss, 1 win = 5% win rate
AB: 17 loss, 1 win = 5% win rate
WSG: 4 loss, 3 win = 43% win rate
AV: 2 loss, 5 win = 71% win rate
Recently AV horde on my BG server has discovered the 'turtle' strategy and
has started winning most AV games, so that is likely to turn AV into yet
another loser BG for alliance.
So, I'm curious, are other people seeing similar results? This contrasts
sharply with some of the other stats I've seen people post that show, for
example, a 55% alliance EOTS win rate.
The common factor in my stats is ... me. So one explanation would be that I
suck and am myself causing the losing games :) However I do not believe this
to be the case. Generally I pay attention to strategy, watch the "big
picture" of what is going on in the BG, call out incomings, defend what I
capture, am well-geared, etc.
Finally, if other people see similar stats, then why don't we demand a fix
from Blizzard? Who wants to lose 95% of EOTS battlegrounds? What fun is that?
A simple fix would be to add battlegrounds that were not Horde vs Alliance,
such as the Aldor vs Scryer that EOTS was allegedly supposed to be.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Posted using Android Newsgroup Downloader:
.... http://www.sb-software.com/android
-----------------------------------------------------------
Monkeyboy
<ke...@spamsucks.com> wrote in message
news:15GdnRgRFcAbDAba...@giganews.com...
I'm on alliance to, vindication battlegroup.
Since i installed an addon that keeps track of my bg statistics a few days
ago i got:
AV - A:H 0/6 (0%)
WSG - A:H 0/5 (0%)
That was one day of bging, and it was enough for me. Cant say it was
different before.
Zamboni
>
> So, I'm curious, are other people seeing similar results? This contrasts
> sharply with some of the other stats I've seen people post that show, for
> example, a 55% alliance EOTS win rate.
>
> The common factor in my stats is ... me. So one explanation would be that I
> suck and am myself causing the losing games :) However I do not believe this
> to be the case. Generally I pay attention to strategy, watch the "big
> picture" of what is going on in the BG, call out incomings, defend what I
> capture, am well-geared, etc.
>
dominates the lvl 70 bracket. But it has more to do with premade vs
pug than it does with which faction you're in. Almost every WSG, AB,
or EotS battle I'm in is a 15 on 9 slaughter against an Alliance
premade (15 on 3 is common).
Unfortunately, AV is still zerg vs zerg, witch the Alliance win every
time by just jumping the fence into Frostwolf Keep and killing Drek.
Since most of the remaining AV players are refugees from the other
BGs, the word "defense" is not in their vocabulary.
--
Zamboni
Mark (newsgroups)
Battlegrounds are insanely unbalanced somehow. Not favouring one
particular faction, but they feed on themselves to the point where it's
no fun for one faction to play unless you do premades. Unfortunately
that's Horde on my battlegroup. Could you tell me the name of that
addon, I'd like to install it myself to see what the stats for my
battlegrounds are. I suspect it's somewhere around 80-90% loss in AB,
WSG and EOTS. The one we used to win, AV, I hardly play anymore because
queues are over an hour long.
It's sad, because at one point it wasn't like this and I really enjoyed
battlegrounds. Atm, they're a bit pointless.
Monkeyboy
"Mark (newsgroups)" <marknew...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fniqpp$vn2$1...@aioe.org...
> Battlegrounds are insanely unbalanced somehow. Not favouring one
> particular faction, but they feed on themselves to the point where it's no
> fun for one faction to play unless you do premades. Unfortunately that's
> Horde on my battlegroup. Could you tell me the name of that addon, I'd
> like to install it myself to see what the stats for my battlegrounds are.
> I suspect it's somewhere around 80-90% loss in AB, WSG and EOTS. The one
> we used to win, AV, I hardly play anymore because queues are over an hour
> long.
>
> It's sad, because at one point it wasn't like this and I really enjoyed
> battlegrounds. Atm, they're a bit pointless.
The addon is HKCounter.
It seems that a majority of gb's is ''owned'' by horde, maybe because more
mature players roll horde, or bg design favours horde (which i doubt). I too
wanted to rool horde, but all my friends were allready on alliance so i had
no choice. Seems like s wrong call now.
twk
"Monkeyboy" <seventh_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
From my limited time on the horde side (so far), 3 characters now level
17 to 26, it seems the horde players stick together better than
alliance. If it's not the more mature players thing, it could be the
underdog thing. There are less of us so we all have to stick together
better.
When my level 23 tauren druid does a drive-by buff he quite often gets a
thank you. My level 62 Nelf priest rarely gets a thank you, except
during the day when the "children" (for lack of a better term) are in
school.
Hum, you may be right about being more mature.
I'm leaning toward horde but I have to get my Nelf to 70 first.
--
Hypanthia, Night Elf, Shadow Priest, Enchantress/Herbalist.
Darkfury, Gnome, Rogue, Miner/Jewel Crafter.
Py, Dwarf, Hunter, Herbalist/Alchemist.
Bigpotpie, Tauren, Hunter, Herbalist/Alchemist.
Bigpotpie, Tauren, Druid, Herbalist/Alchemist (Nathrezim realm).
Not the deadliest bunch on Cenarion Circle, but they do well.
zeeta6
> In article <fnj235$1g...@ss408.t-com.hr>,
>
>
>
> "Monkeyboy" <seventh_mileMA...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "Mark (newsgroups)" <marknewsgro...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
I was alliance for over 1 year and then I switched.
Horde does infact stick together and in my opinion the players seem a
bit more logical. But I think I've finally found the cause of horde
wining :) I think people who roll alliance are more pve oriented,
this leads to them sucking at PVP. Also the whole crazy/colorful/
offensive looking races on the horde might have to do with the type of
people it attracts.
I personally can't go back to alliance. I tried on my mage. I just
can't stand the Alliance races anymore. Also the Alliance cities are
not interesting at all. On the other hand, look at Origmar, UC etc.
They are very interesting and colorful cities.
Mark (newsgroups)
I worded that wrongly. Horde loses most bgs on my server (battlegroup).
I'm Horde.
Dan
>The addon is HKCounter.
I'll have to look that one up. :)
>It seems that a majority of gb's is ''owned'' by horde, maybe because more
>mature players roll horde, or bg design favours horde (which i doubt). I too
>wanted to rool horde, but all my friends were allready on alliance so i had
>no choice. Seems like s wrong call now.
My personal statistics (battlegroup Reckoning, EU) for the weekend's
double-honour WSG are horde: 11, alliance: 1. All battles were pug
vs. pug except for the one horde loss, which was horde pug vs.
alliance premade. This is despite the battles usually starting with
10 alliance players and 4-5 horde players. Often we went 0:1 down at
first, then fought back to win 3:1 as more players showed up.
There doesn't seem to be any particular reason for the horde
domination, except that it seems horde pugs tend to work as a team
more, rather than a bunch of individuals. Lately people seem to be a
lot more oriented toward playing to win rather than topping the
score sheets.
Dan
Smid
I've started doing alliance in BGs as a 69 shadow priest in the last
week, and here's what happened...
Played AV, and won. Didn't have a clue what was going on, but got a
fair bit of honour for it. Looked mad, and read afterwards what was
going on.
Had the daily quest for Eots twice. First five times, alliance utterly
humped. Then I won. Got the daily quest again 2 days later, walked in
and won easily.
Tried WSG twice. One time at least we capped the flag. Frankly, not
really sure what I had to do, but I dont think the others did either
so not much of a learning experience. I tended to get killed def,
attack or midfield...
Then I tried AB... First five games, it was a win with one hoarde
loss. Enjoyed that a lot and felt I knew what I was doing, fearing
rogues, dotting down, VE, running out of mana and dying then... Made
it my favourite pretty quick...
Then this weekend, been doing AV... Despite nearly winning a number of
times, I think won like 1 out of 10 (possibly more than that could be
15). I really don't know what was wrong....
We'd grab mine, lm and stable, they'd grab farm and bs. While a number
of times, the others would try and grab the farm with some success.
We'd even hold 4 for a while to like 1000 points even. Then it would
all fall apart...
A couple of afk'ers seemed to make a difference. Hoarde seemed to have
BM hunters which is my foil as a class (along with warlocks too). But
what was most important...
Was that I barely ever seen more than one of my team around. They
seemed to be somewhere else. Could be dead and rezzing. Could be
elsewhere. At one point there was a faceoff above mine, with about 7
of us versus about 5 of hoard, just looking at each other. I ran up to
attack, dot etc. The fuckers on my side just watched me die. Not come
across anything like it in recent times. Maybe I need voice comms on
perhaps, or I missed something... Hohum...
Smid
Dirk
> I've seen people post stats that show alliance winning 55% of EOTS, etc, and
> I decided to compile my own stats. All of these are the results of farming 20
> marks from each BG. I am on the Whirlwind battleground server.
>
> EOTS: 17 loss, 1 win = 5% win rate
> AB: 17 loss, 1 win = 5% win rate
> WSG: 4 loss, 3 win = 43% win rate
> AV: 2 loss, 5 win = 71% win rate
It all depends on your battlegroup and at which time you play. I've yet
to see a EotS match that alliance won. I've done around 40 games and
lost all of them. Often there are just 7 or 8 alliance players around.
At least those games end fast.
> Recently AV horde on my BG server has discovered the 'turtle' strategy and
> has started winning most AV games, so that is likely to turn AV into yet
> another loser BG for alliance.
Same in my battlegroup. Alliance used to win here, even after the latest
changes but now Horde has decided to turtle and we are often loosing.
It's worst on the weekend. The alliance strategy usually helps horde, as
it's a strategy that is focused on a rush to the general with zero defense.
Horde leaves around 10 defenders at Iceblood GY and have three people
defending the Iceblood Garrision. This is usually enough to delay and
often stop the alliance attack. Alliance respawns in Dun Baldar, the
Stormpike GY is gone at this time already as it only takes one or two
horde players to take it while it's undefended.
While we take Stormpike back we now have a turtle with Horde holding
Stonehearth and using the bottleneck there very effectively.
Reinforcements run out, Horde wins and Alliance gets minimal bonus honor
as often not even one tower was captured.
> Finally, if other people see similar stats, then why don't we demand a fix
> from Blizzard? Who wants to lose 95% of EOTS battlegrounds? What fun is that?
> A simple fix would be to add battlegrounds that were not Horde vs Alliance,
> such as the Aldor vs Scryer that EOTS was allegedly supposed to be.
I assume the problem is not something that Blizzard can fix, as it's the
problem how the players play the game.
There might be some imbalances concerning the map for AV, I agree this
is currently in favor for the horde. Balinda is far too week and can be
taken down by 5 players, not even a tank is needed. The Iceblood
bottleneck is supported by the graveyard being behind the actual
fighting point for horde, while the Stonehearth bottleneck requires
alliance to split up their defenders as the graveyard is to the south
and can easily be captured by horde.
Still the main problem are the players. I see alliance players in Dun
Baldar ignoring that the towers are captured and ride past them because
they want to zwerg at Stonehearth to get some HKs. I've seen more than
enough players that respawn at a graveyard in AB, see that a horde
player is currently trying to tap the flag and mount up and ride away
instead of engaging.
The prejudice that alliance players are not healing is not correct,
there are more than enough paladins, druids and priests who are healing
in battlegrounds (shamans are still rare). The disadvantage is that they
are not protected when attacked and a dead healer is not much use. The
other way around I've seen 5 alliance players beating on a warrior and
ignoring the healer that kept him up.
It's not always this bad for alliance, I had some very successful games
but recently it's the typical behavior I encounter in battlegrounds (and
I do a lot of them).
Dirk
steve.kaye
> Tried WSG twice. One time at least we capped the flag. Frankly, not
> really sure what I had to do, but I dont think the others did either
> so not much of a learning experience. I tended to get killed def,
> attack or midfield...
In WSG you can do the following:
1. Defend your flag
2. Help your flag defenders (mainly if you are a holy/resto spec that
can't kill attackers directly)
3. Grab the flag
4. Help your flag carrier (by healing/shielding or by hindering
attackers with fear/frost nova etc)
From when I played as a shadow priest, I think that you have the best
tools to defend the flag. Psychic Scream and Mind Flay are great for
slowing down the flag carrier. Psychic Scream him (and his friends),
then run ahead and Mind Flay him. Mind Flay is more useful when you
are ahead of the flag carrier so that he is in range as long as
possible. I found that a Shadow Priest + Warlock was a very powerful
defence team - you'd scream and the warlock would fear the flag
carrier. Both dot him and then you mind flay. The double fear also
negates one fear defense - hopefully they use their trinket or will of
the forsaken on the scream meaning the fear lands straight
afterwards :)
I've heard an argument that it is useful to dominate the midfield so
that you can help your FC and kill their FC more easily but I have
never seen that work out.
steve.kaye
evankimori
Stormstrike battlegroup has actually been blamed on the forums for
starting this whole thing where Ally refuse to Q and thus hold up the
AV start for anywhere from 20mins to 4 HOURS. And yes, it has
happened. Some BG Q's lately are outright damn silly. And chances are
when you go in: it's a timed 'premade' for AV where everyone from a
server Q'd the same number BG and just waited or when yo DO get in,
your team sees a premade and goes: "Eh. We're gonna die. Screw it."
Morale problem amirite?
I've seen (and heard) days where Horde across a battlegroup will
DOMINATE all day long and just clean house and I've seen Ally do the
same on some days and it usually affects better judgement and morale.
Some players get a few cracks on the head and a few lost BG's and take
their ball and go home. So go back in and fight, and lose, or win. And
with that some new players come in and some leave. And it evens out
eventually in some way.
AFAIK: it always is a random chance according to the group you get up
against or get paired with as teammates. You'll get utter morons as
opponents some days and as teammates some days.
PVP is a heavy time investment. Same as PVE in some aspects but you'll
ALWAYS at some point, end up against a T5 premade group from X-server
who're more than willing to stick you to one GY and leave it at that.
Urs Steiner
ke...@spamsucks.com wrote:
> I've seen people post stats that show alliance winning 55% of EOTS, etc, and
> I decided to compile my own stats. All of these are the results of farming 20
> marks from each BG. I am on the Whirlwind battleground server.
> EOTS: 17 loss, 1 win = 5% win rate
> AB: 17 loss, 1 win = 5% win rate
> WSG: 4 loss, 3 win = 43% win rate
> AV: 2 loss, 5 win = 71% win rate
> Recently AV horde on my BG server has discovered the 'turtle' strategy and
> has started winning most AV games, so that is likely to turn AV into yet
> another loser BG for alliance.
actually, our Alliance seems to have found ways around the turtle
strategy although I'm not yet sure how (don't play often enough).
> So, I'm curious, are other people seeing similar results? This contrasts
> sharply with some of the other stats I've seen people post that show, for
> example, a 55% alliance EOTS win rate.
the problem here is that the sample is much too small. It would need
some 100s of BGs, distributed over the whole day/week, including joining
solo, in 1 small group and as a whole premade. And against what group
compositions? Might actually need > 1000 BGs or more.
If you're interested, I think they've got some battleground data on
www.warcreaftrealms.com. Although it's largely reliant on people
submitting data and can't tell the same battlegrounds from each other AFAIK.
> The common factor in my stats is ... me. So one explanation would be that I
> suck and am myself causing the losing games :) However I do not believe this
> to be the case. Generally I pay attention to strategy, watch the "big
> picture" of what is going on in the BG, call out incomings, defend what I
> capture, am well-geared, etc.
While in WSG one single person could be a deciding factor, in the bigger
ones it shouldn't be.
The next question is how much do you participate in /bg? Do you announce
INCs? Are you flaming other people? Are you being constructive? etc. How
are the other players? Do they announce? Etc.
> Finally, if other people see similar stats, then why don't we demand a fix
> from Blizzard? Who wants to lose 95% of EOTS battlegrounds? What fun is that?
Blizzard have themselves statistics about BGs and theirs hopefully are
correct.
One of the problems is, demanding a fix is cheap, creating one isn't.
Especially for EotS, as there is no absolutely no map imbalance. So it's
either the Alliance racials vs Horde racials or the players (could be
group composition, could be the players themself.
> A simple fix would be to add battlegrounds that were not Horde vs Alliance,
> such as the Aldor vs Scryer that EOTS was allegedly supposed to be.
jup, might be nice apart from the fact that both old-style factions
can't really talk to each other. But I'm sure this wouldn't be hard to
work around.
Urs
--
Mano - Orc Shaman 70 - Mining & Jewelcrafter
Myno - Tauren Bear 70 - Skinning & Herbalism
Ratoma- Troll Rogue 28 - (Dis)Enchantress
Melony - Human Mage 16
and various others
neithskye
> Horde does infact stick together and in my opinion the players seem a
> bit more logical.
I play Horde on the Emberstorm battlegroup. I have found this as well.
In AB, for example, we leave defenders at each node we control, and
call out incomings. It's gotten to the point where I expect to win AV.
I have a screenshot of my mailbox Inbox. There's an entire page of
excess AV tokens, and each is in stacks of 3.
EotS . . . Horde seems to win about 80%. Of course here and in AB you
get the occassional pre-mades in S3 gear, or you started with 14 Ally
vs. 3 Horde. Only so much you can do here, but then you go to the next
game, and start winning again.
WSG . . we seem to win a lot. AV . . . Horde just can't adapt to the
changes. We lose constantly. AV is not fun anymore; I never go, even
if it's the daily.
The proudest WSG I was ever in was about 2 weeks ago. We started by
being down about 10 players. Within a short time we were down 2 flags
to none. People were saying, "Just let them win". But we rallied. A
Druid took the Alliance flag and held it in our base. Myself and
another healer kept the Druid alive attack after attack. I still don't
know how we did it, but 1 hour, 44 minutes into the BG, we tagged our
third flag, and won. People were absolutely ecstatic. I did about 600K
healing, and most of it was during the last 30 minutes protecting that
Druid.
Speaking of healing, one thing I have noticed is that the Alliance do
not seem to have dedicated BG healers. At the end of each BG I sort
the end-game screen by Healing Done to see how I did. Ninety per cent
of the time, at least the top 3 healers are Horde.
Are the Alliance aware just how valuable BG healers are? It would seem
not. It means the difference between everyone staying alive to grab
that node, versus waiting to rez at the GY to run back and try again.
A live WSG flag-carrier getting cleansed of DoTs, healed, BoFed,
versus a dead one.
What's also weird is that about 70% of the time, they *let* me heal.
Paladin healing is so very easily shut down, and yet there my BE is,
standing in the middle of everyone undisturbed, healing away. Of
course, when the smart Alliance FF me, it's ugly. :P
I do also notice that Horde are generally quite good at protecting
their healers. A few times I've had a Rogue or Warrior follow me
around and protect me so I could heal. The Horde also seem to be very
appreciative of heals, making a point of saying something in /bg chat,
or even whispering me to say thanks.
> I personally can't go back to alliance. I tried on my mage. I just
> can't stand the Alliance races anymore.
Same here.
--
Jill
lcpltom
We don't seem to have too much trouble winning AV on horde side in the
Reckoning battlegroup. I haven't done very many AV's up until the
last month or so, but it seems like we have about a 50/50 win/loss
split for AV.
But the other BG's tend to be a bit rough when I play them. I only
really do the other BG's for daily quests, which I guess is also part
of the problem. I had days where the BG daily was done in 1 run, and
others were it took a lot more attempts. Yesterday my brother spent
about an hour doing WSG as the daily, I went into WSG and we won on
that first one. And not just won, we steamrolled alliance on that
one, they never managed to get our flag even halfway back to their
base (i.e. there was no healing, I had the FC dotted up and I just
watched his health tick away. Heres the kicker, it was a druid in
travel form, never once shifted for even an instant cast HoT). Their
FC died, dropped the flag, and not a single alliance player picked it
up in the several seconds it took us to close in and reclaim it.
Friday night I did AB as the daily, and that was a real close one.
Every node changed hands multiple times, but overall horde controlled
the most nodes most of the time. Final score was 2000 horde - 1740
alliance. That was probably the most fun BG I've ever done because
the battle just kept shifting all over the map.
EotS has 1 major flaw, that stupid flag. When I see people fighting
over the flag while our nodes are being zerged it drives me nuts.
Nodes first, flag second. If they took the flag out, it would just be
an AB clone, so I understand the reasoning for it there. EotS with a
good group can be fun, but most of the time I end up in bad groups and
it becomes unbearable.
ke...@spamsucks.com
> over the flag while our nodes are being zerged it drives me nuts.
> Nodes first, flag second. If they took the flag out, it would just be
> an AB clone, so I understand the reasoning for it there. EotS with a
> good group can be fun, but most of the time I end up in bad groups and
> it becomes unbearable.
That stupid flag in EOTS has cost alliance more games... Last night I was
playing an EOTS that started with 12 alliance to 8 horde. We quickly gained
an 800 point lead over horde. Eventually things evened out with 15 alliance
to 15 horde. A little bit unfair beating horde because their numbers were
down, but when Alliance loses 90-95% of EOTS games, who am I to complain.
Of course, what happens? One tower is left completely unguarded, another
tower has one guard who doesn't bother to call out any incomings, me and a
rogue are guarding the remaining tower. Everyone else is running around
midfield fighting horde over the flag.
Suffice it to say the game ended with alliance holding one tower to horde's
three, down 300 points, and a horde victory. I told everyone to that EOTS is
just like AB and defense wins the game, but I get several responses that
since we "always lose AB, that defense must be the wrong strategy and we
should run flags instead". One guy even writes me back that I shouldn't be
giving advice because I'm a crappy player and near the bottom of the
battleground stats.
As a warlock, I can easily be #1 in the battleground stats if I want to. I've
done it numerous times. All I have to do is run around dotting and SoCing
horde and running away, but that doesn't create victories. Defense creates
victories. Watching the map creates victories. Calling out incomings creates
victories. Try to explain this to people and you'll only get hostility.
I honestly wish they'd add a 10-man "free-for-all" battleground where there
was no strategy and people could all just run out to midfield and kill the
enemy. Whichever side kills 100 enemy first wins. Alliance would win it every
time.
ke...@spamsucks.com
> I assume the problem is not something that Blizzard can fix, as it's the
> problem how the players play the game.
It's fixable by changing the groups that play. For example, Aldors vs Scryers
instead of Horde vs Alliance.
I suspect the problem is two-fold:
1) More experienced players play Horde. This is because, all things being
equal, a new player is more likely to roll Alliance. That's why on most
servers the Alliance population is much greater than the horde population.
Horde gets the people who've already played Alliance and are looking to
experiment, or who are looking for a challenge.
2) Gear Feedback. As you gain better gear, it helps you to win, which further
helps you to get better gear. According to my statistics, it's going to take
me almost 3 times longer to grind AB or EOTS marks than it will a horde.
Grinding honor is more equal; with alliance winning AV since it was nerfed,
we probably now get honor quicker than the horde, at least until Horde start
exploiting the turtle strategy.
You can see from the introduction of the Aldors and Scryers that it was
intended to create a new war that crossed Horde/Alliance lines. Why Blizzard
failed to complete this is beyond me, as it would have really improved the
game. It would have created an entirely new way to slice the players
available players, eliminating Horde/Alliance bias. It would have provided
some much-needed variety to the game.
Instead we got this clunky AB/WSG hybrid battleground that offers nothing
new.
lcpltom
I don't see the aldor/scryers thing as an attempt at creating a new
war, I see it as yet another way to customize your character.
Whatever you choose, you get different quests, different items, and
different FP's depending on what side you choose. The scryer and the
aldor were never stated to be at war with each other, more like 2
spoiled children fighting for their parents (the sha'tar) attention.
Like all fueding siblings, in the next patch they are going to kiss
and make up and take on the real target of their aggression, the
Legion.
LIke you said, a team deathmatch style of battlegrounds would weed out
a lot of the people who don't fully understand the objective based
BG's already in place. I'd say make it bigger than 10 people, make it
40. Just make it a huge HK farming zone. Perhaps Lake Wintergrasp in
Northrend will address some of these issues.
Aboo
> is currently in favor for the horde.
And I don't understand this at all. I play Horde only, no idea what
battle group I'm in but my server is Malygos.
I have won 3 AV battles. I have close to 40 AV Marks. And I bought a
30 Mark battle wolf. We NEVER win AV. We ALWAYS get to the end guy
and start killing him but Alliance always walks in and kills our boss
before we can do the same to theirs.
The only 3 AV's I've been in that we won is when Alliance tried to
turtle and defend the Graveyard that is just "our" side of their
bridge. We eventually kill them until they're out of reinforcements.
Dirk
>> I have won 3 AV battles. I have close to 40 AV Marks. And I bought a
>> 30 Mark battle wolf. We NEVER win AV. We ALWAYS get to the end guy
>> and start killing him but Alliance always walks in and kills our boss
>> before we can do the same to theirs.
That might be the problem. I've seen races where Horde just stormed in
and killed Vanndar - not even waiting for the towers to fall. The winner
ends up with about 300 bonus honor and close to zero HKs but those are
fast games. Alliance in my battlegroup always waits for the towers, even
if Horde is already pulling Vanndar.
A win for Horde in our Battlegroup is pretty sure when the Alliance
attack is stopped at Iceblood. Take the Stonehearth and Snowfall
graveyards and just farm HKs at the Icewing Bunker bottleneck. Alliance
has to travel a long way while you respawn only a short distance away at
the graveyard, making this a pretty good point to defend. You don't even
have to try to kill the general, just wait till their reinforcement
count reaches zero. If you do it right you get over 500 bonus honor,
tons of HKs and alliance ends up with close to zero bonus honor. Just be
aware that those are the games that are absolutely no fun for Alliance.
Dirk
steve.kaye
> That stupid flag in EOTS has cost alliance more games... Last night I was
> playing an EOTS that started with 12 alliance to 8 horde. We quickly gained
> an 800 point lead over horde. Eventually things evened out with 15 alliance
> to 15 horde. A little bit unfair beating horde because their numbers were
> down, but when Alliance loses 90-95% of EOTS games, who am I to complain.
>
> Of course, what happens? One tower is left completely unguarded, another
> tower has one guard who doesn't bother to call out any incomings, me and a
> rogue are guarding the remaining tower. Everyone else is running around
> midfield fighting horde over the flag.
lol - I hate that so much. A big lead turns to a loss because of
goons.
Never, ever is an objective that I am guarding lost without a message
saying that it's in danger. And that message comes as early as
possible. The second that there are more attackers than defenders I
send a message out for help. I even have a macro that I press that
sends the message out and gives the mini map zone text automatically.
> Suffice it to say the game ended with alliance holding one tower to horde's
> three, down 300 points, and a horde victory. I told everyone to that EOTS is
> just like AB and defense wins the game, but I get several responses that
> since we "always lose AB, that defense must be the wrong strategy and we
> should run flags instead". One guy even writes me back that I shouldn't be
> giving advice because I'm a crappy player and near the bottom of the
> battleground stats.
I hate those battleground stats. A friend who used to work with me
was always crowing about how he was always the top of the damage in
BGs with his Mage. I couldn't seem to get through to him that those
stats mean nothing and it's all about how you helped reach the goal.
I don't know if it's relevant but he plays Alliance and I play
Horde :)
steve.kaye
steve.kaye
wrote:
> The proudest WSG I was ever in was about 2 weeks ago. We started by
> being down about 10 players. Within a short time we were down 2 flags
> to none. People were saying, "Just let them win". But we rallied. A
> Druid took the Alliance flag and held it in our base. Myself and
> another healer kept the Druid alive attack after attack. I still don't
> know how we did it, but 1 hour, 44 minutes into the BG, we tagged our
> third flag, and won. People were absolutely ecstatic. I did about 600K
> healing, and most of it was during the last 30 minutes protecting that
> Druid.
If I had to choose a favourite BG I think that I'd choose WSG. Ok, it
is awful when you get a bad group and even worse when your oppisition
is a bad group too but when you get a good group and are against a
good group it is really fun. I hate the "just let them win" message
too. Never do I pay attention to that. I even like the really long
games provided there is a good fight.
> Speaking of healing, one thing I have noticed is that the Alliance do
> not seem to have dedicated BG healers. At the end of each BG I sort
> the end-game screen by Healing Done to see how I did. Ninety per cent
> of the time, at least the top 3 healers are Horde.
Yeah, same here. Mostly I'm in the top two and it's rare when any
Alliance are anywhere near me, never mind above me.
> What's also weird is that about 70% of the time, they *let* me heal.
> Paladin healing is so very easily shut down, and yet there my BE is,
> standing in the middle of everyone undisturbed, healing away. Of
> course, when the smart Alliance FF me, it's ugly. :P
It hurts once they notice you doesn't it? :P It seems like you can't
cast more than one heal before you're having to try to keep yourself
alive with little success. And most of the rest of the BG seems to be
at the graveyard waiting for the res.
> I do also notice that Horde are generally quite good at protecting
> their healers. A few times I've had a Rogue or Warrior follow me
> around and protect me so I could heal.
I must say that I've not seen that happen to me.
steve.kaye
Alphawolf
>I've seen people post stats that show alliance winning 55% of EOTS, etc, and
>I decided to compile my own stats. All of these are the results of farming 20
>marks from each BG. I am on the Whirlwind battleground server.
>
>EOTS: 17 loss, 1 win = 5% win rate
>AB: 17 loss, 1 win = 5% win rate
>WSG: 4 loss, 3 win = 43% win rate
>AV: 2 loss, 5 win = 71% win rate
>
>Recently AV horde on my BG server has discovered the 'turtle' strategy and
>has started winning most AV games, so that is likely to turn AV into yet
>another loser BG for alliance.
The Choke has allowed us to win more than the zero games we were
winning before. And unfortunately this seems to be the only way we
can win. Stall at IB, eventually all the Alliance are spawning back
up at SP or even their relief hut, then we just grind them down. Can
be fun but from the honor per hour standpoint it's nothing like the
quick AV victories Alliance get to enjoy. The fact that the AFKers
seem to have been greatly reduced helps immensely too. Racing always
causes us to lose. We pull Vann, they kill Drek, every damn time we
Horde lose the race. I never understood the cries that the new AV
favored Horde. If it did we sure didn't take advantage of it.
The Choke isn't foolproof either. If a few Alliance slip by and take
the RH uncontested (since they can just waltz into our base
unmolested) it's game over.
I avoid AB like the plague since it's usually steamroller premades.
WSG we usually win (70/30) but it's so annoying when the Alliance play
"hide the flag" just to draw it out. EOTS is about 50/50 IME.
----
Gnuthulhu, Undead Warlock
Fthagn, Undead Warrior
Rhyleya, Troll Hunter
Wydefoote, Tauren Shaman
Curwen, Blood Knight
Thunderhorn,US
neithskye
> It hurts once they notice you doesn't it? :P
Sure does, especially as a Paladin, where every heal I have (all two
of them) have a long casting time, and must be cast standing still.
This formula =/= win in PvP healing. Is there any class that *can't*
interrupt my heals? Nope, I do not believe there is!
(OK, I have three heals, but Holy Shock doesn't really count.
Generally I'm trying to go unnoticed while healing, so I'm hiding
somewhere, and out of the 20-yard range of HS to use it to heal
somebody. Plus, it heals for garbage.)
> > I do also notice that Horde are generally quite good at protecting
> > their healers. A few times I've had a Rogue or Warrior follow me
> > around and protect me so I could heal.
>
> I must say that I've not seen that happen to me.
Well, OK. I have 44,000 HKs, and this has happened exactly twice. :P
But sometimes when people realize I'm healing, they'll Fear/Frost Nova/
whatever that Rogue and Warrior on me. Generally, however, I just
Bubble, and keep healing my teammates. By the time my Bubble's down,
whatever was attacking me are the last Ally standing, and now have the
rest of my teammates on them.
Holy Shock isn't much of a heal, but it makes for tolerable burst
damage. I really love a quick HS, followed by a HoW, and getting the
KB on someone who tried to stop me from doing my job. :D
--
Jill
Aboo
> Healing BGs is a Horde only spell.
>
> I'm surprised that the horde hunters aren't out healing the entire
> alliance.
>
> I was in one AB with my hunter and I healed my pet once. I was the top
> Alliance healer. I was the ONLY alliance who healed at all. And we had
> two Paladins and at least 3 priests.
Now that's funny :) I've been 2nd or third on the list of Healing
done with my Trinket that randomly heals me for 140+ or so, but I have
never topped the list.
I will say that EVERY BG is easily winnable if you have good healers.
Every one. There is nothing so satisfying (as a rogue at least) to be
defending a node with a good healer. It's impossible to lose. And
thanking those healers for doing their job goes a long way in having
them stick around and show up with a crucial heal for YOU if you get
rushed :)
BLMX
> sharply with some of the other stats I've seen people post that show, for
> example, a 55% alliance EOTS win rate.
I have a BE priest and a Gnome mage on different Realms, both
exclusively playing BGs currently... I don't see any pattern. Win,
win big, Lose, lose big, any BG, at various times. I personally don't
think there's any merit in statements about how one faction plays vs.
another - there's just too many variables (excluding Premade vs. Pugs
of course).
Whenever a team is losing, the QQing begins... "<horde/alliance>
always skips that <map objective>", "<horde/alliance> never holds
towers", "they're turtling again!", "Nobody heals on <horde/
alliance>", "<horde/alliance> can only zerg, they don't know how to
play".
And the always popular, "Oh, GG noobs, now this game is lost! U all
suk L2P!!!"
and then we win.
lcpltom
I wouldn't count out the alliance doesn't heal thing. A lot of people
seem to confirm the lack of healing on the alliance side. I don't
play alliance, but I can say I am regularly meleed by paladins, who
only stop to heal themselves after they have bubbled. I've seen
druids in bear, cat, and moonkin form, never tree form, and rarely see
them shift out to heal themselves. Most priests I run into are in
shadow form, so they're not healing anyone. And the lone draenei
shaman I saw the other day looked like he was a bot. Everytime he
died and rezzed he would run back to the same exact spot next to the
SPGY flag and stand there casting the same heal on himself over and
over again.
In fact the only place I ever see alliance healing is at the farm in
AB. For some reason everytime I am there defending, incoming attacks
to that node always include a healer. Its really weird, as I can
attack and defend other nodes and not see a bit of healing done to any
of the alliance players, but whenever I am defending the farm there is
always a healer there. And its always a druid, never a priest or
paladin or draenei shaman (how many of those exist?). Its a really
weird thing that I have no way of explaining.
BLMX
Ya could be right. I'm a little biased though, because my Hordie is a
Priest so... I heal like a madman. My Alli is a Mage and well, we
always QQ about not getting healed (see other post :D) ! But still,
if no one was healing Alliance, my Priest wouldn't lose in 50% of BGs.
I dunno, ya know? Seems like it'd be difficult to quantify with any
amount of accuracy.
Mark (newsgroups)
Well, these things are relative to the battlegroup. I've added HKCounter
as an addon and will post the stats after a couple of months (or less,
depending how often I play bgs). I can confirm that today I won my first
AB for several weeks. I know this because I have had the AB daily quest
sitting in my log for a long time waiting to win. Since we lose AB, WSG
and EOTS I might as well play the one I enjoy most and that is AB. I'm
Horde btw, so it isn't always "Alliance loses". On my realm it's a known
fact that Horde loses AB, WSG and EOTS, but wins AV. That is at level
70. The dynamics are different at lower levels where Horde wins most of
the time.
You can find posts on various servers by people saying as much, both
from Alliance and Horde side, so it's not as if it's just both factions
bitching.
It really must be a feedback effect. Decent players get tired of losing,
so they stop playing the losing BGs. Obviously this suits the opposite
faction because they start winning more, so play more. It's not really
an opinion thing, this is widely reported everywhere. It's hard to see
what Blizzard could do to fix it. Even adding another arbitrary
categorisation like Scryers vs Aldors would have the same effect.
steve.kaye
wrote:
> On Jan 29, 7:46 am, "steve.kaye" <nos...@giddy-kippers.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > It hurts once they notice you doesn't it? :P
>
> Sure does, especially as a Paladin, where every heal I have (all two
> of them) have a long casting time, and must be cast standing still.
> This formula =/= win in PvP healing. Is there any class that *can't*
> interrupt my heals? Nope, I do not believe there is!
Warlock - Fear
Priest - Fear
Paladin - Hammer of Justice
Rogue - stuns, stuns and stuns
Druid - in Cat Form have two stuns one only from stealth and the other
needs combo points. Two stuns in Bear Form and I can't think of any
in caster forms.
Shaman - Earth Shock
Hunter - Scatter Shot, Intimidation, Wyvern Sting
Warrior - Shield Slam (or whatever it's called)
Mage - Counterspell
That's just listing the first interrupt that I could think of and does
include at least one for every class. :) I listed three for hunters
because there is one in each tree. Looks like the class least likely
to interrupt you is a caster Druid but I think that a lot of caster
PvP Druids take Feral Charge and Furor for the quick change to bear
and charge combo. :) I haven't played a warrior too much so I don't
know how many interrupts they have that don't need a shield but if
they have none then it looks like you'd be safe from them.
> (OK, I have three heals, but Holy Shock doesn't really count.
> Generally I'm trying to go unnoticed while healing, so I'm hiding
> somewhere, and out of the 20-yard range of HS to use it to heal
> somebody. Plus, it heals for garbage.)
Is it useful at all for healing? I've not healed too much on my
Paladin but I'm sure I've never cast Holy Shock to heal in an
instance.
> > > I do also notice that Horde are generally quite good at protecting
> > > their healers. A few times I've had a Rogue or Warrior follow me
> > > around and protect me so I could heal.
>
> > I must say that I've not seen that happen to me.
>
> Well, OK. I have 44,000 HKs, and this has happened exactly twice. :P
:) That'll be it then - I've only got about 3,000 HKs on my Priest.
Maybe it's some kind of rep grind thing. I need to get out there and
support the Horde more so they'll support me.
steve.kaye
Dan
>I was just in a WSG. Alliance had nine players, Horde had 5. Alliance
>Druid was carrying the flag back. We had 3 druids, 2 shaman, 2 priest,
>and 2 hunters.
>
>The Druid running got ZERO heals, got killed, and lost the flag.
Sadly, a common sight in bad pugs - on both sides.
Battles in my main battlegroup (Reckoning EU) always seem to start
with unbalanced teams - 10 alliance vs. 4 or 5 horde. It would be
annoying if we (horde) didn't tend to win anyway. Typically the 5
who are there at the start make an attack run for the alliance flag,
and then 5 more straggle in just in time to defend ours from the
alliance attackers. :)
>By the
>time we got back to the horde flag, the horde was up 15-13 on the
>alliance and had our flag. They also had 6 in their room on defense.
I'm pretty sure WSG is still limited to 10 players per team, tho. ;)
Dan
chocolatemalt
Dirk <news...@cubeworld.net> wrote:
After playing countless hundreds of AV matches I *still* haven't figured
out if a 10-minute zergfest to the general (assuming you win) is better
than a 30-minute slugfest in terms of honor/hour.
In a 10-minute win you skip the captain and you might cap two towers, or
maybe none, and in the latter case you only get a 4-kill bonus honor for
killing the general. That's 84 honor or so at lvl 70, about 56 at lvl
60. That's very low, and added to a complete lack of HK's it seems
possible it's a bad honor grind strategy. On AV holiday weekends you
get an additional 4-kill bonus honor which potentially doubles your
honor if the general is all you get.
Killing the captain and capping towers adds much more honor (3-kill
equivalents for each) and can reasonably be done in a 15-minute match,
but if the other side decides to defend at all (and you do get bonus
honor for defended towers/captains) it can easily turn into the
45-minute war that people whine about.
Maybe this would be easier to measure if I had a working honor per match
meter but the one bundled with Titan Panel is a notorious disconnection
glitcher and I removed it after suffering many of those. Anyone have
another honor mod they recommend?
lcpltom
Warlock fear has a cast time. Its great for stopping a healer, but
not so great for interupting a heal already in progress. Deathcoil is
instant cast and fears them for 3 seconds, giving the warlock time to
apply fear. Much better interrupt ability with deathcoil.
Seduce also works, and has a shorter cast time than fear.
Using a felhunter, spell lock is the best interrupt ability a warlock
has.
And the felguard has a charge ability that can be used to interrupt
casts.
And don't forget those poor healers who try to dispel UA.
neithskye
> Looks like the class least likely
> to interrupt you is a caster Druid but I think that a lot of caster
> PvP Druids take Feral Charge and Furor for the quick change to bear
> and charge combo. :)
Don't forget Cyclone! That wonderful CC that I can't even Bubble out
of. You don't take any damage while Cycloned . . . but you aren't
healing your teammates, either.
The class I have come to fear the most in PvP are Mages. They target
me, do thousands of damage in milli-seconds. If my Bubble is on CD,
I'm screwed. If I try to cast anything, I'll get counterspelled, and
have my entire UI grayed out for 5.6 seconds. Hopefully I still have a
Master Healthstone, or can drink a pot, so I can try to survive 5.6
seconds where I can do . . . absolutely nothing.
> Is it useful at all for healing? I've not healed too much on my
> Paladin but I'm sure I've never cast Holy Shock to heal in an
> instance.
It's pretty weak. In PvP gear I have +1,310 healing, and Holy Shock
heals for something like 1.1K. In PvE gear I have about +1,460
healing. I can't remember what it heals for here, but I don't think
it's that much more.
I have used it when I didn't think someone was going to last the
casting time of my other heals. The problem here, however, is the 20-
yard range vs. the 40-yard range for my other heals. If I'm come
across a PvP battle, sometimes it seems that the time it will take me
to close the distance to get within 20 yards of someone to cast HS
would be the same as the casting time of my FoL had I just stayed back
and started to cast immediately.
I have used it on tanks in instances, but if I'm trying to stay out of
an AoE effect, I'm probably not within 20 yards of the tank. Typically
I'll auto-cast HS on myself while healing in an instance so I can heal
myself of any damage I may have taken, while still focusing on healing
my main target.
--
Jill
Barry Freeman
<jill_bookerGR...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Typically
>I'll auto-cast HS on myself while healing in an instance so I can heal
>myself of any damage I may have taken, while still focusing on healing
>my main target.
I thought that was what Binding heal is for? I use that if I've got
any damage at all, right near the end of a fight.. saves time
Catriona R
wrote:
Paladins don't have Binding Heal ;-) And for priests it's pretty mana
expensive, don't think I've ever used it tbh, easier to chuck a renew on
myself (ok, I always forget it exists in the very rare situations when it's
be useful, I *should* use it sometimes but never remember...)
--
EU-Draenor:
Balgair - Human Rogue (lvl 70)
Naomh - Draenei Priest (lvl 70)
Rosad - Human Warlock (lvl 70)
Sealgair - Dwarf Hunter (lvl 70)
Sagart - Undead Priest (lvl 70)
Eilnich - Blood Elf Warlock (lvl 60)
Beag - Dwarf Paladin (lvl 60)
Sgoildubh - Human Mage (lvl 53)
Cathach - Gnome Warrior (lvl 30)
steve.kaye
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:00:55 +0000, Barry Freeman <b...@nospam.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 07:43:01 -0800 (PST), neithskye
> ><jill_bookerGREENEGGSANDS...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>Typically
> >>I'll auto-cast HS on myself while healing in an instance so I can heal
> >>myself of any damage I may have taken, while still focusing on healing
> >>my main target.
>
> >I thought that was what Binding heal is for? I use that if I've got
> >any damage at all, right near the end of a fight.. saves time
>
> Paladins don't have Binding Heal ;-) And for priests it's pretty mana
> expensive, don't think I've ever used it tbh, easier to chuck a renew on
> myself (ok, I always forget it exists in the very rare situations when it's
> be useful, I *should* use it sometimes but never remember...)
I use it all the time if I'm not stretched for mana. The threat is
reduced so that's one advantage. If I am stretched for mana I'll not
use it because, as you say, it's less than 1/2 the HPM of Renew.
steve.kaye
Catriona R
Yep, very true, I always remember the reduced threat after the situation
when it might've been useful, but not during it ;-) Maybe one day I'll get
in the habit of using it, I just seem to have some mental block that never
remembers it exists.
RogerM
>
> Healing BGs is a Horde only spell.
>
> I'm surprised that the horde hunters aren't out healing the entire
> alliance.
>
> I was in one AB with my hunter and I healed my pet once. I was the top
> Alliance healer. I was the ONLY alliance who healed at all. And we had
> two Paladins and at least 3 priests.
Well, that sucks. I have at times lead in healing with my WARLOCK. I
made sure to chastise the other Horde players when that happened.
When I do a BG with a healing class, I make a point of healing. My L27
Priest is usually 1st or 2nd in healing in AB.
--
RogerM
>
> I will say that EVERY BG is easily winnable if you have good healers.
> Every one. There is nothing so satisfying (as a rogue at least) to be
> defending a node with a good healer. It's impossible to lose. And
> thanking those healers for doing their job goes a long way in having
> them stick around and show up with a crucial heal for YOU if you get
> rushed :)
So true.
--
RogerM
I have not noticed a major difference in healing done by the two sides.
--
RogerM
>
> It really must be a feedback effect. Decent players get tired of losing,
> so they stop playing the losing BGs. Obviously this suits the opposite
> faction because they start winning more, so play more. It's not really
> an opinion thing, this is widely reported everywhere. It's hard to see
> what Blizzard could do to fix it. Even adding another arbitrary
> categorisation like Scryers vs Aldors would have the same effect.
I would be opposed to a Scryer versus Aldor BG, as it would lead to me
being grouped with Gnomes (which is a MAJOR reason I rarely play
Alliance).
--
RogerM
>
> Don't forget Cyclone! That wonderful CC that I can't even Bubble out
> of. You don't take any damage while Cycloned . . . but you aren't
> healing your teammates, either.
>
> The class I have come to fear the most in PvP are Mages. They target
> me, do thousands of damage in milli-seconds. If my Bubble is on CD,
> I'm screwed.
And if you DO bubble, you're a few seconds from being screwed. I go out
of my way to set up a double-buffed PoM Pyroblast for a bubbled Pally.
Nothing personal, but I DO hate that bubble.
If I try to cast anything, I'll get counterspelled, and
> have my entire UI grayed out for 5.6 seconds. Hopefully I still have a
> Master Healthstone, or can drink a pot, so I can try to survive 5.6
> seconds where I can do . . . absolutely nothing.
>
Mwa ha ha. I'm sorry (not really).
--
Barry Freeman
<catrion...@totalise.co.uk> wrote:
>Paladins don't have Binding Heal ;-) And for priests it's pretty mana
>expensive, don't think I've ever used it tbh, easier to chuck a renew on
>myself (ok, I always forget it exists in the very rare situations when it's
>be useful, I *should* use it sometimes but never remember...)
Woops.. my fault..
I've used it a fair amount, but what you say is true as well.. cast a
renew and carry on.
Catriona R
wrote:
Agreed, sometimes I've done 3-4 times as much healing as anyone else, and
when there's shamans/paladins/whatever in the BG that's a bit slack :-/
Ashen Shugar
like...
Depends on why you're taking damage. Sometimes it may not be a good
idea to be so low on life while you wait for a renew to heal yourself.
And casting a renew on yourself is 1.5 seconds that you're not casting
a heal on someone else. The situation that springs to my mind is
against the 2nd boss in Shadow Labs. You don't really want to go into
"fun time" with only half life because you're waiting for a renew to
bring your life back up. Nor do you really want other people going
into fun time with less health than they might otherwise have because
you took the time to cast a heal on just yourself. Obviously you can
get by well enough without using it though, so it's not a big deal.
Ashen Shugar
--
The lions sing and the hills take flight.
The moon by day, and the sun by night.
Blind woman, deaf man, jackdaw fool.
Let the Lord of Chaos rule!