no, because live WSG sucks compared to old expansions. cross realm zones killed communities.
Community, Competition, Newbs, and Elitists
- Thread starter saxxon
- Start date
no, because live WSG sucks compared to old expansions. cross realm zones killed communities.
Solipsist
They/Them
OP
OP
Jadyne
39 Evangelist
Re: A change of the premade rules
I understand the burst issues, those sound pretty hard to overcome. I also see how merging the battlegroups could have disrupted the communities that were already in place.
That said, it's not impossible to rebuild a community. Just takes a lot of time and patience.
I understand the burst issues, those sound pretty hard to overcome. I also see how merging the battlegroups could have disrupted the communities that were already in place.
That said, it's not impossible to rebuild a community. Just takes a lot of time and patience.
Mocha
Legendary
Re: A change of the premade rules
Some battlegroups that were not as active for 19s as Vengeance, Cyclone, or Ruin didn't have 19s but they had other brackets active for the most part.
Then the exp off toggle killed games for every battle group except one. The only battlegroup to get pops was Ruin.
Nearly the entire Vengenace crew with guilds like Dominate, Mayhem, MTU, DDG, and nearly a dozen of others funneled down into primarily 2 guilds. Alliance on Zul'Jin and Horde on the improved Mayhem guild on Skullcrusher called Shield Bashed By Heysus.
Now we have a community that started with several guilds per server into basically 2 guilds per battlegroup. This isn't even a result from people quitting, this is a result of elitism and exposure to outside communities.
It was only a matter of time before those several guilds per battlegroup became one or two guilds on one server---> Bleeding Hollow.
Fast forward to Cataclysm.
Everyone transfers to BH. This resulted in nearly only 2 viable guilds, 1 per faction.
Waw Tawent vs Train Cow.
So what we have here is an example of when the walls between communities are torn down. The entire 19s community basically funneled down into two guilds and mainly on one server across all realms of US WoW. Keep in mind how we started with several guilds nearly on every realm.
Just my 2c
Mocha
Just going to talk a bit more about what Saxxon brought up. Back before cross realm bgs... Nearly every realm had quite a few twink guilds. Whether they were highly competitive or not it didn't matter. Shortly after games were across a battlegroup, a lot of guilds on the same realm were syphoned down to only a small number of twink guilds per server. Typically a competitive one, and a more welcoming guild.
Some battlegroups that were not as active for 19s as Vengeance, Cyclone, or Ruin didn't have 19s but they had other brackets active for the most part.
Then the exp off toggle killed games for every battle group except one. The only battlegroup to get pops was Ruin.
Nearly the entire Vengenace crew with guilds like Dominate, Mayhem, MTU, DDG, and nearly a dozen of others funneled down into primarily 2 guilds. Alliance on Zul'Jin and Horde on the improved Mayhem guild on Skullcrusher called Shield Bashed By Heysus.
Now we have a community that started with several guilds per server into basically 2 guilds per battlegroup. This isn't even a result from people quitting, this is a result of elitism and exposure to outside communities.
It was only a matter of time before those several guilds per battlegroup became one or two guilds on one server---> Bleeding Hollow.
Fast forward to Cataclysm.
Everyone transfers to BH. This resulted in nearly only 2 viable guilds, 1 per faction.
Waw Tawent vs Train Cow.
So what we have here is an example of when the walls between communities are torn down. The entire 19s community basically funneled down into two guilds and mainly on one server across all realms of US WoW. Keep in mind how we started with several guilds nearly on every realm.
Just my 2c
Mocha
Jadyne
39 Evangelist
Re: A change of the premade rules
While I actually appreciate and agree with your sentiment, Agonist, I think Mocha's also right to look at how we ended up where we are now. I'll respect your request, and maybe make a new thread to discuss that in more detail. But I do want to point out that knowing how we got here may help us figure out how to change direction and go where we want to go with twinking.
While I actually appreciate and agree with your sentiment, Agonist, I think Mocha's also right to look at how we ended up where we are now. I'll respect your request, and maybe make a new thread to discuss that in more detail. But I do want to point out that knowing how we got here may help us figure out how to change direction and go where we want to go with twinking.
Jadyne
39 Evangelist
I've been thinking about this topic for at least a month now, if not longer. I was going to put together something much more coherent and complete, but some of the interesting posts I've read recently got me thinking why wait to have things put together perfectly? Maybe someone has some info or an idea that would make it a lot easier to consider the issues I've been considering.
A post by Mocha in Agonist's thread about 19 premade rules is where I'd like to start:
Very interesting. Actually sounds like a similar pattern to what my favorite bracket, 30-39, has experienced over the years, with some variation. I'll keep this brief: Not every guild had a 39 twink guild when x-realms came out, but when they did, many 39 guilds formed, with 10-50 players each.
My guild, PH, was one of the largest and most active. I advertised for competition, and it showed up in the form of an entire guild from Cyclone bg. They proceeded to crush us in 10v10s, and approximately half of my guildies quit playing 39s. I recruited higher skilled players from other less active bgs, and we got competitive 10v10s for about 9 months before I quit for RL reasons.
3.2 came out, everyone moved to one battlegroup, and I hear the pugs were as competitive as organized 10v10s. But again, only one bg managed the activity. There was a huge epidemic of afk-reporting anyone not fully geared or playing like a noob. Eventually the community essentially died from a lack of activity. Currently getting games for a few hours 2-3 nights a week between players that are now well connected.
~*~
Obviously, there's at least one interesting pattern here: wide spread activity, that grows for a while, before some sort of upheaval leads to the community self-filtering itself and removing the lowest/lower skilled players. Rinse-repeat until you have today.
I see a number of other possible patterns/themes here, but I'm wondering what other people see? And even more importantly, what should we do about it? Are these things going to keep happening? Do we want them to? If so, why? If not, why not, and how could we prevent them from happening?
~*~
My take:
We all start as newbs if you go back far enough. Some of our communities now are so elite that it's difficult to not be elitist. But I ask you this: what's the point of being able to beat anybody, if there's no one to beat? Play to win, yes, but you can't win if you don't get games. Therefore, shouldn't getting games be everyone's first priority, with winning being a close second? The only whole I see in this argument right now is that some people may say that if they win so much that they don't have anyone left to beat, they can always just move on to another game. Fine, but I would expect those people to have already left long ago. I'm going to assume those of you who are still here just want games. Great games, but still, you need to play games for there to be a chance at them being good.
You see those newbs in your WSG? Frustrating, right? But they're the reason you're getting to pvp in your chosen bracket. Maybe not those specific noobs, or that specific game, I'm making a more existential claim here: We need those newbs. People leave WoW all the time; the WoW population, and by extension the twink population, has a "death rate". We need a "birth rate" to balance that death rate. Consider every newb you see in WSG to be a potential new member of the community. Scary, right? You just got a nanoscopic hint of what it's like to be a parent.
I don't think it's practical for us to go and try to teach every twink newb we see. How do I know? I just tried it for the last 4-5 months. Recruited around 500 new 19 twinks to Molten. And guess what? 90% of them are newbs. Worse, 70-80% of them are probably scrubs. I have so many stories of frustration, patience, more frustration, and finally resignation. I burnt out a week or so ago, but fortunately, I recovered within a day or two thanks to support from my guildies, one of whom I recruited when he was a newb about 3 months ago.
Now look at those numbers: 500 new twinks. 90% newbs means that 50 of them were at least competent at playing the game. Not a bad start for starting a community. 70-80% scrubs. Let's say 80% were scrubs and it'd be too resource-intensive to teach/unscrub them. That leaves another 50 legitimate newbs who will eventually be good members of a twink community. 100 twinks in about 4-5 months of work. I'm not even sure how to evaluate that. Is that a success? Is it insanity? Perhaps it just is what it is. What do you think?
TL;DR? Just read the quote and the italicized section in the middle, and share what you think about that.
A post by Mocha in Agonist's thread about 19 premade rules is where I'd like to start:
Very interesting. Actually sounds like a similar pattern to what my favorite bracket, 30-39, has experienced over the years, with some variation. I'll keep this brief: Not every guild had a 39 twink guild when x-realms came out, but when they did, many 39 guilds formed, with 10-50 players each.
My guild, PH, was one of the largest and most active. I advertised for competition, and it showed up in the form of an entire guild from Cyclone bg. They proceeded to crush us in 10v10s, and approximately half of my guildies quit playing 39s. I recruited higher skilled players from other less active bgs, and we got competitive 10v10s for about 9 months before I quit for RL reasons.
3.2 came out, everyone moved to one battlegroup, and I hear the pugs were as competitive as organized 10v10s. But again, only one bg managed the activity. There was a huge epidemic of afk-reporting anyone not fully geared or playing like a noob. Eventually the community essentially died from a lack of activity. Currently getting games for a few hours 2-3 nights a week between players that are now well connected.
~*~
Obviously, there's at least one interesting pattern here: wide spread activity, that grows for a while, before some sort of upheaval leads to the community self-filtering itself and removing the lowest/lower skilled players. Rinse-repeat until you have today.
I see a number of other possible patterns/themes here, but I'm wondering what other people see? And even more importantly, what should we do about it? Are these things going to keep happening? Do we want them to? If so, why? If not, why not, and how could we prevent them from happening?
~*~
My take:
We all start as newbs if you go back far enough. Some of our communities now are so elite that it's difficult to not be elitist. But I ask you this: what's the point of being able to beat anybody, if there's no one to beat? Play to win, yes, but you can't win if you don't get games. Therefore, shouldn't getting games be everyone's first priority, with winning being a close second? The only whole I see in this argument right now is that some people may say that if they win so much that they don't have anyone left to beat, they can always just move on to another game. Fine, but I would expect those people to have already left long ago. I'm going to assume those of you who are still here just want games. Great games, but still, you need to play games for there to be a chance at them being good.
You see those newbs in your WSG? Frustrating, right? But they're the reason you're getting to pvp in your chosen bracket. Maybe not those specific noobs, or that specific game, I'm making a more existential claim here: We need those newbs. People leave WoW all the time; the WoW population, and by extension the twink population, has a "death rate". We need a "birth rate" to balance that death rate. Consider every newb you see in WSG to be a potential new member of the community. Scary, right? You just got a nanoscopic hint of what it's like to be a parent.
I don't think it's practical for us to go and try to teach every twink newb we see. How do I know? I just tried it for the last 4-5 months. Recruited around 500 new 19 twinks to Molten. And guess what? 90% of them are newbs. Worse, 70-80% of them are probably scrubs. I have so many stories of frustration, patience, more frustration, and finally resignation. I burnt out a week or so ago, but fortunately, I recovered within a day or two thanks to support from my guildies, one of whom I recruited when he was a newb about 3 months ago.
Now look at those numbers: 500 new twinks. 90% newbs means that 50 of them were at least competent at playing the game. Not a bad start for starting a community. 70-80% scrubs. Let's say 80% were scrubs and it'd be too resource-intensive to teach/unscrub them. That leaves another 50 legitimate newbs who will eventually be good members of a twink community. 100 twinks in about 4-5 months of work. I'm not even sure how to evaluate that. Is that a success? Is it insanity? Perhaps it just is what it is. What do you think?
TL;DR? Just read the quote and the italicized section in the middle, and share what you think about that.
Dirt Nasty
Legend
Re: A change of the premade rules
I was watching the Waw Tawent vs Train Cow premade video on youtube and came across another premade video with the guild Train Cow playing against a guild called Noodle Arms.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywq8jvHexM4
I also came across two guilds called Light Speed Scrolls and Lethal Synergy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jErY-EpOlEw
As well as Machine Gun Clicks, Beantown Bullies and Use Splash Attack.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X3ZZ_l-wC8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=354_GijwglY&list=TLRcBMl9bSl_FQj2ydl7NUxEhJV2nnzyeX
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dydlJn3Ct_o&list=TL_rJzIOR2rS6Tm9ZClqE10XT3GcUc-aGa
I also found one between Lethal Synergy and LSFTW - I'm not sure what LSFTW stands for but clearly it is a 19 twink guild that was around in Cata.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu-3F2SLDQM&list=UUpHV9QvjFRvcVjYAJ5bpTYg
Keep in mind that these are just videos that I have come across youtube while I was searching for 19 twink gameplay videos. I seriously doubt that every guild posts their premade video and we can't forget that a twink guild isn't required to premade other guilds to be considered a 19 twink guild.
Not all of the guilds were on Bleeding Hollow and there certainly weren't only 2 guilds; one on each faction. You have made your point without any hard evidence.
I have proven you wrong with the evidence I displayed above, so it seems like the point you were trying to make in that long post is invalid
I hate to say it, but it seems like your '2c' is worthless.
I was watching the Waw Tawent vs Train Cow premade video on youtube and came across another premade video with the guild Train Cow playing against a guild called Noodle Arms.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ywq8jvHexM4
I also came across two guilds called Light Speed Scrolls and Lethal Synergy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jErY-EpOlEw
As well as Machine Gun Clicks, Beantown Bullies and Use Splash Attack.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5X3ZZ_l-wC8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=354_GijwglY&list=TLRcBMl9bSl_FQj2ydl7NUxEhJV2nnzyeX
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dydlJn3Ct_o&list=TL_rJzIOR2rS6Tm9ZClqE10XT3GcUc-aGa
I also found one between Lethal Synergy and LSFTW - I'm not sure what LSFTW stands for but clearly it is a 19 twink guild that was around in Cata.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zu-3F2SLDQM&list=UUpHV9QvjFRvcVjYAJ5bpTYg
Keep in mind that these are just videos that I have come across youtube while I was searching for 19 twink gameplay videos. I seriously doubt that every guild posts their premade video and we can't forget that a twink guild isn't required to premade other guilds to be considered a 19 twink guild.
Not all of the guilds were on Bleeding Hollow and there certainly weren't only 2 guilds; one on each faction. You have made your point without any hard evidence.
I have proven you wrong with the evidence I displayed above, so it seems like the point you were trying to make in that long post is invalid
I hate to say it, but it seems like your '2c' is worthless.
Mocha
Legendary
Re: A change of the premade rules
Your argument would be valid had I stated that there were only 2 guilds in Cataclysm for 19s as a factual statement.
In my opinionated exaggeration, I said there were
I do give credit to LSFTW and NA though despite them having been left out in my exaggeration.
You did not disprove anything I said. You did however, prove that I used an exaggeration to relay my opinion.
Since my exaggeration lost you here's the TLDR:
In the past there were lots of guilds in the 19 twink community. Now there are not many guilds in the 19 twink community.
Looking forward to how you'll use hard evidence to show everyone how there are more 19 twink guilds now and activity in the 19 twink community is greater now than back in vanilla / TBC / WOTLK.
Your argument would be valid had I stated that there were only 2 guilds in Cataclysm for 19s as a factual statement.
In my opinionated exaggeration, I said there were
Most of the guilds BTB, MGC, LSS, LS, USA, NA were comprised of the same key players making new guilds to clear their premade records.
I do give credit to LSFTW and NA though despite them having been left out in my exaggeration.
You did not disprove anything I said. You did however, prove that I used an exaggeration to relay my opinion.
Since my exaggeration lost you here's the TLDR:
In the past there were lots of guilds in the 19 twink community. Now there are not many guilds in the 19 twink community.
Looking forward to how you'll use hard evidence to show everyone how there are more 19 twink guilds now and activity in the 19 twink community is greater now than back in vanilla / TBC / WOTLK.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dirt Nasty
Legend
Re: A change of the premade rules
Just because they were comprised of the same key players doesn't mean they aren't guilds. And you really shouldn't exaggerate so much. In reality you left out 6 guilds meaning there really were 4 times as many guilds as you stated. Even if we go by what you claim, only counting LSFTW and NA, that's still twice as many guilds as you initially stated and it really isn't appropriate to exaggerate that much. You give credit to them now, but only because someone pointed it out. I'm also unsure as to why you're not giving credit to Lethal Synergy as others have told me they were their own guild and didn't have the same key players as the other guilds you grouped them with. They deserve just as much credit as Train Cow or Waw Tawent.
You claim you exaggerated, but you blew it way out of proportion. It's either 400% more guilds or 200-250% more guilds depending on if you are willing to change your mind and give Lethal Synergy credit. Regardless, it was not appropriate to exaggerate this much and discredit certain guilds and only choose to give some credit after someone points it out.
I made no mention of the vanilla / TBC / WOTLK twinking communities. All I'm saying is that there were much more than 2 guilds in cata.
Just because they were comprised of the same key players doesn't mean they aren't guilds. And you really shouldn't exaggerate so much. In reality you left out 6 guilds meaning there really were 4 times as many guilds as you stated. Even if we go by what you claim, only counting LSFTW and NA, that's still twice as many guilds as you initially stated and it really isn't appropriate to exaggerate that much. You give credit to them now, but only because someone pointed it out. I'm also unsure as to why you're not giving credit to Lethal Synergy as others have told me they were their own guild and didn't have the same key players as the other guilds you grouped them with. They deserve just as much credit as Train Cow or Waw Tawent.
You claim you exaggerated, but you blew it way out of proportion. It's either 400% more guilds or 200-250% more guilds depending on if you are willing to change your mind and give Lethal Synergy credit. Regardless, it was not appropriate to exaggerate this much and discredit certain guilds and only choose to give some credit after someone points it out.
I made no mention of the vanilla / TBC / WOTLK twinking communities. All I'm saying is that there were much more than 2 guilds in cata.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mocha
Legendary
Re: A change of the premade rules
And whether or not there were between 2 and even 10 guilds in Cata doesn't matter. You're arguing an irrelevant point. The entire purpose of the post was that there were less guilds in Cata than there were in WOTLK, TBC, or Vanilla.
Exactly. You missed the entire point of my post.
And whether or not there were between 2 and even 10 guilds in Cata doesn't matter. You're arguing an irrelevant point. The entire purpose of the post was that there were less guilds in Cata than there were in WOTLK, TBC, or Vanilla.
Solipsist
They/Them
Re: A change of the premade rules
He was distinctly referring to that one point in your post where you were completely wrong. We are not looking at BC/Wrath etc, we are looking at the one point you made about cata guilds which was totally incorrect.
Again, he pointed out he was talking about the amount of cata guilds, not your whole random theory on twink life.
He was distinctly referring to that one point in your post where you were completely wrong. We are not looking at BC/Wrath etc, we are looking at the one point you made about cata guilds which was totally incorrect.
Again, he pointed out he was talking about the amount of cata guilds, not your whole random theory on twink life.
Last edited by a moderator:
Dirt Nasty
Legend
Re: A change of the premade rules
This sentence was a part of your last paragraph which I am assuming was your 'point'. If you're going to have a point in your post, it's not okay to spew false information or 'exaggerations' as you like to call it. You went from initially stating there were 'nearly' 2 viable guilds to 4 guilds and now admitting there were at least 10. I still believe there were more but that doesn't matter. The point is that even if this part of your post isn't the 'point' of your post, it is definitely not okay to discredit and disrespect these guilds and their leaders. How do you think the leaders of these guilds who put in a lot of time, effort, and in some cases money, feel when they see not just anyone, but a moderator posting that there guild pretty much didn't exist during that expansion or wasn't 'viable'. That is just downright disrespectful and even more disheartening seeing that it is coming from a moderator on this website.
Hopefully the rest of the community sees how immature you are acting.
This sentence was a part of your last paragraph which I am assuming was your 'point'. If you're going to have a point in your post, it's not okay to spew false information or 'exaggerations' as you like to call it. You went from initially stating there were 'nearly' 2 viable guilds to 4 guilds and now admitting there were at least 10. I still believe there were more but that doesn't matter. The point is that even if this part of your post isn't the 'point' of your post, it is definitely not okay to discredit and disrespect these guilds and their leaders. How do you think the leaders of these guilds who put in a lot of time, effort, and in some cases money, feel when they see not just anyone, but a moderator posting that there guild pretty much didn't exist during that expansion or wasn't 'viable'. That is just downright disrespectful and even more disheartening seeing that it is coming from a moderator on this website.
Hopefully the rest of the community sees how immature you are acting.
Mocha
Legendary
It was an exaggeration. I would trust these honorable GMs would discuss things in a PM with me if they were offended that they were left out of my exaggeration.
It was a chronological post. Just because I said something later on in a post doesn't mean it's of any more importance than the first few paragraphs
How is using an exaggeration all of a sudden immature? I'd say it's immature of you to be going all out on a single line of my entire post. What do you want? An apology for exaggerating?
I apologize that you're so stuck up on a single line that you missed the purpose of the entire post.
In reality I know that you're just being difficult with me because an exaggeration is a good excuse to argue with someone whom you don't care for. I welcome you to curse me out all you want in a PM if that's how you feel. You're posting in protest to the poster, not the post otherwise you would have seen past the exaggeration. Surely you'll deny this and keep arguing publicly instead.
It was a chronological post. Just because I said something later on in a post doesn't mean it's of any more importance than the first few paragraphs
How is using an exaggeration all of a sudden immature? I'd say it's immature of you to be going all out on a single line of my entire post. What do you want? An apology for exaggerating?
I apologize that you're so stuck up on a single line that you missed the purpose of the entire post.
In reality I know that you're just being difficult with me because an exaggeration is a good excuse to argue with someone whom you don't care for. I welcome you to curse me out all you want in a PM if that's how you feel. You're posting in protest to the poster, not the post otherwise you would have seen past the exaggeration. Surely you'll deny this and keep arguing publicly instead.
Jadyne
39 Evangelist
Ok, so, Dirty Nasty, You're arguing that the bracket never shrank? Or just that we haven't proven that it shrank in Cata? Or that it didn't shrink as much? At one point you say all you're saying is that there were more than 2 guilds in Cata. Okay, lets work with that. Can we agree that there were at least 2 guilds per server on average before x-realm? If, we should probably start there.
But if we can agree that before x-realm, each server averaged 2+ guilds, then I'd say we still have a good case here to claim that the 19 bracket has been shrinking periodically. I'd be more interested to see some disagreement about why it has been than whether it has been. We're probably all instinctively aware of network effects, but that doesn't justify sticking our heads in the sand any time someone says something bad about the size of our chosen bracket.
Once upon a time, you could queue up at almost any time of day and get a game at 19, 29, or 39. And at 49 you could easily get games daily. Now, 20-24 has that, but 39s have games for a few hours 2-3 times a week, 49s and 29s are dead, and 19s get... do you guys have designated game nights still, or are those not working atm?
So what caused this to happen? I could argue that it was rampant elitism, but I'm not sure it's that. That seem's too simple of an explanation.
But if we can agree that before x-realm, each server averaged 2+ guilds, then I'd say we still have a good case here to claim that the 19 bracket has been shrinking periodically. I'd be more interested to see some disagreement about why it has been than whether it has been. We're probably all instinctively aware of network effects, but that doesn't justify sticking our heads in the sand any time someone says something bad about the size of our chosen bracket.
Once upon a time, you could queue up at almost any time of day and get a game at 19, 29, or 39. And at 49 you could easily get games daily. Now, 20-24 has that, but 39s have games for a few hours 2-3 times a week, 49s and 29s are dead, and 19s get... do you guys have designated game nights still, or are those not working atm?
So what caused this to happen? I could argue that it was rampant elitism, but I'm not sure it's that. That seem's too simple of an explanation.
Mocha
Legendary
[MENTION=16622]Jadyne[/MENTION] that's a contributing factor I feel. In the past less experienced twinks were challenged instead of being completely excluded from all forms of 19 twink pop with no opportunity to improve.
Therefore our numbers were never given an opportunity to grow.
Mix that with contagious negativity and elitism and with time here we are
Therefore our numbers were never given an opportunity to grow.
Mix that with contagious negativity and elitism and with time here we are
Jadyne
39 Evangelist
The thing is, a lot of twinks were also inspired by those players who were at the top if their game. And regardless, there's no way we can collectively forget all the things we've learned. There's a sizable learning curve to get to level of competition that most of us are used to now. I know I don't want to do random pugs against noobs any more. I'd burn out in an hour if I did.
What I'm saying is, I think some of those instances of filtering that happened in the twinking community greatly improved the average level of competition and skill. Getting <Cyclone> to join me and <Purple Haze> on Bloodlust seriously upped the fun. So did the Nightfall merge, or so I hear. When great players were brought together to face each other, the games were epic. The concern lies with some of the other, unintended, consequences of those merges and filterings.