Best Queuing Methods

Annymous

Legend
Do NOT queue Random. You can only block 2 Battlegrounds and Southshore vs. Tarren Mill, Alterac Valley and Arathi Basin have the longest queues.
Do NOT queue Skirmishes. Being in a Skirmish blocks Battleground pops.
Do NOT queue Dungeons if you don’t need to. They will make queues longer.
Queue for only ONE Battleground. Alterac Valley is the exception.

Fastest Method:
Queue Warsong Gulch Specific
The fastest Battleground queue. Enough said.

Second Fastest Method:
Queue Eye of the Storm Specific
The second fastest Battleground queue.

Best Alterac Valley Method:
Queue Warsong Gulch Specific EVERY day (fastest Battleground queue)
Queue Alterac Valley Specific EVERY day
MORE chances for Alterac Valley pops if you queue every day. You queue for Warsong Gulch to pass time while waiting for Alterac Valley to pop. Alterac Valley queues are so bad, it won't hurt to also queue for Warsong Gulch.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Good point... but how many will follow it?

We all know that many F2P's don't even know about this website...

I'm sad to see skirmishes killed BG's.
 
look man 90% of this bracket no speak engrish, but good luck
 
I have almost given up logging into my F2P account due to the queues 30+ minutes.

I have been trying random battlegrounds with Southshore vs. Tarren Mill and Alterac Valley black listed since it can be like herding cats in 10/15 man battlegrounds trying to get people to do the objectives never mind try to get 40 working together

I'll try only queuing for only warsong, but if that fails to shorten the queue times it looks like I'll be back to playing just my P2P.
 
Remove Skirmish and the problem will be solved, as said before, skirmish ruined bg que..
 
Quite an ignorant thing to suggest. This community, not just f2p but twinks in general wanted skirms back for so long. Don't talk ill about something that's a great implement by blizzard, however it is true that if you are in the arena, your bg queue will pause and because of such long queues people will tend to queue skirms as well which is unfortunate. If you're looking for something to blame for long queues, blame the extra bgs that have been added. More 15 man/ 40 man bgs = longer queues.
Remove Skirmish and the problem will be solved, as said before, skirmish ruined bg que..
 
Imagine battleground queues as being a playground. What we seem to want (in this metaphor) is to play anything but football (American football). Seriously, we'll do basketball, baseball, soccer - hell, we'll even do kickball.

But there are enough people who want to play football, that they form a decent crowd. Since it takes 20-30 people to do the games that we want to play and it takes 80 to do football, we will need more people lined up to do anything BUT football than we do people who want to play football. The problem is that football can quickly reach a point where the people who want to play it are more than the total required players for ANY other game.

So if there is a crowd of 40 people who want to play football (50% full), the new kids are going to gravitate towards the bigger crowd (random queues). At that point, the priority becomes getting a game of football to start rather than any other game. The problem is that there are only 100 kids at this school, and a bunch of them are running around in circles, or not allowed to come outside during recess, or they have asthma, or they're inside the computer center googling "Megan Fox bewbies".

So the crowd of kids around football continues to grow, but it's never actually going to start because they'll never have 80% of the population wanting to play it.

Meanwhile the other kids don't get any games, because there isn't enough of them to offset the people who only want to play football.

I hope this makes sense.

(EU key: football = rugby, soccer = football).
 
[MENTION=18826]Bop[/MENTION] not a sports guy but football is when you move a ball with your foot, and afaik in rugby you clutch it to your chest sprinting like crazy. (But we all know it's just naming so I don't really want to start an argument)

What I want to know is why blacklisting AV is beneficial. Ive got an AV pop and it was glorious, I don't see any positive sides to blacklisting bgs I like (If I hated a bg on the other hand I would use the blacklist button)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
1) Be Horde.
2) Block EotS and AV.
3) Queue WSG.
4) ???
5) Profit.
 
It isn't at all. Blacklisting SS vs TM is just idiotic seeing it can't even pop for us since we don't have WoD. Blacklisting AV does nothing since it takes the most amount of people to get a random to pop and as soon as the minimum amount of people that are needed in a bg that bg pops. Only reason to blacklist a bg is for, like you mentioned, making sure a bg you don't like doesn't pop. Can also be used for getting AV to pop IE blacklisting WSG and EOTS since these two have the least amount of people needed, however, this will cause long queues.

Other than that don't listen to what people on here say about blacklisting. Blacklisting SS vs TM... lol

You're right on every point except that blacklisting is useless. I guess I need to further explain myself...

If everyone queued only rBG, only WSG would ever be played (the goal of rBG is to make that person enter a BG as fast as possible).

If 5 people only-queue EotS (5/30th of the required population) and 5 people only-queue AV (5/80th of the required population), EotS is going to take the players who queued rBG, because it is closer to being full.

However, if 5 people only-queue EotS (5/30th of the required population) and 20 people only-queue AV (20/80th of the required population), the rBG players are going to be sent to AV because WoW detects that AV is closer to filling (as a percentage) than EotS.

First, let's talk about why this happens. If rBG only calculated the number of spaces left when putting people into a battleground, only WSG (or Twin Peaks at endgame) would ever be filled. Therefore, rBG was implemented as a way of saying "I don't care, I'll play anything" so that the players who /do/ want to queue a specific battleground can eventually get that to happen.

Second, let's talk about why this is problematic for our bracket. Automatically assumed at endgame is that a battleground is going to quickly fill. Looking back at that hypothetical Alterac Valley with 20 people in queue for it, we can tell that it is going to fill fairly quickly at endgame, especially with the influx of rBG players. This is not the case at 20-29. Just because it took 60 minutes to get 40 people in queue for AV does not mean that it will take another 60 minutes to get to 80. People are constantly leaving queue and there simply isn't the population to support an 80 man battleground.

Third, let's talk about why this is harmful for the bracket. Since we've already established that Alterac Valley is an unrealistic goal given the 20-29 population, we can easily see how the allocation of rBG players towards it can be harmful for getting other battlegrounds to pop. Those 5 people in queue for EotS don't know it, but all of the rBG players who might have been put into their EotS queue are being placed in an AV queue - simply because AV is closer (as a percentage) to being filled (I.E., 5/30 players for EotS is 16.66%, whereas 20/80 for AV is 25%). In short, AV is starving other battlegrounds in the bracket while not actually giving out pops to players in queue for it.

Please, please, please do not make blanket statements about something that you're not extremely familiar with. This is a problem that this bracket needs to be made aware of, not made ignorant of.

The best solution is to blacklist AV if you want to get a BG pop - and queue randoms with no blacklist if you want to queue AV.

Skirmishes have been mentioned, but that's fairly silly. They have an extremely low impact on battleground queues since the games are extremely short. The only way skirmishes could impact BG queues would be if people were only queueing for skirms - but then how can we fault them for queuing something they enjoy, instead of growing old in a battleground queue that isn't ever going to pop because of AV (which people are still sadly misinformed about, even on these forums).
 
This is a fairly obvious statement, but hey, it might help someone:

Do something else while you wait for the que to pop.

I.E., farm for mats for consumables, stand around in Goldshire/the Gates of Org dueling, pick your nose.

I recommend windowing WoW and Hearthstone, side by side. It works. I'm a doctor.

This bracket is generally much more enjoyable than endgame PvP, since the two share common problems, and this one doesn't really matter, so you don't care!

Peace, tacos, happiness.
 
This is a fairly obvious statement, but hey, it might help someone:

Do something else while you wait for the que to pop.

I.E., farm for mats for consumables, stand around in Goldshire/the Gates of Org dueling, pick your nose.

I recommend windowing WoW and Hearthstone, side by side. It works. I'm a doctor.

This bracket is generally much more enjoyable than endgame PvP, since the two share common problems, and this one doesn't really matter, so you don't care!

Peace, tacos, happiness.
Actually, the queues are nothing to me. Piece of cake. Years of playing Alliance. I pass time by auto attacking wolves with no weapon equipped.
This thread is just in theory.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
This is a fairly obvious statement, but hey, it might help someone:

Do something else while you wait for the que to pop.

I.E., farm for mats for consumables, stand around in Goldshire/the Gates of Org dueling, pick your nose.

I recommend windowing WoW and Hearthstone, side by side. It works. I'm a doctor.

This bracket is generally much more enjoyable than endgame PvP, since the two share common problems, and this one doesn't really matter, so you don't care!

Peace, tacos, happiness.

I disagree with bracket being much more enjoyable than endgame... at least from rogue lover perspective. Rogue at 20 is boring as f..k compared to endgame rogue.

I'd always chose endgame instead of f2p as long as my sub is active.

But.. that's personal preference ofc.
 
If I may, I think there is going to be a perpetual misperception of something being "wrong", and a general dissatisfaction as a result, for as long as people continue to hold "the way things were before" as the standard by which the way things now are measured. The simple and unavoidable fact is that prior to WoD, the 20-29 bracket had two choices. Now, the 20-29 bracket has five: four battlegrounds and skirmishes. With 5/2 as many options as before, we must expect that queues will be at least 5/2 as long--or longer still depending on the factorial nature of increasing options.

So any lament that things aren't the way they were, and any effort to return things to the way they were, is ignoring the fact that the landscape has changed. And many if not most people like a combination of activities that is different from the combination you or you or I happen to like. so asking anyone to not queue for the things they like a) isn't fair, and b) won't actually help.

I hope and wish that going forward from here, everyone simply learns to accept that the cost of having more options is having to wait a little longer for other folks who also like that option. We don't live in the past, in general as human beings, and you can never make something "the way it used to be". Please just be happy with the options we have, and learn to accept that queue times have changed, for good. It's not the first time we've had changes like this, and it won't be the last.
 
kk here goes

monday, wedsnday, friday: arena days

tuesday,thursday,saturday: WSG days

sunday: AV days

hope ur happy peeples
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top