US Real Wargames

[Voc]

49s pm me arena and bg wargames

 

[moyo]

I'm well aware of the "plebmades" available in the bracket, however these aren't real wargames but instead a small group of friends who like playing together. They're not really pushing themselves to improve or create a competitive atmosphere. Looking to schedule a date for real wargames in the 19 bracket. What is a real wargame you may wonder? A real wargame is two teams playing their best to win. Each player gives their all. Each player knows their role. Mistakes are punished. No egos. No bias decisions. Pure wargames. RBGs at 19.

The best way to go about doing this is to see who is interested, play one "tryout" game with random teams, then use this to balance the next games. We can do a best of 5 after making teams. We can create games where it feels like soloQ , making these the most competitive wargames possible. Eventually it could get to a point where we have divisions like Division 1, 2, 3, etc..

Arenas + WSG


Leave a comment with the armory of your 19 you would like to play. If you would like to assist in making this happen, pm me on xpoff. Players with 5+ years twink xp, players with endgame pvp xp, players in leadership roles in guilds should all get in contact with me.

PLEASE NO TROLLS OR ANYTHING NON-RELATED TO THE IDEA PRESENTED ABOVE!!​

I think it's a cool idea overall. A few hopefully helpful points of feedback:

1. "play one 'tryout' game with random teams, then use this to balance the next games" seems a bit oversimplified in theory. Any feedback you get from *one* game, whether positive or negative, is indistinguishable from a random event. Clutch play? Could have been dumb luck. Noob goof? Could have been bad RNG.

I think at least 3, maybe as many as 5, games should constitute a 'tryout'. If a person makes mistakes 3x out of 3, well, that's a stronger indicator than one game with a mistake. Similarly, if they make clutch decisions 3x out of 3, go the distance of 5 games and see if the stellar performance holds.

2. There should be a way to include consideration for 'soft' skills that don't show up on a scoreboard. Top damage and killing blows always seemed too game-able for me to give them any weight. What about the druid who consistently roots healers to separate them from the FC, or the rogue who saps just the right players at key moments in a match?

These 'soft skills' never make the board, but they're often game-breaking in terms of contribution. Personally, I'd like to see the scoreboard completely removed from battlegrounds so that the greater emphasis is on objectives & winning the match vs. gaming the board for top damage/killing blows/healing.

3. Make dueling relevant again. And, for those of you who were around for it, keep in mind that 'naked duels matter'. When all gear advantages are removed, and you're 1v1, that's when individual ability and resourcefulness can truly show itself. Given the general class imbalance at 19, I think duels would best be run & interpreted with specific class/bracket matches as a baseline metric. For example...

Given roughly equally skilled players, does the outlaw rogue almost always beat the elemental shaman? If so, then make ele vs outlaw a test for ele's who excel at their classes to prove their exceptional tactics/strategy against an opponent who, by sheer class imbalance at 19, almost always wins. Not only does this serve to isolate individual player strengths (and weaknesses, identified solely for improvement), but it becomes an objective metric for identifying class imbalance beyond sim/theorycrafting.

To drive home that last point, I'll mention the old 4-minute mile barrier. It was once believed that human beings were physiologically incapable of breaking a 4-minute mile. Trials, experiments, sim/theorycrafting (aka 'science') spent some time evaluating this matter and because some authoritative source -- combined with repeated experience -- 'proved' time and again that no one could break a 4-minute mile, it was accepted as fact.

Then, along comes Roger Bannister who, in 1954, ran a mile in 3m:59.4s. Within 3-years, 16 other runners managed to break the 4-minute barrier. The obstacle wasn't physiological, it was psychological. When people come to believe something is true due to theory and/or experience, they psychologically handicap themselves. Over the past 50-years or so, that 'impossible' time of 4-minutes has incrementally decreased by 17-seconds.

So, all that shared to say this: those classes and specs that are universally believed to be under-powered relative to most others may actually be gems, waiting to be mined. And that can only happen if we first drop our psychological barriers -- our _certainty that we know_ -- and bring a truly open mind to the matter.

 

[Blueballuh]

I have been wanting to get into some competitive wargames regardless of the bracket for some time now. Some of the most fun ive had in wow was the 39 arena tourney the forceful cup.

Hmu for any assistance with this, more than anything getting 2 rival guilds to wargame eachother regularly and be in competition with eachother would be the tits.

 

[Voc]

I think it's a cool idea overall. A few hopefully helpful points of feedback:

1. "play one 'tryout' game with random teams, then use this to balance the next games" seems a bit oversimplified in theory. Any feedback you get from *one* game, whether positive or negative, is indistinguishable from a random event. Clutch play? Could have been dumb luck. Noob goof? Could have been bad RNG.

I think at least 3, maybe as many as 5, games should constitute a 'tryout'. If a person makes mistakes 3x out of 3, well, that's a stronger indicator than one game with a mistake. Similarly, if they make clutch decisions 3x out of 3, go the distance of 5 games and see if the stellar performance holds.

2. There should be a way to include consideration for 'soft' skills that don't show up on a scoreboard. Top damage and killing blows always seemed too game-able for me to give them any weight. What about the druid who consistently roots healers to separate them from the FC, or the rogue who saps just the right players at key moments in a match?

These 'soft skills' never make the board, but they're often game-breaking in terms of contribution. Personally, I'd like to see the scoreboard completely removed from battlegrounds so that the greater emphasis is on objectives & winning the match vs. gaming the board for top damage/killing blows/healing.

3. Make dueling relevant again. And, for those of you who were around for it, keep in mind that 'naked duels matter'. When all gear advantages are removed, and you're 1v1, that's when individual ability and resourcefulness can truly show itself. Given the general class imbalance at 19, I think duels would best be run & interpreted with specific class/bracket matches as a baseline metric. For example...

Given roughly equally skilled players, does the outlaw rogue almost always beat the elemental shaman? If so, then make ele vs outlaw a test for ele's who excel at their classes to prove their exceptional tactics/strategy against an opponent who, by sheer class imbalance at 19, almost always wins. Not only does this serve to isolate individual player strengths (and weaknesses, identified solely for improvement), but it becomes an objective metric for identifying class imbalance beyond sim/theorycrafting.

To drive home that last point, I'll mention the old 4-minute mile barrier. It was once believed that human beings were physiologically incapable of breaking a 4-minute mile. Trials, experiments, sim/theorycrafting (aka 'science') spent some time evaluating this matter and because some authoritative source -- combined with repeated experience -- 'proved' time and again that no one could break a 4-minute mile, it was accepted as fact.

Then, along comes Roger Bannister who, in 1954, ran a mile in 3m:59.4s. Within 3-years, 16 other runners managed to break the 4-minute barrier. The obstacle wasn't physiological, it was psychological. When people come to believe something is true due to theory and/or experience, they psychologically handicap themselves. Over the past 50-years or so, that 'impossible' time of 4-minutes has incrementally decreased by 17-seconds.

So, all that shared to say this: those classes and specs that are universally believed to be under-powered relative to most others may actually be gems, waiting to be mined. And that can only happen if we first drop our psychological barriers -- our _certainty that we know_ -- and bring a truly open mind to the matter.

1. Yes 100% agree

2. The players who make it past tryouts would naturally exhibit a playstyle matching that.
Objectives > Numbers on scoreboard

3. Arena 1v1s. Endgame players often enter an arena with a team of 5 to face off vs the other team of 5. When you die next player comes in. Team to lose all 5 players first loses. This could be tuned after trials and testing to create the most fair sequence.
[doublepost=1525883267,1525880840][/doublepost]We can try to make it a weekly thing. With enough numbers we could simultaneously run WSG and Arenas. I know some players prefer one or the other, but for those of us who enjoy both we can rotate based on schedules. There could be 3 groups for each division. One group would be WSG- ONLY. Other group for Arena only and group for both.

Something like
Division 1 Group A, Group B, Group C
Division 2 Group A, Group B, Group C
Division 3 Group A, Group B, Group C​

Group A = both , Group B = WSG, Group C = arenas​

​

 

[moyo]

3. Arena 1v1s. Endgame players often enter an arena with a team of 5 to face off vs the other team of 5. When you die next player comes in. Team to lose all 5 players first loses. This could be tuned after trials and testing to create the most fair sequence.

I've seen Dalaran post videos of this endgame 1v1 arena play. I mostly enjoy it, even though his content doesn't come from a twinking angle. What I don't like about how he does it is that there's zero down-time between a kill and the next player coming in. So, if the winner had to blow all his cooldowns to finish the previous opponent, then he has nothing for the next fight while the newcomer has everything. You're probably already aware of the disparity this creates so I hope there'd be some 'break' to allow both players in each fight to start with all their cooldowns.

In any case, it sounds like a lot of fun.

 

[Voc]

I've seen Dalaran post videos of this endgame 1v1 arena play. I mostly enjoy it, even though his content doesn't come from a twinking angle. What I don't like about how he does it is that there's zero down-time between a kill and the next player coming in. So, if the winner had to blow all his cooldowns to finish the previous opponent, then he has nothing for the next fight while the newcomer has everything. You're probably already aware of the disparity this creates so I hope there'd be some 'break' to allow both players in each fight to start with all their cooldowns.

In any case, it sounds like a lot of fun.

We can arrange the order of who goes in when based on many different factors to make it less about the class and more about the player. Lots of testing would be needed to really find a sweet spot for that, especially if you are trying to decide if they come in right away or delay with a timer.

 

[Nitten19]

I'm well aware of the "plebmades" available in the bracket, however these aren't real wargames but instead a small group of friends who like playing together. They're not really pushing themselves to improve or create a competitive atmosphere. Looking to schedule a date for real wargames in the 19 bracket. What is a real wargame you may wonder? A real wargame is two teams playing their best to win. Each player gives their all. Each player knows their role. Mistakes are punished. No egos. No bias decisions. Pure wargames. RBGs at 19.

The best way to go about doing this is to see who is interested, play one "tryout" game with random teams, then use this to balance the next games. We can do a best of 5 after making teams. We can create games where it feels like soloQ , making these the most competitive wargames possible. Eventually it could get to a point where we have divisions like Division 1, 2, 3, etc..

Arenas + WSG


If you would like to assist in making this happen, pm me on xpoff. Players with 5+ years twink xp, players with endgame pvp xp, players in leadership roles in guilds should all get in contact with me.

PLEASE NO TROLLS OR ANYTHING NON-RELATED TO THE IDEA PRESENTED ABOVE!!​

Do you still have any Screenshots from your Rank 1 5v5 days?

 

[Venumz]

I'm well aware of the "plebmades" available in the bracket, however these aren't real wargames but instead a small group of friends who like playing together. They're not really pushing themselves to improve or create a competitive atmosphere. Looking to schedule a date for real wargames in the 19 bracket. What is a real wargame you may wonder? A real wargame is two teams playing their best to win. Each player gives their all. Each player knows their role. Mistakes are punished. No egos. No bias decisions. Pure wargames. RBGs at 19.

The best way to go about doing this is to see who is interested, play one "tryout" game with random teams, then use this to balance the next games. We can do a best of 5 after making teams. We can create games where it feels like soloQ , making these the most competitive wargames possible. Eventually it could get to a point where we have divisions like Division 1, 2, 3, etc..

Arenas + WSG


If you would like to assist in making this happen, pm me on xpoff. Players with 5+ years twink xp, players with endgame pvp xp, players in leadership roles in guilds should all get in contact with me.

PLEASE NO TROLLS OR ANYTHING NON-RELATED TO THE IDEA PRESENTED ABOVE!!

I'm well aware of the "plebmades" available in the bracket, however these aren't real wargames but instead a small group of friends who like playing together. They're not really pushing themselves to improve or create a competitive atmosphere. Looking to schedule a date for real wargames in the 19 bracket. What is a real wargame you may wonder? A real wargame is two teams playing their best to win. Each player gives their all. Each player knows their role. Mistakes are punished. No egos. No bias decisions. Pure wargames. RBGs at 19.

The best way to go about doing this is to see who is interested, play one "tryout" game with random teams, then use this to balance the next games. We can do a best of 5 after making teams. We can create games where it feels like soloQ , making these the most competitive wargames possible. Eventually it could get to a point where we have divisions like Division 1, 2, 3, etc..

Arenas + WSG


If you would like to assist in making this happen, pm me on xpoff. Players with 5+ years twink xp, players with endgame pvp xp, players in leadership roles in guilds should all get in contact with me.

PLEASE NO TROLLS OR ANYTHING NON-RELATED TO THE IDEA PRESENTED ABOVE!!​

I swear Voc is a laughing stock of the community. New players plebmade all the time. It’s not our fault deserting bgs isn’t an option in wargames and doesn’t give us r1 god pub stats​

 

[Stunar]

[doublepost=1525904801,1525904666][/doublepost]

Each player knows their role. Mistakes are punished. No egos. No bias decisions. Pure wargames. RBGs at 19.
​

no egos please

 

[whatmynameis]

So basically your trying to do the same thing were already doing but pretend like it's something different. Fantastic, best of luck to you.

 

[Hired]

Recently plebmades havent even been forming so goodluck.

 

[Phrontistery]

i wouldn't be so quick to discredit the potential of his idea

after all there are countless hundreds/(thousands?) of twinks out there waiting and ready to play

i'd just be very interested to see them streamed

 

[whatmynameis]

I think your right Phron. A bunch of twinks playing wargames. This is nothing like plebmades. The idea to try and balance teams is ground breaking. Just as soon as I thought this couldnt get any better he mentioned playing competitively and actually trying. This could very well be the start to a great new age in twinking.

 

[Light]

Thank you for taking a stand voc you deserve a legend badge

 

[Goohd]

Just months ago @Vet was a rogue noobie, got him out of stealth countless times by my Hunter in the 20-29 plebmades earlier this year. Now after going through the 19 boot camp program some say he's TC material. I think he deserves the "most improved twink" award or prettyboi, kinda hard to pick one. But lets say if those players from Warlords of Warsong players did the same then holy fuck we would have teams for days to feed competition

 

[Light]

Yeah honestly like real shit vet is the true rare player who goes from 0 to 100 with ease
[doublepost=1525928780,1525928721][/doublepost]I saw it with original when he played for our veteran guild then moved to 19s then endgame

I project vet might take the same path
If he buys a real pc el oh el

 

[Pitter]

good luck with ur wargaming group :3

 

[Raz]

tc 2018 hype ! !

 

[partygirl]

?XD

 

[Puempeekstoh]

Tbh i don't know these players. Idk why they feel the need to come to my thread.

Today i'd like to test some arena 3v3s on 19s. For those interested we can try our best to make balanced teams and try out different comps. Message me on xpoff or discord if interested.

Id suggest you learn about them because every single one of those players is ten times better than you even on their bad days.