Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

PvE vs PvP meet in Warsong. (was forum=21)Follow

#1 Jul 19 2010 at 10:14 PM Rating: Default
Scholar
***
1,912 posts
Random battleground. Enter battleground... it's Warsong.

Horde team:
The usual mix of PvP and PvE gear. And me on my warlock.

Alliance team:
2 rogues that didn't stun or use cloak of shadows.
2 dks that were always together and I solo'd repeatedly.
1 destro warlock who coudln't stun or fear.
1 tree that didn't seem to know shapeshift removes snares.
I can't remember the rest.

Almost all of them were fully geared in visually recognizable ICC25 gear. When I confronted them, they would proceed to attack me with their well known boss DPS rotations as if I was a boss... (flattering...).

Horde team proceeds uncontested into the alliance base, grabs flag, kills allliance flag carrier and all of the alliance team in midfield and scores, too easy...

So I defend the flagroom and let my team carry on. I was effortlessly killing everything that comes to the flag room. Until I realize I was the only person left defending the flag... and that the entire rest of my team was not grabbing the alliance flag.

On the minimap my team was all grouped and almost inside the alliance base... and they weren't getting killed. (How could that be bad?)

Eventually some rogue sprints away with my flag while I'm fighting the 2 dks... I managed to finish both DKs (for the 11th time) and run after the rogue... Let me stress that I really suck at fighting dks on my warlock and I solo'd both dks 2v1 repeatedly.

I chased the FC and saw my entire team very close to the tunnel entrance of the alliance base... Their FC foolishly went straight to the tunnel entrance...

and my team ignored him...

THEM!!
The bloodthirsty juggernauts of war and destruction...
The impalers of warsong...
The death squad of ownage...
Neutralized in the stupidest way ever...
By weaksauce raiders that didn't even know what cloak of shadows does in PvP...

5-7 of the alliance were continuously jumping down from their spawn and serving as bait to keep my entire team there. I don't know if they were doing it on purpose. But my team was eating bait for honor kills, ignoring the flags and refusing to listen, and we lost... we lost against the weakest team.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 12:29am by xorq
____________________________
NOTE: I may post comments about my like/dislike/approval/disapproval of game features.
1- They are NOT a complaint. They are a perspective.
2- They are NOT advocacy. They are a perspective.

Overlord Theophany wrote:
Insults aren't needed
#2 Jul 20 2010 at 12:17 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
27,577 posts
xorq wrote:
But my team was eating bait for honor kills, ignoring the flags and refusing to listen, and we lost... we lost against the weakest team.

That makes it pretty obvious to me that your team was in fact the weakest one.
____________________________
Someone on another forum wrote:
Wow, you've got an awesome writing style.! I really dig the narrator's back story, humor, sarcasm, and the plethora of pop culture references. Altogether a refreshingly different RotR journal (not that I don't like the more traditional ones, mind you).

#3 Jul 20 2010 at 1:27 AM Rating: Good
**
387 posts
Even the weakest of strategies is > mindless Zerg

Oh, and I dount that their suicidal-tactic that would make a lemming proud was an actual tactic. Or that the two DKs and the rogue who stole your flag worked together on purpose. They just happened to do the right thing at the right time, while your team failed at the wrong time (which is pretty much given as a zerg).

Btw, let me stress that PVE gear is not much inferior to PVP gear IF (and only if) the PVE players work together like they would in a raid.

One of my most fun Battlegrounds was warsong with my raidgroup after a raid.
It's the SYNERGY. A lone PVEer w/o his friends stands not much chance against a good PVPer with the right equip.
#4 Jul 20 2010 at 2:58 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,912 posts
The pair of DKs were always together, the rogues weren't. They kept coming over and over to get killed. It just happened that at a certain moment the rogue appeared by the flag when I was still not done killing the DKs.

Gear... people in icc25 gear do insane dps. What they were doing terribly was that they were using their abilities as if they were attacking raid bosses (can I say they wiped?).

It seemed that at least one of them was doing warsong for the first time. One of the things they did when they got the horde flag was taking it to our own roof and waiting there, it's the wrong roof. And when I went to the roof to recover it they stayed at the roof to fight as if they were defending the roof itself.

One of the rogues seemed to think it was good to LoS an affliction warlock to wait for dots to expire, each time I had full dots on him he would LoS and wait for dots to expire...

My team... they were tearing the other guys appart pretty easy but yes, the alliance guys were so easy to kill that my team could really have been full of bads and still kill the alliance with ease. It is quite possible as I am terrible at killing ONE dk on my warlock and I was constantly soloing 2 without becoming better.

Sometimes people in warsong seem to ignore flags and just wander in search for honor kills. The one thing the alliance team did right was that they knew their objective was the flag.



Edited, Jul 20th 2010 5:04am by xorq
____________________________
NOTE: I may post comments about my like/dislike/approval/disapproval of game features.
1- They are NOT a complaint. They are a perspective.
2- They are NOT advocacy. They are a perspective.

Overlord Theophany wrote:
Insults aren't needed
#5 Jul 20 2010 at 4:10 AM Rating: Good
***
2,938 posts
So, basically, you got stuck in a game full of suck.

Your team (Horde) had their collective fingers up their asses and didn't know how to play, period. They knew what their abilities were for, sure, but they sure didn't know how to win a match of one of THE oldest wargames known to Mankind.

The other team (Alliance), were also sitting on their chairs with their thumbs up their asses, but they at least knew that they ought to be grabbing the flag and trying to capture it.

Whether or not they were working together (other than the pair of DKs) is unclear, but either way, both teams sucked. Yours just happened to have sucked a little more than theirs, thus, you lost.

Doesn't matter how good you are at killing the enemy or staying alive yourself, if you just plain don't care about the objectives, then you are probably not going to win by anything other than blind luck unless you're playing Team Deathmatch.

Edit:

There's also another possibility: Don't HKs give you a more reasonable amount of Honor, now?

Maybe your team cockily thought that if they could just farm the Alliance guys over and over again (given that they were such easy kills), that the honor gained by repeatedly farming them would outweigh the honor gained by capping the flag twice more, and thus winning the match sooner?

Its just that they got too cocky and it took them too long to realize that they were going to lose the match, and didn't get serious soon enough.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 6:12am by Lyrailis
#6 Jul 20 2010 at 8:01 AM Rating: Excellent
****
4,056 posts
Agree with Poldaran: the Horde team was weakest in this case. Neither skill nor gear can counter disregarding how you actually win the battleground. I don't know what it is about mid in WSG. It's like the Hotel California. Once entered, people never seem to leave it. Maybe there's a stand there that gives out free crack and cupcakes. There's another location of that same stand on the road between the Stables and the Lumbermill in AB.
#7 Jul 20 2010 at 9:05 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
4,684 posts
Quote:
Agree with Poldaran: the Horde team was weakest in this case.

To be honest, I absolutely hate this way of viewing as it's blatantly not true. If in regardless what sport/game/circumstances team A beats team B, it is not automatically true that team A is "the better team". To say so is to insinuate that ONLY skill matters and luck, referees, field of play, team composition and balance have no influence on the match at all.

This is precisely the frustrating thing about battlegrounds (but sports as a whole as well, and I point at the WC football); it occurs so often that one team blatantly plays better than the other team, all game long, but the other team wins by a bit of chance, or by having the referee on their side, or by having a field more suited to their tactic, or by having a team make-up that is by default more effective against the opponent's team make-up.

Honestly, there is stuff out there you don't really have an influence on.
____________________________
"My guildy Kasdaye" wrote:
Gearscore for raiders is like Goldshire for roleplayers.
#8 Jul 20 2010 at 9:24 AM Rating: Good
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you Moz, but I would disagree with you. In BGs, unlike the World Cup, there's no human referee, so unless you want to argue about terrain advantages, the "unfair ruling" goes out the window. In any event, you're correct that people err, and sometimes there's luck involved as well as skill.

In general though, if you win three games to zero, you're probably doing something better than the opposition, whether it's strategy or gear. I've found that when I'm in a BG where people work together and cooperate, they're much more effective than the team where some people defend, some people try to take a resource by themselves, and the rest run off to be midfield avengers.

Thus, if your team is better in terms of gear, it is the physically stronger team- but if they run around like a herd of feral cats doing their own thing, they are still the weakest team overall, since they tend to lose regardless of gear.
____________________________
Longtail | Evilynne | Maevene | Kornakk | Steelbelly
#9 Jul 20 2010 at 9:49 AM Rating: Good
Does it from behind...
Avatar
*****
13,048 posts
Mozared wrote:
Quote:
Agree with Poldaran: the Horde team was weakest in this case.

This is precisely the frustrating thing about battlegrounds (but sports as a whole as well, and I point at the WC football); it occurs so often that one team blatantly plays better than the other team, all game long, but the other team wins by a bit of chance, or by having the referee on their side, or by having a field more suited to their tactic, or by having a team make-up that is by default more effective against the opponent's team make-up.

Honestly, there is stuff out there you don't really have an influence on.

The bolded part is just being better than the other team. If they can't adjust to how you're playing, you're the better team.

It's like when arenas first came out and people weren't used to double DPS teams in 2s; if you could adjust to the fast pace that a double DPS team would set, you could likely survive. Druids would prehot, priests would keep up shields and prom, etc; stuff those classes didn't necessarily have to do against other DPS/healer class comps.
____________________________
The·oph·a·ny (thē-ŏf'ə-nē)
An appearance of a god to a human; a divine manifestation.
Rogue Hunter
#10 Jul 20 2010 at 9:51 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
4,684 posts
Quote:
Maybe I'm misunderstanding you Moz, but I would disagree with you. In BGs, unlike the World Cup, there's no human referee, so unless you want to argue about terrain advantages, the "unfair ruling" goes out the window.

Well yes, the problem with my post is that I wanted to encompass (always wanted to use that word) all shapes of sport, games and competitive play. The referee thing is obviously refering to the World Cup and doesn't really apply to WoW. In a similar fashion, stuff like 'team composition' applies to WoW a lot more (3v3 arenas) than it does to football.

Quote:
In general though, if you win three games to zero, you're probably doing something better than the opposition, whether it's strategy or gear. I've found that when I'm in a BG where people work together and cooperate, they're much more effective than the team where some people defend, some people try to take a resource by themselves, and the rest run off to be midfield avengers.

Thus, if your team is better in terms of gear, it is the physically stronger team- but if they run around like a herd of feral cats doing their own thing, they are still the weakest team overall, since they tend to lose regardless of gear.

Yes, that much is true. I'm not even sure to what extend it's the case in the OP's situation, but I just wanted to point out that Anobix' earlier point simply doesn't work. And 'unfair losses' are what first and foremost frustrate me in any kind of game. Back to it's basics, it really is the good old "I spend 5 minutes perfectly solo-ing my counter-class and then, just as I'm about to finish him, a ret pallie pops up and kills me". Losing matches/fights where you are obviously the better player is one of my biggest pet peeves, which is why I felt the need to post an answer to Anobix' post.

Edit: In response to Theo's post, this isn't always true. In this case it's referring especially to 3v3 arenas. You of all people should know that some comps are simply more effective than other comps, and that this can cause you to lose even if you play your very best and the opponent doesn't.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 5:52pm by Mozared
____________________________
"My guildy Kasdaye" wrote:
Gearscore for raiders is like Goldshire for roleplayers.
#11 Jul 20 2010 at 10:49 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
*
174 posts
xorq wrote:
The one thing the alliance team did right was that they knew their objective was the flag.


I may be wrong, but it seems to me that the people who ignore the flags in WSG are the same people who can't leave the flag alone in EotS...
#12 Jul 20 2010 at 11:01 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
11,854 posts
Battlegrounds, I love them...

Such a wonderful combination of people who are actually trying to accomplish something, and those who just want to blow off some steam and moonfire a couple of gnomes.

I can't imagine any drama coming from that. Smiley: lol
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#13 Jul 20 2010 at 11:22 AM Rating: Excellent
****
4,056 posts
Mozared wrote:
Quote:
Agree with Poldaran: the Horde team was weakest in this case.

To be honest, I absolutely hate this way of viewing as it's blatantly not true. If in regardless what sport/game/circumstances team A beats team B, it is not automatically true that team A is "the better team". To say so is to insinuate that ONLY skill matters and luck, referees, field of play, team composition and balance have no influence on the match at all.


Um. You cut off the next sentence, in which I explained why I felt they were the weaker team. And it has nothing to do with anything you're saying, most especially with this:

Mozared wrote:
Honestly, there is stuff out there you don't really have an influence on.


An enemy flag carrier ran right through a crowd of them and they made no attempt to even stop him. How much more opportunity for "influence" do you want? They were the weaker team because they weren't trying to win. Walking into a competition and then ignoring the part where it's, um, a competition? I don't think it gets a whole lot weaker.

I can't comment on football, but in battlegrounds this happens pretty often. And I know you and I have gone round on this issue before, Moz, and my position remains unchanged: you pugging into my battleground and ignoring the objectives to fight mid-field is just as bad as me pugging into your raid and running along down the hall to poke ineffectively at the trash instead of healing the rest of you while you fight the boss. Hey, I'm contributing! I'm doing damage! I'm hurting enemies! Nope, doesn't work that way. PVE or PVP, regardless of the factors you mention, either the team works together to try to achieve the objective, or they aren't a good team.

That doesn't mean, obviously, that the team doesn't have strong members individually, such as xorq here. But taken as a whole? That's a weak team.
#14 Jul 20 2010 at 11:25 AM Rating: Default
***
1,679 posts
jiggeryqua wrote:
xorq wrote:
The one thing the alliance team did right was that they knew their objective was the flag.


I may be wrong, but it seems to me that the people who ignore the flags in WSG are the same people who can't leave the flag alone in EotS...
You are correct!
____________________________
"anything added to the game is technically content, even if it was only a giant, steaming pile of turds for us to climb for a paltry achievement." - Drusas

#15 Jul 20 2010 at 11:36 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
4,684 posts
Quote:
Um. You cut off the next sentence, in which I explained why I felt they were the weaker team. And it has nothing to do with anything you're saying, most especially with this:

An enemy flag carrier ran right through a crowd of them and they made no attempt to even stop him. How much more opportunity for "influence" do you want? They were the weaker team because they weren't trying to win. Walking into a competition and then ignoring the part where it's, um, a competition? I don't think it gets a whole lot weaker.

And fair is fair, you missed the part in my second reply =P
Quote:
Yes, that much is true. I'm not even sure to what extend it's the case in the OP's situation, but I just wanted to point out that Anobix' earlier point simply doesn't work.


Quote:
I can't comment on football, but in battlegrounds this happens pretty often. And I know you and I have gone round on this issue before, Moz, and my position remains unchanged: you pugging into my battleground and ignoring the objectives to fight mid-field is just as bad as me pugging into your raid and running along down the hall to poke ineffectively at the trash instead of healing the rest of you while you fight the boss. Hey, I'm contributing! I'm doing damage! I'm hurting enemies! Nope, doesn't work that way. PVE or PVP, regardless of the factors you mention, either the team works together to try to achieve the objective, or they aren't a good team.

I still feel you've completely misunderstood me on that subject. What I was and am saying is that you can contribute to a WSG team without standing near your own flag, being on your way to grab the enemy's flag or walking next to your flag carrier. If I can engage in a 1on1 with an enemy healer that I can't kill, then yes, you lose me in defense. But the allies lose their healer, which gives our team more opportunity to take down that flagcarrier. If you go into a GOOD, solid 1v1, all you do is turn the game into a 9v9 rather than a 10v10. At worst, you break even, at best, you keep a key player in the enemy's team busy and effectively cause your team to win.

That's something different than going into the midfield and purposefully ignoring flagcarriers walking by.
____________________________
"My guildy Kasdaye" wrote:
Gearscore for raiders is like Goldshire for roleplayers.
#16 Jul 20 2010 at 11:41 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,912 posts
Quote:
Doesn't matter how good you are at killing the enemy or staying alive yourself, if you just plain don't care about the objectives, then you are probably not going to win by anything other than blind luck unless you're playing Team Deathmatch.


That's probably the reason we lose most of the time.

In Strand of the Ancients. You usually get a few people scoring mad kills from farming the other team at their spawn, bragging about their killing blows and complaining about the rest of the team, but when a gate goes down there will often be almost nobody moving out to protect the next gate that will be attacked.

On isle I've seen times when there's 3 enemy demos smashing my team's gate and nearly 20 defenders inside the keep who completely destroy the incoming paradrops but then didn't move to counter the demos outside the gates, they just stood there idle.

Quote:

There's also another possibility: Don't HKs give you a more reasonable amount of Honor, now?

Maybe your team cockily thought that if they could just farm the Alliance guys over and over again (given that they were such easy kills), that the honor gained by repeatedly farming them would outweigh the honor gained by capping the flag twice more, and thus winning the match sooner?


The people farming HKs get more honor than the rest of their own team, be it win or lose.

But if you queued for a random the honor bunus from winning is a lot more than what you will get for farming HKs.

There may be one thing... we get instant queue for bgs, I'm told the alliance does not. So alliance may feel a stronger need to win because if they lose they'll have to go back to picking flowers while waiting for the queue once more.

Quote:
I still feel you've completely misunderstood me on that subject. What I was and am saying is that you can contribute to a WSG team without standing near your own flag, being on your way to grab the enemy's flag or walking next to your flag carrier. If I can engage in a 1on1 with an enemy healer that I can't kill, then yes, you lose me in defense. But the allies lose their healer, which gives our team more opportunity to take down that flagcarrier. If you go into a GOOD, solid 1v1, all you do is turn the game into a 9v9 rather than a 10v10. At worst, you break even, at best, you keep a key player in the enemy's team busy and effectively cause your team to win.


It depends... You shouldn't ignore an easy-to-kill enemy fc walking right next to you to continue your good solid 1v1.

Otherwise I have in fact used as viable tactic a resil tank+healer pair to distract like 5 of the opposite team into a midfield fight that leads to nowhere so that the rest of the team will meet very little opposition.

Edited, Jul 20th 2010 4:46pm by xorq
____________________________
NOTE: I may post comments about my like/dislike/approval/disapproval of game features.
1- They are NOT a complaint. They are a perspective.
2- They are NOT advocacy. They are a perspective.

Overlord Theophany wrote:
Insults aren't needed
#17 Jul 20 2010 at 12:00 PM Rating: Excellent
****
4,056 posts
Mozared wrote:
And fair is fair, you missed the part in my second reply =P
Quote:
Yes, that much is true. I'm not even sure to what extend it's the case in the OP's situation, but I just wanted to point out that Anobix' earlier point simply doesn't work.



Smiley: laugh Well if you want to argue with Anobix, quote him, not me.

As for the other thing, I didn't miss what you were saying. If you're engaged in that 1v1 for a valid strategic reason, of course I have no argument with that. Unless it is really a strategic target, though, taking it down from 10v10 to 9v9 gives your team no advantage (again, unless it does, i.e., the one you're taking out is key). That's not helping. Either you're making deliberate decisions for the sole purpose of how to best achieve the objective, or you aren't. [Edit: "best" is the key word in that last sentence. Any damage I do to a boss is a strategic contribution, but if I'm not using the best rotation and only pulling half the DPS of the rest of the raid, I bet you'll still want to talk to me about it.]

But that's academic anyway because it is, of course, rarely a matter of strategy in such cases. The overwhelming majority of people durpdurping around in mid are doing it because they just want their honor and don't care whether the bg is won or lost. My only point is that this is no less rude and jerky a move than it would be in any pug. I don't care if you're running WSG or trying to down the hard mode badassiest-more-evil-than-anything-has-been-evil-before-and-could-totally-beat-up-Arthas boss. Have some manners, and either try your best and play to win or GTFO. I've spoken my piece and counted to three.


Edited, Jul 20th 2010 2:07pm by teacake
#18 Jul 22 2010 at 1:12 PM Rating: Good
Sage
**
363 posts
This is a very confusing thread.

To begin with, Anobix never posted in it, but evidently made substantial contributions?

In any case, winning is winning. A "bit of luck" or having a team-mate bail you out of a losing 1v1 or having a friendly referee (in the case of football, or even, say... science, which is also competitive and refereed) is still indicative of types of skill. Gamesmanship and strategy are facts of competition.

Not to say you shouldn't be angry when a referee determines a match, but a team truly covering all possibilities makes sure to be winning that battle as well. For the US in the WC, Donovan's goal against Algeria was in fact very lucky. But, he was in the right place to take advantage of that luck (like the rogue in the OP's battleground), which is not always easy.
____________________________
this page purposefully left empty
#19 Jul 22 2010 at 1:55 PM Rating: Excellent
****
4,056 posts
boquaz wrote:
To begin with, Anobix never posted in it, but evidently made substantial contributions?


That's just how Anobix rolls.
#20 Jul 22 2010 at 4:24 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
****
4,684 posts
Shush!

Everybody knows Anobix is just a mirror image of Poldaran.

*Nods*
____________________________
"My guildy Kasdaye" wrote:
Gearscore for raiders is like Goldshire for roleplayers.
#21 Jul 22 2010 at 10:22 PM Rating: Good
xorq wrote:
The people farming HKs get more honor than the rest of their own team, be it win or lose.

But if you queued for a random the honor bunus from winning is a lot more than what you will get for farming HKs.

This a true (and interesting) point and one I've felt really needs changing in BG mechanics. I can run in as a healer, keeping our flag runners and cappers alive through battle and invasions but I still finish with much less honor points than players who reenact the Kill Bill scene of The Bride sword fighting the Crazy 88's in the midfield.

The score chart clearly records who made flag caps amongst its statistics ... So why not give 50% extra (or, ****, 100% extra) honor points to a player for each flag cap (and not just flag carrying) they make? If taking the enemy's flag back to your base and getting the point for it gets you more honor than randomly killing keyboard turners then you can bet players will make a rush to keep the enemy's flag (and their own) more often.
____________________________
Rorschach wrote:
For my own part, regret nothing. Have lived life, free from compromise ... and step into the shadow now without complaint.

#22 Jul 23 2010 at 7:33 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
****
4,684 posts
Quote:
but I still finish with much less honor points than players who reenact the Kill Bill scene of The Bride sword fighting the Crazy 88's in the midfield.

To be fair though, if you pull that off, you deserve the honor =P

Quote:
The score chart clearly records who made flag caps amongst its statistics ... So why not give 50% extra (or, ****, 100% extra) honor points to a player for each flag cap (and not just flag carrying) they make? If taking the enemy's flag back to your base and getting the point for it gets you more honor than randomly killing keyboard turners then you can bet players will make a rush to keep the enemy's flag (and their own) more often.

And it'll also encourage "OMG I wanted to grab the flag give it to me I'm prot" - "stfu im a resto druid".
____________________________
"My guildy Kasdaye" wrote:
Gearscore for raiders is like Goldshire for roleplayers.
#23 Jul 23 2010 at 10:19 AM Rating: Good
Mozared wrote:
Quote:
but I still finish with much less honor points than players who reenact the Kill Bill scene of The Bride sword fighting the Crazy 88's in the midfield.

To be fair though, if you pull that off, you deserve the honor =P

Quote:
The score chart clearly records who made flag caps amongst its statistics ... So why not give 50% extra (or, ****, 100% extra) honor points to a player for each flag cap (and not just flag carrying) they make? If taking the enemy's flag back to your base and getting the point for it gets you more honor than randomly killing keyboard turners then you can bet players will make a rush to keep the enemy's flag (and their own) more often.

And it'll also encourage "OMG I wanted to grab the flag give it to me I'm prot" - "stfu im a resto druid".

Yeah, that's true, I guess. And we already have things like a rogue grabbing the flag and then running out to the enemy GY and trying to stab all the spawners ... Then complaining to the team that they died.

Gawd, everytime someone tries to moron-proof something, nature just invents new morons.


Edited, Jul 23rd 2010 4:19pm by Smallsword
____________________________
Rorschach wrote:
For my own part, regret nothing. Have lived life, free from compromise ... and step into the shadow now without complaint.

#24 Sep 13 2010 at 10:34 AM Rating: Decent
8 posts
Newbie here and Just noticed this post.

In my experience Horde are far better @ PVP than Ally.

They are usually far better equipped, more organised and work more as a team and with 250k+ kills with my Ally Mage my win ratio in all BG's is only approx 1 in 3! wins! That fact speaks for itself!

You can anylsye it all you want, it wont change 1. The facts and 2. the Stats.

Going back to the original post it is hugely frustrating when you work your **** off for the Hk farmers to lose a game that is already in the bag. Rated BG's will change this and I for one can't wait! I also think its piffle that HK's give more honour than actually winning via the objectives set. A blind man and his dog could earn 75k honour in a few hours via the BG's so HK is nonsense, ultimately, its all about sitting on top of the tree and gloating about your kills, which of course is not what Bg's were designed to do!

A decently geared PVP team will easily beat a similarly geared PVE team, but only if that team works as a team, thats it.!
#25 Sep 13 2010 at 11:28 AM Rating: Good
*****
14,174 posts
Quote:
...on my warlock...

Almost all of them were fully geared in visually recognizable ICC25 gear. When I confronted them, they would proceed to attack me with their well known boss DPS rotations as if I was a boss.


Sounds about right.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#26 Sep 13 2010 at 4:27 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,912 posts
Kavekk the Pest wrote:
Quote:
...on my warlock...

Almost all of them were fully geared in visually recognizable ICC25 gear. When I confronted them, they would proceed to attack me with their well known boss DPS rotations as if I was a boss.


Sounds about right.


What you mean is that warlocks and ICC bosses can't be 2-manned in ICC gear?

BTW I just discovered a possible reason why an ICC geared premade that can't PvP worth a copper would be doing warsong... If someone talks to the king and removes your ICC buff you have to get your entire team outside the instance for 30 minutes...

Oh well, from what I can remember they actually won in the end.

Edited, Sep 13th 2010 6:30pm by xorq
____________________________
NOTE: I may post comments about my like/dislike/approval/disapproval of game features.
1- They are NOT a complaint. They are a perspective.
2- They are NOT advocacy. They are a perspective.

Overlord Theophany wrote:
Insults aren't needed
#27 Sep 13 2010 at 4:37 PM Rating: Good
*****
14,174 posts
xorq wrote:
Kavekk the Pest wrote:
Quote:
...on my warlock...

Almost all of them were fully geared in visually recognizable ICC25 gear. When I confronted them, they would proceed to attack me with their well known boss DPS rotations as if I was a boss.


Sounds about right.


What you mean is that warlocks and ICC bosses can't be 2-manned in ICC gear?

BTW I just discovered a possible reason why an ICC geared premade that can't PvP worth a copper would be doing warsong... If someone talks to the king and removes your ICC buff you have to get your entire team outside the instance for 30 minutes...

Oh well, from what I can remember they actually won in the end.

Edited, Sep 13th 2010 6:30pm by xorq


No, I'm still just bitter about vanilla warlocks on my mage. And tBC warlocks on my mage. Just warlocks generally, actually.
____________________________
“Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.”
#28 Sep 13 2010 at 4:53 PM Rating: Decent
Scholar
***
1,912 posts
Kavekk the Pest wrote:

No, I'm still just bitter about vanilla warlocks on my mage. And tBC warlocks on my mage. Just warlocks generally, actually.


That's exactly how I was feeling the day I created my Warlock.

When I created my Rogue I was feeling like, World of Roguecraft (old warcraft movie).

They are both pretty strong... they both have their weaknesses too... they both are pretty good for killing mages too.
____________________________
NOTE: I may post comments about my like/dislike/approval/disapproval of game features.
1- They are NOT a complaint. They are a perspective.
2- They are NOT advocacy. They are a perspective.

Overlord Theophany wrote:
Insults aren't needed
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 13 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (13)