Check it out!

[Indalamar]

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.aspx?fn=wow-general&t=4782636&p=1&tmp=1#post4782636

[arch]

Good stuff.

Now give me a 5 on 5 Battleground.

[Rekuul']

5 man bg would suck. The whole 5v5 thing is played out, go try the arena if you want 5v5.

-Rek

[alcaras]

Interesting post; restores a lot of my confidence the game, especially the bit about outdoor PvP. :) Fix insanely long BG queue times as well and we're good to go... if I only have an hour or two to play I shouldn't spend all of it in queue for a BG :)

[Ezstyle]

Are the forums down? I cant access the thread, give me some details!!

[deathjester]

up again

[Theldon]

Interesting post; restores a lot of my confidence the game, especially the bit about outdoor PvP. :) Fix insanely long BG queue times as well and we're good to go... if I only have an hour or two to play I shouldn't spend all of it in queue for a BG :)

Crazy, you horde have it rough in que times. Then again, if you get a pug its instant win for you. For pug I wait max 15mins, and if its a proteus org av its like a 5min wait.

[arch]

5 man bg would suck. The whole 5v5 thing is played out, go try the arena if you want 5v5.

-Rek

5v5 is where you find the skills at imo.

[Nemico]

major let down reading the part about fixing queues, reducing min players to 20 etc, must mean we still won't see cross-server battle grounds for a very long time. QQ

[Rekuul']

5 man bg would suck. The whole 5v5 thing is played out, go try the arena if you want 5v5.

-Rek

5v5 is where you find the skills at imo.

5v5 is where the ideal group set up wins. And thats not just IMO. All of the BEST 5 man teams I know will tell you that its about 90% group make-up and 10% execution.

Im much harder pressed in a place like Arathi Basin than I am in a 5v5. For a warlock all it takes is a small assist train and we have no recourse. We can toss a few dots around and limp around in circles like a gimp, but thats about it.

When the field opens up and its not so cut and dry on who to assist on utility classes like the warlock and the hunter have room to work with. This is their chance to shine and that is when you can see how well they play their class.

And what kind of BG would a 5 man be? Consider the fact that if there is ANY capturing of objectives that effectively takes out at least one member of your team. So you have 3vs4 and 1vs2 fights? Honestly... doesnt sound very entertaining. Gives you minimal room for strategy and teamwork.

I've done more than my fair share of 5v5s but unless a 5 man BG has something incredibly revolutionary going for it, I'll pass.

-Rek

[arch]

5 man bg would suck. The whole 5v5 thing is played out, go try the arena if you want 5v5.

-Rek

5v5 is where you find the skills at imo.

5v5 is where the ideal group set up wins. And thats not just IMO. All of the BEST 5 man teams I know will tell you that its about 90% group make-up and 10% execution.

Im much harder pressed in a place like Arathi Basin than I am in a 5v5. For a warlock all it takes is a small assist train and we have no recourse. We can toss a few dots around and limp around in circles like a gimp, but thats about it.

When the field opens up and its not so cut and dry on who to assist on utility classes like the warlock and the hunter have room to work with. This is their chance to shine and that is when you can see how well they play their class.

And what kind of BG would a 5 man be? Consider the fact that if there is ANY capturing of objectives that effectively takes out at least one member of your team. So you have 3vs4 and 1vs2 fights? Honestly... doesnt sound very entertaining. Gives you minimal room for strategy and teamwork.

I've done more than my fair share of 5v5s but unless a 5 man BG has something incredibly revolutionary going for it, I'll pass.

-Rek

The BG would probably be a 5v5 DM in that case. I totaly agree that having objectives in a 5v5 BG would be straight out stupid.

I still think that 5v5 is alot more skill compared to AV where it, most of the time, is just the team that zergs the best. In some occasions are there also some cooperative groups that makes alot of difference.

[Rekuul']

Oh well compared to AV - 5v5 is the frickin olympics.

Im just saying there is a LOT more room for interesting play in a place like Arathi Basin.

[RubiksCube]

5v5 PvP BG's don't work. Simple as that, as Rekuul stated, you'd have no room for utility classes/hybrids like Warlock, Hunter, Druid.

You'd have 5 man groups of Warrior, Priest, Mage, Paladin/Shaman and Rogue.

Additionally, imho, 5 vs 5 in a set bg is no fun. In roaming PvP it's fun, but once you enter a bg you KNOW where the other team is, you can pick targets. Assisttrain a priest is not skill.

I like situations better where I have a 4 vs 6, 5 vs 8 or something and still win. Small scale PvP is where you find the skill, but does it have to be fair all the time? IMHO no.

Regarding the post, I'm excited about the outdoor events which lead to PvP. I like the arena event in dire maul for that exact reason, you automatically get 5 on 5 PvP, because groups in DM will be 5 man groups WITHOUT knowing when which team will attack.

We need more like that :)

[deathjester]

ya, as i always said, enlarge FFA zones or create more of em

[dNa]

5v5 PvP BG's don't work. Simple as that, as Rekuul stated, you'd have no room for utility classes/hybrids like Warlock, Hunter, Druid.

You'd have 5 man groups of Warrior, Priest, Mage, Paladin/Shaman and Rogue.

Additionally, imho, 5 vs 5 in a set bg is no fun. In roaming PvP it's fun, but once you enter a bg you KNOW where the other team is, you can pick targets. Assisttrain a priest is not skill.

I like situations better where I have a 4 vs 6, 5 vs 8 or something and still win. Small scale PvP is where you find the skill, but does it have to be fair all the time? IMHO no.

Regarding the post, I'm excited about the outdoor events which lead to PvP. I like the arena event in dire maul for that exact reason, you automatically get 5 on 5 PvP, because groups in DM will be 5 man groups WITHOUT knowing when which team will attack.

We need more like that :)

WTF, locks own 5on5 good druids too, rogues suck !
Fear = best cc in 5on5 imo felhunter can dispell and is free win vs rogues, SM/Ruin = mass dmg. Druids have Cres and instant heals + moonfire spam or bear form ..

[byto]

you forgot 2* combat rezz with druid and warlock. its like 5vs7 then.

[FallenDevil]

5v5 round based deathmatch would be pretty sweet

[Wyvvy]

5v5 round based deathmatch would be pretty sweet

This would result in 90% of W/W/P/M/S for horde and W/W/P/M/P for alliance, kinda boring =[

although the idea of a 5v5 ound based deathmatch is still fun!

[FallenDevil]

well i can completely see yer point wyvvy... some other class could be used to change the aspects tho. hunters and warlocks can add more people to a team, druids can root the runners...i'm just saying its probably the only alternative they will have for the azshara BG. I'm a FPS junkie from the get go and when the dust settles round based Deathmatch is still and will be the most popular. I mean first team to 7 wins or something will be faster, challenging, and fun imo.

[Shakkha77]

i don't agree.

Sure at equal skill and coordination level, a better rounded team has an edge.

But coordination/communication and skill makes more difference imo. I know a few friends from 'underated' class like the one you said that makes some real difference in 5v5. A good hunter can be a fucking pain in the ass, a druid is a healer with 10k armor, stun and instant heal, in many ways he can be considered superior to a priest.

Warlocks as said can CC with fear/seduce, see rogues/dispell if they pull out the fellhunter, they can nuke/snare, and have very high survability.

I think the results would be much more open that expected. Of course you'd have some perfect team of the best players who would probably be the best, but besides that there is a lot of room for fun battles.

I've always been in favor of 5v5 BG, i really hope they put it in.

[arch]

i don't agree.

Sure at equal skill and coordination level, a better rounded team has an edge.

But coordination/communication and skill makes more difference imo. I know a few friends from 'underated' class like the one you said that makes some real difference in 5v5. A good hunter can be a fucking pain in the ass, a druid is a healer with 10k armor, stun and instant heal, in many ways he can be considered superior to a priest.

Warlocks as said can CC with fear/seduce, see rogues/dispell if they pull out the fellhunter, they can nuke/snare, and have very high survability.

I think the results would be much more open that expected. Of course you'd have some perfect team of the best players who would probably be the best, but besides that there is a lot of room for fun battles.

I've always been in favor of 5v5 BG, i really hope they put it in.

QFT.

[Rekuul']

i don't agree.

Sure at equal skill and coordination level, a better rounded team has an edge.

But coordination/communication and skill makes more difference imo. I know a few friends from 'underated' class like the one you said that makes some real difference in 5v5. A good hunter can be a fucking pain in the ass, a druid is a healer with 10k armor, stun and instant heal, in many ways he can be considered superior to a priest.

Warlocks as said can CC with fear/seduce, see rogues/dispell if they pull out the fellhunter, they can nuke/snare, and have very high survability.

I think the results would be much more open that expected. Of course you'd have some perfect team of the best players who would probably be the best, but besides that there is a lot of room for fun battles.

I've always been in favor of 5v5 BG, i really hope they put it in.

Having fought the "perfect group" setup with extremely good players at the helm im more than a little jaded. There comes a point where you throw up your hands and say "theres nothing we can do against that".

But yea, somewhere between suck and "team perfection" there is a lot of room for good fights and any class can make their mark. But you said it: there is a definite best... and its based on the classes more than the players and thats why 5v5 will be less than optimal until Blizz can better balance the game.

-Rek

[Wyvvy]

my imbaed team is the following:

Mage/mage/warlock/shaman/shaman

shamans - 2 grounding totems so on one gets polymorphed, purge, shock, other totems and heal of corse.

warlock - curse of elements, fear and basic utility

mages - asssist warlock on curse of elements, AP/Trinket frontload for 3-4k each....lotta people are gonna die instantly.

[Soruss]

When WoW was coming out Blizzard said they were going to balance the game based on group PvP (and I think they said rock/paper/scissors too, but I'm no positive). Anyone who plays WoW should know this because every time there is a debate about class imbalances someone brings it up ("wahh wahh, my class isn't imbalance, WoW is balanced for group PvP!").

Anyway, Rek and Wyyvy are totally right... It is totally based on class structure and not as much on skill. Which I find completely hilarious, considering the above, because this shows how unbalanced WoW's group PvP really is!

Blizzard needs to focus on how to make their game more balanced in group PvP.

Also, I know i posted this in another thread (without know of this one), but I'm starting to worry about the outdoor objective. If there is only one, then it will jsut be SS/tarren mill all over again.

I wanted to add that despite imbalances 5vs5 would be the most fun imho... even 10vs10 starts to feel zergy (because of the 30sec respawns in WSG :/)

40vs40 (no respawns) BG would be something I'd totally be in to.

[Totakeke]

Regardless of the sizes of the BG, when it comes to a state where both sides are competitive enough that it's not an auto-win, the "class factor" will always come into play, it's apparent in WSG (MS Warriors), and it's apparent to an extent in AV too (AoE mages and rogues/druids sneak gy cap). It's not something that you can avoid in a game like this, there's always the best class composition. (assuming everyone sticks to their cookie cutter "role" and the larger the bg, the more restricted one is towards their "role")

IMO, a 5v5 bg would actually be more skill oriented than a larger BG, everyone's skill and actions would have a larger effect on the battle. So rather than keep doing the same thing over and over again, you would actually need to act and react towards your opponents in order to win. Surely a caster wouldnt be the first one charging against a MS oriented group, and you wouldnt charge towards a warrior with healers backing him up behind. There's always tactics and planning that a group could utilize and most of the classes are versatile enough for some creative (or cheesy) tactics. It would also help if the 5v5 bg would not be just a big flat open ground, having different elevations and props would help to make the bg more "creative" to play.

[keboman]

40v40 no respawn/no res deathmatch!

[Mongul]

I think a 5v5 dm BG with some kind of dungeon style map rather than a wide open area could be pretty sweet with random respawns on individual spawn points rather than team respawn locations. Basically think Quake DM type respawning. You auto-respawn by yourself maybe 3 seconds after you die or something on any one of the spawn points on the map. That way you don't have to worry so much about the perfect 5 man group makeup as you do about map control and coordination.

Add some powerups that are strong enough to make a difference so that you want to control them to win; spread those out across the map so a team cant just camp and run with all 5 players grouped together the whole game.

Yeah, you'd get plenty of 1v1, 1v2, 2v2, etc fights. I think it'd be pretty cool and definitely skill-based.

Well I'm an FPS player at heart, since Quake 2, so this is what I'd like to see... ;) I kinda doubt there will ever be a 5v5 BG, though...

[keboman]

Why not just play Rocket Arena if that's what you want?

[Mongul]

Because Rocket Arena doesn't play anything like what I described... :P

[keboman]

Well, Q3 DM of course.. but if you're going to do it like that you might as well play rocket arena ;) That's what I meant.. Rocket Arena > all

[Palmen]

I have no idea how your WSGs look like, but on BL EU server ther is only room for 1 Warrior in every team.

Teams are based around 1 warrior (for MS ther flagg man) 1 priest (dispell your flagg man), 1-3 druids (runing, rooting, healing), 1 rouge, 1 hunter, rest is mages and maybe som shamans.

You dont kill players in WSG, you CC them to hell and run whit the flagg. MS dosent stack so ther is no point in bringing more then 1 anyway. becous its way faster to run in CC everyone on deff and run whit the flagg, then it is to kill everyone.

And yes RA3 pwns.

[Totakeke]

What you're talking about is getting the enemy flag back into your base, butI bet you've never experienced getting the flag back after they have gotten back to their base to camp at the gy with no MS warriors. ;p It's a pain.

CC works well, but in equal strength fights, it's only part of the battle.

[Palmen]

What you're talking about is getting the enemy flag back into your base, butI bet you've never experienced getting the flag back after they have gotten back to their base to camp at the gy with no MS warriors. ;p It's a pain.

CC works well, but in equal strength fights, it's only part of the battle.

I said that the WSG grps normaly have 1 warrior. MS dosent stack so its better to get the flag back whit 1 warrior, 1 rouge, 2 mages and 1 random.

2 pollys, 1 sap, MS and shitload of damage on the flag man. Works everytime.

If you bring more warrior in that attack force your going to get mass CCed and die. 3 warrior is going to do alot of damage, but so dose mages, and mages brings Polly and roots to the battle, and thats somthing warriors cant do.

MS dosent stack so more then 1 warrior is pointless

We have 3 rank 14 on my server, soon 5 and i non of them have alot of kills. They did it in WSG CC:ing ther way to the win.