OP
OP
Lights
Legend
That's the problem, Turtle. You're doing that because you don't have regular queue pops on locked XP toons. We are on the same side. >.>
The redundancy of XP lock, low level PVP, heirlooms and more.
- Thread starter Lights
- Start date
That's the problem, Turtle. You're doing that because you don't have regular queue pops on locked XP toons. We are on the same side. >.>
Faerondil
Legend
I do that with any toon I level. A sort of stop and go twinking style.
OP
OP
Lights
Legend
I'm not disagreeing with the playstyle btw, I'm just saying that I think a lot of people would much prefer to be able to play on their XP locked twinks than have to level new characters just to get a game in.
willix
Legend
Lights said:
How is what I said more complicated than your proposal of a bracket dedicated entirely to people without BoAs? The problem is segregation. Having more segregation or different segregation does not solve the problem of... segregation. My proposal with a comprehensive queue system does not segregate anyone. Let's say 20 people are queued up at any given time per side. The queue system grabs 10 players per faction and pops a WSG game, filling needed roles and making sure neither side is overloaded with twinks. Making sure games don't allow for more than 30% twinks would prevent them from doing what they already do in XP off brackets. It would discourage harmful behavior to everyone, while allowing players to enjoy playing the toons they've spent a ton of time creating.
BAM! Segregation gone, everyone wins.
Lights said:
What does communication have to do with the efficacy of your idea? People will still be segregated, which means that pops will take longer for one group, and there will still be abuse on the scrubs who don't have BoAs by the cunts who twink that bracket without BoAs to farm them. BoAs aren't the be-all, end-all of twinking and should not be the deciding factor in how the bracket is segregated. XP enabled/disabled shouldn't be either.
Segregation is bad, it creates longer queue times no matter how you slice it.
OP
OP
Lights
Legend
There is two brackets. One for the vast majority of players (heirloomed levelers, XP locked players) and one for new players (no heirlooms, unlocked XP only)
Not entirely sure why you're not understanding this. There is no way to abuse the new player bracket because it's impossible to lock your XP and play with them.
If you wanted to make a lv19 to abuse the new player bracket, the only way of doing it would be on an account without BOAs and having your XP unlocked, which means everytime you'd ding over the brackets cap you'd have to reroll, regear, etc. If someone wanted to do that, fine, but it's wasting a lot of time when you could just make an XP locked character with or without BOAs and play in the main pool.
edit: You might be misunderstanding the difference between having BOA on your account and having BOA on a character. What I'm saying is, if you have (1) heirloom on your account, even if it's not equipped to your current character, you will be in the Experienced player pool. If you have (0) heirlooms on your account, you're in the New Player bracket. The idea is that there is one core BG, to un-segregate the vast majority of PVPers, and while doing so, create a sub-que for new players so they don't get stomped by heirloom wearers and/or twinks.
Last edited by a moderator:
OP
OP
Lights
Legend
Also, my apologies, bro. I think we're on the same page here. The only reason this idea surfaced in my mind is because of what you're talking about.
I want more queues for XP off players. I always thought turning your XP off shouldn't send you to a separate bracket. The reasoning behind the two brackets (New and Experienced) is because I'm going to post this on official suggestions forums once it has been refined a bit more. I can't just go to Blizzard and say "Hey, your XP lock feature has become redundant, put us back in with the XP on players", it'd be ignored because it doesn't solve anything but the minority's problem (twinks). The reason the "New Player pool" idea is there is because it solves Blizzard's original problem with twinking (new players getting stomped on by more geared/more exp'd players) while indirectly allowing the XP locked players back in with the heirloom XP on players. Hope we're on the same page here, because I'm all with you about more queues and the issues of segregation.
edit: Also just quickly adding, I also dislike heirlooms and how they've affected twinks. I've played since vanilla and have played 19s/29s every xpac since. The reason I say BOA and Non-BOA is because it's the easiest way to differentiate between a new player and an experienced player. Also because Heirlooms are now bound to account and aren't like normal in-game items anymore, it means that rather than checking if Character (A) has heirloom count 1>, it can just check the entire account and move it to the Experienced player pool if it has more than (1) BOA.
Last edited by a moderator:
willix
Legend
Lights said:
I'm not misunderstanding anything. Currently, the most popular bracket is the 20-29 bracket. In this bracket, we have an entire population of players who abuse the starter account system to make pseudo twinks without having to pay for the game. This bracket gained popularity because asshole twinks abused a system that put brand new players into the same BGs as levelers while capping their level at 20. This system is how those players were able to play 24/7 without having to wait for organized activity.
Blizzard decided to put starter accounts players into XP off BGs once they reached level 20 because of these asshole twinks who abused the system. Now you're telling me that under your version of segregation, these assholes wouldn't be able to abuse the system because they can't lock their XP? Dude, the game already locks their XP once they reach level 20. If they have no BoAs, they'd be put into the same BGs as your new players, unless Blizzard continues to put starter accounts into XP off BGs.
At which point you haven't solved any problem. There's still segregation, and new players are still forced to play with twinks. At least until they buy the full game. This is why BoA vs non BoA is not a good way to determine who plays where. BoAs are gear. Gear is good. Having gear is what makes you viable. Getting gear is the point of the game. Punishing players for getting gear is bad. Rewarding players for not getting gear is bad. Segregation is bad.
Do you see where I'm going with this? Put everyone in the same BGs. Limit the number of twinks (or xp locked players, if you prefer) who can be in the same BG. Players who want competitive games can still do wargames/skirms with their play group.
OP
OP
Lights
Legend
You're coming from a jaded perspective of the F2P-29 bracket here. I said in my 2nd post I don't know how F2Ps fit into this and it was up to people to add to it. This post is talking about the ENTIRE twinking community's benefit. 20-29 still gets pop rights now, 10-19, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, etc. get pops for certain portions of the day, even 1-2 days a week at best, if at all.
Breaking an idea down because it doesn't fit one tiny portion of the game isn't constructive, and while I think your idea of a "one BG" system works (possibly with 30% XP off playerrs, of 30% twinks or whatever), it's just asking far too much of Blizzard's dev team. I get the idea behind it, but to redesign the entire queuing process from the ground-up just for the sake of lowbie PVP is asking way too much. With the idea I'm talking of, it's just a matter of 1) does acc have heirlooms yes/no 2) is xp on/off, these are two things that are already in the game's design. Making simple code for this would be easy. To make a queuing system that can differentiate between a twink player and an average leveler would mean it'd need to take gear, level, enchants, professions, etc. ALL into account and that would require a lot of work (think about how many brackets there are and how many items/combinations/etc there are in the game, it'd take ridiculously long)
Honestly with the F2P 20 issue, the simplest way around it I can think of is if Starter Account has existed for more than say, 1-3> months, it's moved to the Experienced pool.
Another idea is locking the amount of games you can play each day, so 3 WSG games per day, or saying that once you've reached Lv20 on a Starter Account character, you have 1 month to PVP and then it locks permanently just for that character.
Last edited by a moderator:
PepeLePewPew
Grandfathered
I haven't read all of the posts. Please excuse my comment if it's redundant.
The initial purpose for XP locked battlegrounds was to separate twinks from non-twinks. It was one of the best, wisest changes made to battlegrounds and I don't think it's lost it's purpose at all. Your suggestion would be D.O.A.
Also, it seems to me you are over-legitimizing starter twinks. That is not an intended way to play WoW and it's doubtful Blizzard will do anything specifically to support or encourage it. The XP lock works as intended in bg's and starter twinks don't matter, while 29 twinks sadly steal lunch money for lack of hugs. I'm still playing my starters btw, and enjoying them for what they are. If you want to travel the road towards true f2p, the token system is THAT way.
Seriously, twinks were obnoxious for non-twinks before the XP lock quarantine. There was much rejoicing when the lock was first implemented and I'd bet most players are still happier with it as is.
The initial purpose for XP locked battlegrounds was to separate twinks from non-twinks. It was one of the best, wisest changes made to battlegrounds and I don't think it's lost it's purpose at all. Your suggestion would be D.O.A.
Also, it seems to me you are over-legitimizing starter twinks. That is not an intended way to play WoW and it's doubtful Blizzard will do anything specifically to support or encourage it. The XP lock works as intended in bg's and starter twinks don't matter, while 29 twinks sadly steal lunch money for lack of hugs. I'm still playing my starters btw, and enjoying them for what they are. If you want to travel the road towards true f2p, the token system is THAT way.
Seriously, twinks were obnoxious for non-twinks before the XP lock quarantine. There was much rejoicing when the lock was first implemented and I'd bet most players are still happier with it as is.
Rusks
Legend
I would support this if real twinks were still separated from the levelers. If I wanted to farm people Im at an advantage to Id play my 29 more than once every few months
Seperating the bgs even more means longer queue times and that might have a negative impact on new non boa players
Seperating the bgs even more means longer queue times and that might have a negative impact on new non boa players
Last edited by a moderator:
willix
Legend
Lights said:
Whether or not I'm 'jaded' has fuck-all to do with anything being discussed in this thread. The 20-29 bracket is the most active bracket for one simple reason: there's a steady stream of starter accounts fueling activity. Outside of that bracket, twinking doesn't exist (except in the 90-99 bracket and those 19s getting ready for the twink cup). Coincidentally, the 90-99 bracket is also a natural cap where players who haven't bought WoD are forced into BGs with players who have their XP disabled. If that wasn't the case, that twink bracket would be as dead as all the others.
Also, the 19s activity is being fueled by the twink cup, which we all know will die after the games are over. So, I'm really not sure what you expect to change if your suggestion were implemented. Levelers would seriously avoid using BoAs if it meant not having to face twinks in XP off games.
Lights said:
You proposed this idea based on your perception regarding 'the problem' with twinking, which is longer queue times/dead brackets due to segregation. But rather than proposing a solution to this problem that actually makes sense, you propose more segregation. So instead of getting all upset that I'm criticizing your idea, maybe you should take a step back and rethink what you're proposing?
My proposed solution takes into account the actual factors that are the root of the problem. And while it might be too much to ask of the current dipshits who design this game, it isn't too much to ask of a design team who cares about the quality of life for its players.
What makes you think they would have to redesign the entire queue system? The game already differentiates between players with XP enabled/disabled. Obviously, those players who don't want to gain XP (twinks) are going to have their XP disabled. The only thing Blizzard would have to do is tweak the system to no longer split these players up into two different queue systems and then add a few lines of code to prevent more than X number of spots being given to players with their XP disabled on a per game basis.
You're idea might be equally simple to implement, but it doesn't even begin to address the actual problem twinks face in World of Warcraft today.
Lights said:
None of those things would be necessary to differentiate a twink from a non-twink.
Lights said:
While I completely support a system that discourages players on starter accounts from 'twinking,' you're still faced with the problem I mentioned before if Blizzard were to take your proposition seriously. Believe it or not, new players do play on starter accounts, and are forced into the same BGs as actual twinks. I'm tired of these players thinking this is their bracket, when the reality is it was never theirs to begin with, and never will be.
I don't see BoAs as a problem. If anything, I think Blizzard needs to update all gear to reflect the stats scaling of BoAs, so everyone has viable gearing options outside of BoAs.
Last edited by a moderator:
Junoo
<XL>
And why exactly hasn't this been posted on the official forums?
Allybeboba
Legend
The issue at hand is the game has evolved to the point that it does not need XP off segregation for battlegrounds. The minority of undergeared toons in battlegrounds are minuscule. The overwhelming majority of players that truly want to level do so by leveling through LFD.
Many people are enchanting white geared items that are not BoE and rofl stomping people. When that toon levels out of their desired bracket, they just mail enchanted whites and and heirlooms to new level 1, delete leveled toon, rinse and repeat. Easy as pie, if that is your thing I suppose.
/cheers
Sweetsydney
Many people are enchanting white geared items that are not BoE and rofl stomping people. When that toon levels out of their desired bracket, they just mail enchanted whites and and heirlooms to new level 1, delete leveled toon, rinse and repeat. Easy as pie, if that is your thing I suppose.
/cheers
Sweetsydney
Tom Ganks
Guest
Actually the non heirloomed pvp twinkers will have their gear and chants scaled up each bracket they ding into with the current scaling system. So if they have bis or near bis non-boa they can dominate for a good amount of levels.
The solution to this would be to at least merge the new player and experienced brackets at around the lvl 60 bracket. Then those Newby players are more experienced by then and have racked up enough honor for good gear. Then they'll face the scaled up twinkers with boa and non boa.
The solution to this would be to at least merge the new player and experienced brackets at around the lvl 60 bracket. Then those Newby players are more experienced by then and have racked up enough honor for good gear. Then they'll face the scaled up twinkers with boa and non boa.
Tom Ganks
Guest
But the good thing is this would significantly increase activity in every twink bracket 