PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post Reply
User avatar
Coun
Posts: 46

PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post by Coun » Wed Oct 13, 2021 5:19 pm

Hello dear turtles.

If you're in any way involved into PvP, you have likely noticed that the community has been somewhat keen to debate, even more so since the latest changes to the Vanilla battlegrounds.

To help make the situation more constructive and help the staff keep track of what ideas have been brought to the table, I'll attempt to collect, summarize and categorize any ideas on how to improve the PvP experience on Turtle.

New or missing ideas can be posted in this thread. I'll try to add them to the list. When doing so, please note: This thread is for concrete ideas. E.g., instead of saying "prevent AFKing" or "make honor system more bearable", give detailed ideas on how that could be achieved.

General PvP experience
  • Increase Team size requirements. Battlegrounds should be more than duels or blood ring fights, but requirements should still account for the size of the PvP community. WSG should be 3v3 or 4v4. AB should be 5v5. AV should be 10v10.
  • Blood Ring should be queueable along with all other battlegrounds. Currently, you cannot queue blood ring when already in another queue.
  • To decrease queue hopping, cancel all other queues when joining any battleground.
  • Make battlegrounds cross-faction to reduce frustration if one faction somehow outweighs the other. This could potentially also reduce toxicity among players because everyone is also a potential teammate.
  • Incentivize PvP during leveling by increasing the XP rewards (e.g. for mark turn-ins). Make PvP a more viable way to gain experience.
  • Introduce gear/stat scaling in battlegrounds to reduce twinking. Alternatively, introduce battleground-exclusive gear.
  • Create World PvP events, quests or generally incentivize world PvP. Vanilla world PvP locations could also get revised to give more incentive to participate.

PvP progression
  • Remove or decrease rank decay to make the system more casual-friendly and less punishing regarding voluntary or unvoluntary breaks. When wanting to stay close to the Vanilla experience, decreasing decay from 20% to 15% and increase the RP requirements per rank (e.g. 5000 -> 10000) could go a long way. Alternatively, rank decay could be removed completely, which would require much larger and more careful adjustments to the RP requirements.
  • Replace the honor system by the TBC PvP progression system.
  • Allow purchase of PvP gear in exchange of the existing battleground marks. Stack sized should then be increased (currently, it's 20 per character and mark). Players could then also decide whether they want to use their marks for gear or reputation. An example on how this could look like can be found here (thanks, Skady!).
  • Introduce a glyph that prevents honor gain/rank decay to allow taking a break and allow players that do not want to participate in ranking competition (e.g. because they have completed ranking progression) to play without hurting other players' progress. A glyph that, when worn during honor calculation, prevents a character from being included in the ranking calculations at all could work well enough.
  • Make pure reputation turn-ins a more viable alternative to mixed-honor-rep turn-ins by decreasing the required number of marks or increasing the reputation reward. Calculation & example here.

Battlegrounds
  • Alterac Valley content is often bugged. Elemental lords can bug and not move to the enemy base. Riders can also bug and not move. AV content should get thoroughly fixed.
  • Some sort of scaling (NPC health/attack) similar to what has been implemented in raids could help when AV team sized get below 10 each. Alternatively, removing unit upgrades can also prevent games from stalling.
  • New cross-faction battlegrounds, potentially with model swapping or completely different themes (e.g. Scarlet Crusade against Scourge).
  • Fix Arathi reputation gain: Reputation should trickle depending on the number of captured flags.
Last edited by Coun on Fri Oct 15, 2021 3:56 pm, edited 12 times in total.

User avatar
Coun
Posts: 46

Re: PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post by Coun » Wed Oct 13, 2021 5:19 pm

In this post, I will link postings from this or other threads where (I think) people gave very detailed and interesting opinions on what could be improved, and how.

General PvP experience PvP progression
Last edited by Coun on Thu Oct 21, 2021 12:39 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
Coun
Posts: 46

Re: PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post by Coun » Wed Oct 13, 2021 5:20 pm

Reserved

User avatar
Nerasw
Posts: 15

Re: PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post by Nerasw » Wed Oct 13, 2021 10:57 pm

Coun wrote:
Wed Oct 13, 2021 5:19 pm

[*] Create World PvP events, quests or generally incentivize world PvP.

Battlegrounds
  • New cross-faction battlegrounds, potentially with model swapping or completely different themes (e.g. Scarlet Crusade against Scourge).
Shut up and take my money!

Rakura
Posts: 7

Re: PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post by Rakura » Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:50 pm

Suggestion:
Lower requirement for rep only turn ins to be 1 token instead of 3. As it stands you are better off turning in for honor plus rep than rep alone. 50 plus 398 as oppose to 75 for just rep. This would allow us to make a choice on how we want to spend our tokens and significantly reduce the grind for everyone.

Present grind with 3 turn ins:
233 wins to get from neutral to exalted (best case scenario)
2520 losses to get from neutral to exalted (worst case scenario)

1 token for rep only implemented at 75 rep:
127 wins to get from neutral to exalted
560 losses to get from neutral to exalted

1 token for rep only implemented at 100 rep:
103 wins to get from neutral to exalted
420 losses to get from neutral to exalted

As you can see just this simple change would allow us to feel like we are progressing even if we are not the victors all the time and would also allow casuals the opportunity to farm gear in between raids. This should be combined with the removal of only being allowed to have 1 stack of 20.

User avatar
Coun
Posts: 46

Re: PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post by Coun » Thu Oct 14, 2021 1:35 pm

Rakura wrote:
Thu Oct 14, 2021 12:50 pm
Suggestion:
Lower requirement for rep only turn ins to be 1 token instead of 3. As it stands you are better off turning in for honor plus rep than rep alone. 50 plus 398 as oppose to 75 for just rep. This would allow us to make a choice on how we want to spend our tokens and significantly reduce the grind for everyone.

Present grind with 3 turn ins:
233 wins to get from neutral to exalted (best case scenario)
2520 losses to get from neutral to exalted (worst case scenario)

1 token for rep only implemented at 75 rep:
127 wins to get from neutral to exalted
560 losses to get from neutral to exalted

1 token for rep only implemented at 100 rep:
103 wins to get from neutral to exalted
420 losses to get from neutral to exalted

As you can see just this simple change would allow us to feel like we are progressing even if we are not the victors all the time and would also allow casuals the opportunity to farm gear in between raids. This should be combined with the removal of only being allowed to have 1 stack of 20.
Added.

User avatar
Sinrek
Posts: 788

Re: PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post by Sinrek » Thu Oct 14, 2021 3:05 pm

Finally some constructive feedback and ideas! Good work.
satisfied_turtle Slowly turtling my way up.

User avatar
Bazog
Posts: 1

Re: PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post by Bazog » Thu Oct 14, 2021 5:21 pm

Hi everyone, I just created my first character in Turtle Wow yesterday and it is my first post in this forum. I never played on a private server before, and I actually hesitated joining this server because I mostly only do PvP in end game, but seeing all the "classic+" features and respect/love for the warcraft lore and atmosphere I decided to give it a try.

Funnily, I also played on a RP/PVE server back in 2004. And let me tell you there was a lot of PvP going on on that server. There wasn't any battlegrounds yet, nor any honor system. But players grouped together anyway and tried to conquer other factions' towns quite often, just for the fun of it. You could regularly see raids of 30 characters, none of them max level yet trying to hold a quest hub. Then the defenders called for help and you could see another pack of players from the other faction gathering to reclaim the town. It was for me the golden age of WoW. Most players didn't care much about getting max level or BiS, they had fun doing some "unrewarded" pvp/pve conquest.

Later, with the addition of honor, battlegrounds and dishonorable kills, nobody dared attacking hubs and towns anymore, I PvP mostly only took place in BGs. Don't get me wrong, I like BGs, but they don't feel "organic" like city raiding, and have much less role play value.

So here are my proposals:

-I think dishonorable kills shouldn't affect honor anymore. But the stat itself should remain, as well as the pariah title (great role play addition). The most dishonorable characters should have a bounty on their head proportional to their dishonorable kill stat. Other faction players could have a big honor reward by tracking and killing them.

-Reward more honor for killing other faction leaders, and a few honor for killing other important and well guarded ennemy NPCs. On the other hand, successfully protecting your leaders and other important NPCs of your faction should also reward honor.These additions could foster city sieges/city defenses.

-Adding some World PvP objectives in the world would also be great.

These additions wouldn't bother strictly PvE players, as they only affect ennemy NPCs. But for players not hermetic to PvP it could lead to great world PvP events.

Deathduck2
Posts: 2

Re: PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post by Deathduck2 » Tue Oct 19, 2021 5:30 pm

Here is how to keep BGs lively and active at almost all times of the day: cross faction battlegrounds. I'm not talking about merc mode, I mean the game automatically ques alliance and horde on the same side based on the order people que up. This does a few great things:

1. One side is not dominating. With a small PvP population, depending on who's queing, one faction will end up dominating the battleground. When this happens the other faction will stop queing up and bang, no one gets to PvP anymore. In cross faction BG this doesn't happen.

2. There are no que times. If your faction has many PvPers queing up and the other faction doesn't, well it doesn't really matter because the game will pop as soon as 8 players que in total.

3. A more fair winrate. If your on the weaker faction it's okay, because now you understand your win rate should be around 50%, more or less depending on your skill. You got a bad team last time but you are willing to que one more time because everything will be different.

This is really the change that will make BG players happiest whether they realize now or not for one simple reason: in this system BGs are always popping. And the one thing we want more than anything is to be able to actually play.

Warmane
Posts: 1

Re: PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post by Warmane » Wed Oct 20, 2021 12:48 pm

While at it's beginning turtle-wow was a niche server where only RP focused players would gather, it is undeniable that now it is slowly becoming the main reference point for anyone who wants to play on a vanilla Pserver. Recent months have alredy seen a doubling of the online population, and if 1.15.2 is promoted well after the launch we'll easly get 1k online pop.
I am sure the devs are aware that they cannot simply ignore the massive number of player they would lose if they keep the server so unappealing to PVPers. As i said, turtle is becoming THE reference point for anyone who want's to play non blizz vanilla, you are not a niche server anymore.
That said i'm not suggeting you put any developer's effort into pvp, cause i know you want to run a pve/leveling oriented server, and that's absolutely fine. Simply push the "Allow world pvp" button, and that should open the door to the massive number of players who have not joined yet cause of lack of pvp.
If this change will bring bad /unwanted results in the server, you can always push the "kill world pvp" button again.

Mcnair
Posts: 12

Re: PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post by Mcnair » Wed Oct 20, 2021 3:16 pm

Simply push the "Allow world pvp" button
I really hope they never ever enforce world PvP in here. All of you so desperately wanting to get ganked have the option to enable your PvP any time. If you want, you can even announce on /World your position and ask for it, maybe someone will comply. But please do not think that the majority here wants to get ganked. Especially the HC players.
1. One side is not dominating. With a small PvP population, depending on who's queing, one faction will end up dominating the battleground. When this happens the other faction will stop queing up and bang, no one gets to PvP anymore. In cross faction BG this doesn't happen.
I don't really see how would cross-faction BGs decrease the one sidedness. The number of people with high-end gear is still quite small compared to the total population, so those 1-2 in top gear will dominate the group they are in regardless of the opposition. And what would stop them to just group-join the queue?

User avatar
Coun
Posts: 46

Re: PvP suggestions: An attempt to collect and systematize

Post by Coun » Wed Oct 20, 2021 10:02 pm

Mcnair wrote:
Wed Oct 20, 2021 3:16 pm
I don't really see how would cross-faction BGs decrease the one sidedness. The number of people with high-end gear is still quite small compared to the total population, so those 1-2 in top gear will dominate the group they are in regardless of the opposition. And what would stop them to just group-join the queue?
I mean, you have a 50% chance those people are on your team each match. Of course this would reduce one-sidedness. Grouping could be an issue, but would probably be considered bad sportsmanship, similar to how it is treated in the arena.

Post Reply