a necro party? awesome!
Arena Inactivity: Incentive Suggestions
Started by ameego, Jun 03 2010 09:36 PM
145 replies to this topic
#141
Posted 10 February 2013 - 12:56 PM
#142
Posted 10 February 2013 - 01:12 PM
a better game []
#143
Posted 10 February 2013 - 03:02 PM
Cendrid, on 04 June 2010 - 07:12 PM, said:
The real problem is that the WoW arena population is decreasing, and as seen in other MMOs, they need to start merging servers into fewer Battle groups and reducing the amount of Battle groups people have to hit a high rating and camp it.
Some of the BGs are, as it sits, a total joke. When a couple of teams transfer to a "low-end" BG and go 95%+ Win/Loss to sky rocket to Ranks 1-10, then that BG should just be compacted somewhere else and disposed of. If those Glad level players are really that good, then they'll still succeed.
World PvP is dead, there is no reason to have a BG primarily composed of PvE servers anymore (Emberstorm). If they want to arena seriously, then they can come compete with the rest of us. If they don't want to take arena seriously, then don't expect high ratings.
Some of the BGs are, as it sits, a total joke. When a couple of teams transfer to a "low-end" BG and go 95%+ Win/Loss to sky rocket to Ranks 1-10, then that BG should just be compacted somewhere else and disposed of. If those Glad level players are really that good, then they'll still succeed.
World PvP is dead, there is no reason to have a BG primarily composed of PvE servers anymore (Emberstorm). If they want to arena seriously, then they can come compete with the rest of us. If they don't want to take arena seriously, then don't expect high ratings.
Hakfu said:
My personal opinion about why PHD/ATC/Beastcleave are not being that succesful on Tournaments is that in many cases it relies on the enemy making an error...In a sense, that makes them the underdog...Hunter's have never really been that OP. People just have the image that hunters should be something to be stomped over
#144
Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:58 PM
ephex, on 03 June 2010 - 09:49 PM, said:
Rating decay is dumb, if you wanna camp thats your choice. Its your team you get to choose what rating you stop at.
If you dont like not having high teams q'ing transfer to a more populated bg aka bg9
If you dont like not having high teams q'ing transfer to a more populated bg aka bg9
#145
Posted 11 February 2013 - 01:08 AM
Absoqt, on 10 February 2013 - 10:53 AM, said:
Not true. They will reward playing which is the opposite of this idea - and a much better one.
The result is the same. If you don't play then you fall behind on the ladder.
If you do play then you keep up with your place on the ladder.
Why does every new game suck ass.
I'm back, sort of.
I'm back, sort of.
#146
Posted 11 February 2013 - 02:30 AM
i would say that the best way to get players to want to actually play arena consistently is to create a weekly title system. this would make people not worry as much about playing simply for titles, and make them want to play to be the best. since the title would only last a week who gives a fuck if you miss it for a week, all it means is that you can try to perform better next week in order to gain your title once more for another week. this also eliminates the mid season lull in arena as every week is essentially a "season". with this weekly system it would also open up a new window of opportunity to blizzard to keep arena updated on a weekly basis as they won't have to make changes to the game in a big package at the end of each season/pve content but rather constantly work upon their game to keep people happy and wanting to play a game not just for titles, but for enjoyment.
tldr weekly system, make titles something the best will have consistently while at the same time making it not something to xfer to shithole bgs for.
tldr weekly system, make titles something the best will have consistently while at the same time making it not something to xfer to shithole bgs for.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users
























