Leveling Ally 47+ is a joke

[Mryul]

World pvp is what's happening at the moment.

60 lvls camping 60lvls passing brm
35-39 lvl chars fighting 35-39 lvl chars in north svv
45-50 lvl chars fighting 45-50 lvl chars in south Tanaris
this is world pvp

if 60 lvl geared retard killing 10+ lower targets for hours who r chanceless to win due to wow mechanic, its not wpvp its called griefing and only deep idiot cant understand it

It's still world pvp. Many people think it's shit, but geared lvl 60s griefing lower lvls until they log out is still world pvp.

just like telling someone to kill themselves is just online communication

if you're trying to make a point you failed

[HAEVNEREN]

if you tried to come across like a complete moron and provide no real point you did a good job

Except he is right. Writing it like a moron or not, whatever you think, doesn't change the fact that the de facto wide acceptance of world pvp includes excessive griefing done here on Nostalrius. Naturally this doesn't mean it can't be discussed.

EDIT

just like telling someone to kill themselves is just online communication

if you're trying to make a point you failed

Well, making a point depends on the receiving end to think of it as reasonable. Do you not think camping low lvls count as world pvp? Pvp, in the world, as in none-instanced areas.

[Mryul]

just like telling someone to kill themselves is just online communication

if you're trying to make a point you failed

Well, making a point depends on the receiving end to think of it as reasonable. Do you not think camping low lvls count as world pvp? Pvp, in the world, as in none-instanced areas.

online communication is okay, but harrasment through it isn't. same applies for world pvp

sure, you may get ganked. sure, you may get corpse camped. but if it results into not being able to play the game, it's harresment/greifing

[Solmyr]

As no additional arguments, except for Haevneren's, have been presented since my last post, I shall only respond to his - and not in multi-quote mode, for the posts are becoming increasingly difficult to follow and the debaters are already aware of each others' points.

Skipping over the personal attacks, which would not lead to a productive discussion, your first claim is that due to the 60/40 ratio and the alliance pve focus, fighting back is next to impossible. This general argument might sway some of our lazier readers, but those who prefer data would see its flaw. Despite the perceived high number of lvl60 Horde ganking, the total amount of gankers is still a small fraction of the Horde population - the rest are doing other things, namely farming, doing PvE, battlegrounds or afking in Orgrimmar.

Since we have no credible source of exact numbers, we can't clarify the exact figures any further, but the gist of the counterargument is that there are plenty of lvl60 allies, in absolute numbers, to counter and totally obliterate all of the current lvl60 Horde gankers, even with the 60/40 ratio in place. PvE focus is not really an inhibitor to world PvP, as current PvE content is cleared in 1 night by most raiding guilds, allowing their players plenty of time to fight in the high level zones.

Your next claim is that this entire series of events will lead to the server being fucked and deteriorating in health. Since these terms are generally applied to animate objects, server not being such, I shan't make attempts at guessing what you meant exactly. Lastly you mention that many other private servers were abandoned due to faction ratio imbalance. Frankly I see no clear logical link between the current events discussed (Horde engaging in world pvp) and faction ratio imbalance. Au contraire, I can give you evidence that the world pvp herein discussed has a net positive effect on the server's population (both factions, more strongly on Alliance):

1. World pvp is one of the defining features of vanilla, unfortunately due to the low populations on most private servers it hardly exists. Nostalrius featuring ongoing world pvp battles would do a great deal in promoting the server to new players.
2. Faction balance within the current boundaries (~60/40) affects the choice of some players on which faction they would roll. When the ratio is more imbalanced (say 80/20) and/or if the server is low populated, people tend to choose the more populated faction to ensure they'll have people to play with. On high populated servers like Nostalrius however, where the faction balance is close to perfect*, the only objective criterion left is battleground queues. Currently alliance features much more favourable queues, therefore it is natural that PvPers would choose to roll alliance, if faction balance alone were the determining factor to their decision.

*I define perfect as within 45-55 range, either way. No faction balance on any server, ever, has been 50/50, and few private servers have ever had 45-55 range balance.

You admit that you base your opinions on the forum posts of people, none of which is a reliable source of data, as a few vocal people can make themselves look like majority. You correctly referred back to my first post in this thread, wherein I began by stating what I base my conclusions on. Had you attacked my post based on its data source, I would've acknowledged your counterargument as correct, for the source is indeed rubbish. But since you use the same source yourself, it would invalidate your own argument. And since this entire series of threads is rubbish in my view, I wouldn't mind if my initial argument (the one about what Ally/Horde on Nos value in PvP) is proven invalid, as long as the arguments of others, whose source are the same opinions of loud, arsehurt, manchildren, are also invalidated.

Finally, you claim that Horde does it merely to farm HKs, but a great many posters admitted to joining the world pvp teams simply for fun and to get a reaction from alliance players - in fact this series of threads has probably contributed significantly to increasing the number of Horde world pvpers, due to many people joining simply to share in the fun.
Of course the Hordes will go to the higher level areas for world pvp - where else would you like them to go? Would you rather have lvl60s doing world pvp in Redridge or in Winterspring/Burning Steppes/EPL? The latter zones are specifically designed to accommodate world pvp in addition to leveling.
Alliance might be outnumbered PvP-wise, but only because many alliance players choose not to PvP. But that's the thing about PvPing in an MMO - it's not always a choice. Your enemy can choose to engage you and if you don't want to fight back, you'll just die. There are plenty of alliance players choosing not to PvP (neither BGs, nor world), thus it is they, who are to blame the most for their brethren's defeat in the 50-60 leveling zones.

Your attack might be based on debunking my initial post, but as you clearly see now, I do not mind that post being debunked. I actually started it by providing people with a way to debunk it, namely the source of my conclusions. Having you debunk my initial argument is my way of making you prove my actual argument, which is that the entire situation with world PvP is nothing abnormal and needs no addressing besides encouragement for more alliance players to participate.

[Don]

[HAEVNEREN]

Good post, Solmyr.

Skipping over the personal attacks, which would not lead to a productive discussion, your first claim is that due to the 60/40 ratio and the alliance pve focus, fighting back is next to impossible. This general argument might sway some of our lazier readers, but those who prefer data would see its flaw. Despite the perceived high number of lvl60 Horde ganking, the total amount of gankers is still a small fraction of the Horde population - the rest are doing other things, namely farming, doing PvE, battlegrounds or afking in Orgrimmar.

True, but i would argue that it hardly matters wether its a small fraction of the total horde population or not - as long as it's enough to hint a bad trend on the census data. Besides, the census data is one thing, i don't know if you play alliance chars in the 40s and 50s zones, but the chat is literally full of whine at times, and people do actually quit. Out of the 4 guys i added after a super fast uldaman run, only one is still at it, being a 51 dwarf warrior, but he is on the brink of quitting. Yeah yeah, whiny shit and so on and so on.

Since we have no credible source of exact numbers, we can't clarify the exact figures any further, but the gist of the counterargument is that there are plenty of lvl60 allies, in absolute numbers, to counter and totally obliterate all of the current lvl60 Horde gankers, even with the 60/40 ratio in place. PvE focus is not really an inhibitor to world PvP, as current PvE content is cleared in 1 night by most raiding guilds, allowing their players plenty of time to fight in the high level zones.

I can't know for sure. However, regarding what i have highlighted, this is fine in theory, but doesn't apply in practical terms. These pve carebears are not easily, if at all, persuaded into doing the job wpvp wise.

Your next claim is that this entire series of events will lead to the server being fucked and deteriorating in health. Since these terms are generally applied to animate objects, server not being such, I shan't make attempts at guessing what you meant exactly. Lastly you mention that many other private servers were abandoned due to faction ratio imbalance. Frankly I see no clear logical link between the current events discussed (Horde engaging in world pvp) and faction ratio imbalance. Au contraire, I can give you evidence that the world pvp herein discussed has a net positive effect on the server's population (both factions, more strongly on Alliance):

Just a disclaimer; if you read through my posts i very often if not always state that it "might" end up fucking things up. I don't have a definitive answer, i only have access to pop data. More weeks with more data will naturally give a stronger base to discuss from.

1. World pvp is one of the defining features of vanilla, unfortunately due to the low populations on most private servers it hardly exists. Nostalrius featuring ongoing world pvp battles would do a great deal in promoting the server to new players.

Maybe, but on the contrary, looking at these forums as a new player might shun you from playing alliance. "Dont make the posts then". "Stop camping lvling people then". The reasons can be many, either way its not a good thing to be met with when choosing faction.

Faction balance within the current boundaries (~60/40) affects the choice of some players on which faction they would roll. When the ratio is more imbalanced (say 80/20) and/or if the server is low populated, people tend to choose the more populated faction to ensure they'll have people to play with. On high populated servers like Nostalrius however, where the faction balance is close to perfect*, the only objective criterion left is battleground queues. Currently alliance features much more favourable queues, therefore it is natural that PvPers would choose to roll alliance, if faction balance alone were the determining factor to their decision.

*I define perfect as within 45-55 range, either way. No faction balance on any server, ever, has been 50/50, and few private servers have ever had 45-55 range balance.

The actual faction balance is very good, especially for a server this side. It often ranges from 55-45 to even 51-49 in horde favor. However, at lvl 60, and 50-59 it's looking pretty different, and the evolution of these statistics has gotten worse. So what might not present as a problem now, could possibly do so later, and snowball out of control.

You admit that you base your opinions on the forum posts of people, none of which is a reliable source of data, as a few vocal people can make themselves look like majority. You correctly referred back to my first post in this thread, wherein I began by stating what I base my conclusions on. Had you attacked my post based on its data source, I would've acknowledged your counterargument as correct, for the source is indeed rubbish. But since you use the same source yourself, it would invalidate your own argument. And since this entire series of threads is rubbish in my view, I wouldn't mind if my initial argument (the one about what Ally/Horde on Nos value in PvP) is proven invalid, as long as the arguments of others, whose source are the same opinions of loud, arsehurt, manchildren, are also invalidated.

Noted.

Finally, you claim that Horde does it merely to farm HKs, but a great many posters admitted to joining the world pvp teams simply for fun and to get a reaction from alliance players - in fact this series of threads has probably contributed significantly to increasing the number of Horde world pvpers, due to many people joining simply to share in the fun.
Of course the Hordes will go to the higher level areas for world pvp - where else would you like them to go? Would you rather have lvl60s doing world pvp in Redridge or in Winterspring/Burning Steppes/EPL? The latter zones are specifically designed to accommodate world pvp in addition to leveling.
Alliance might be outnumbered PvP-wise, but only because many alliance players choose not to PvP. But that's the thing about PvPing in an MMO - it's not always a choice. Your enemy can choose to engage you and if you don't want to fight back, you'll just die. There are plenty of alliance players choosing not to PvP (neither BGs, nor world), thus it is they, who are to blame the most for their brethren's defeat in the 50-60 leveling zones.

No, Alliance at lvl 60 (which is what i assume we consider adequate "help" material since the ganking hordes are 60, and often pretty OK geared) is not equal in pop as the horde. Total server pop, almost, but where it matters, 50-60, no.

Your attack might be based on debunking my initial post, but as you clearly see now, I do not mind that post being debunked. I actually started it by providing people with a way to debunk it, namely the source of my conclusions. Having you debunk my initial argument is my way of making you prove my actual argument, which is that the entire situation with world PvP is nothing abnormal and needs no addressing besides encouragement for more alliance players to participate.

Such is your opinion, which is fine. Reading my original post in my thread on the forums, i state it's just a heads up. No idea or bigger hope that anything remarkable would be produced from it, but i took my chances, based on the last few weeks of experience regarding whine and server population evolution at later levels. I dont argue from a personal involvement with the server in its current setting. I wont reroll, ill keep playing and being an avid world pvper ill hopefully have a better "pain" tolerance on the griefing than most others. A lot don't, though.

What consequences do you see if said solution of encouraging Alliance players to participate won't work? Do you think the server population ratio will get better or worse as even more people hit the lvl 48-50 wall?

[Solmyr]

These pve carebears are not easily, if at all, persuaded into doing the job wpvp wise.

... looking at these forums as a new player might shun you from playing alliance.

I wont reroll, ill keep playing and being an avid world pvper ill hopefully have a better "pain" tolerance on the griefing than most others. A lot don't, though.

You're starting to hit the nail on the head as to where the real problem is. And not rerolling or quitting is the right approach to this problem. Horde will PvP, one way or another. It's up to the Alliance to find ways of fighting back. Not quitting just before lvl60, instead pushing thru and gearing up is one of the ways.

Not spamming the forums about how bad alliance have it is another way of not turning away potential alliance players. All these threads are doing are discouraging new people from rolling alliance, thus deepening the problem.

No, Alliance at lvl 60 (which is what i assume we consider adequate "help" material since the ganking hordes are 60, and often pretty OK geared) is not equal in pop as the horde. Total server pop, almost, but where it matters, 50-60, no.

Haven't seen latest census data, but I can assure you when server launched Alliance had more players, including more high levels during the first month. Why this is no longer the case I cannot say, but many players and guilds, ours included, made a faction choice based on the notion of balancing the server PvE- and PvP-wise, based on the choice others had already made. If many of those initial alliance guilds have quit by now, it's not Horde's fault that it now has the upper hand.

What consequences do you see if said solution of encouraging Alliance players to participate won't work? Do you think the server population ratio will get better or worse as even more people hit the lvl 48-50 wall?

I think that regardless of whether anyone helps you or not, players of lvl48+ will eventually get to 60. It might take them twice as long as otherwise, but in the long run that time is insignificant. If the player values the server and wants to play on it long term, he will power through and get to 60 one way or another. Just to give you an example, many of us played on release day when there were literally no mobs to be found and leveling was ~10 times slower than blizzlike. We gritted our teeth and powered through. So will you and anyone else, who cares about this game. Everything else is just casual talk.

[reddeffect]

I actually rolled alliance because I prefer playing the underdog.

[Lobogo]

I actually rolled alliance because I prefer playing the underdog.

UD rogue+priest
many underdog
such suck-race
wow

[grimnarr]

It's up to the Alliance to find ways of fighting back. Not quitting just before lvl60, instead pushing thru and gearing up is one of the ways.

Why bother when you can just go to another server or roll horde? I'm playing wow to have fun. Pushing through the horde campers and getting 1 level every 15 hours is not fun.