08-12-2005, 10:20 AM
(This post was last modified: 08-12-2005, 10:27 AM by MongoJerry.)
savaughn,Aug 11 2005, 02:37 PM Wrote:While I appreciate the concept, Mongo, we all know that Blizzard has looked at this idea and have a much better grasp of the advantages and disadvantages of doing this than the players do. While this may seem like a "simple" fix, it is quite likely that this would take several months of coding work to accomplish and the reality is that you are only talking about a band-aid.
The issues you list are very real and crippling. If you look at the solution you are describing, there is a disconnect between the issues and the solution. For example, the line may move somewhat more consistently with a combined solution but that same line will be exponentially longer. There is no net improvement there.
I don't think you have a real handle on the problem, Savaughn. The problems with the queues are due to low population problems. The most obvious example is when there is not enough players of one faction queuing up to start a game. In this case, one has to wait an infinite amount of time to get in a a game. But even if a game is going on, what happens when the teams are evenly matched? People can be waiting for hours for spaces to become available, because such a game doesn't end in a timely fashion.
However, with cross-server battlegrounds, there will always be games going on and what's more dozens and possibly hundreds of them. More battlegrounds would be played at once, because the player pool would be made up of players from all over. In addition, while some games will be evenly matched, other games will be lopsided and end quickly. Games will be ending and starting all the time, so there will be a smooth flow of players in and out of the instances. So what if you're in a queue of 1000? If an AV is starting up every 30 seconds, then that means you'll get in within 10 minutes. That's so much better than anything anybody sees currently.
Quote:Let's take a look at what this would do. Let's say that server A has a horde guild that has organized an AV event. They pull the bodies together to create an AV instance. Now, normally, that server's alliance side would now be able to play. Instead you will be talking about pulling one or two players from dozens of servers. You will end up with maybe one or two players per server who get to play and you will have to wait in a line of tens of thousands. There is also zero chance that you will be able to join an AV instance as a group in such a scenario.
I don't understand how you're coming to your conclusion. Cross-server battlegrounds would make joining as a group far easier than it is now, because AV games would be constantly ending and starting. Once a group got to the head of the queue, they would get in the next game that got started. With cross-server battlegrounds, full 40-man raids could get in almost as quickly as individuals. They wouldn't have to wait the hours upon hours that they have to do now.
Quote:There are design issues with Battlegrounds. Rather than have Blizzard spend months working on band-aids, I'd rather see them plow their resources into actually correcting the underlying issues. They have fixed resourcing. If they commit to implementing a band-aid, that means they are not working on the long term solution.
This isn't a band-aid. It is the long term solution to the problem, which is why I want them to work on it *now*.