The Art of War(craft): Is Wintergrasp too successful for its own good?

Crygil's post about the change from Daily quests to Weekly ones -- conceivably a first for the game -- note that the changes were being explored "In an effort to better balance the amount of players that are in Wintergrasp at any given time". No matter how Blizzard tries to spin it, they're trying to dissuade players from participating in Wintergrasp. This is a bad idea. There's something epic about Wintergrasp, and it's not (just) the lag. Considering it's obviously one of their most popular game features in Wrath, it's ironic they're taking steps to curtail its success.
There's something to be said for the ambitious concept of scaling battles. Apprehensions about Wintergrasp's appeal were quickly quelled when the zone quickly filled up as more players hit max level. It was something that we'd never seen before in the game. But while the game is fun, but the rewards are phenomenal, too. The Honor gain from playing a short game of Wintergrasp are extremely good, especially if you factor in the daily quests. Almost too good, in fact, that Blizzard expressed concern that it was taking away interest in instanced Battlegrounds. I understand the goal of reducing Honor, but the move from Daily quests to Weekly ones is just plain bad.
With respect to the Honor gain, it would have been simple enough to reduce the Honor reward from Daily quests from a generous 1241 Honor per quest at Level 80 to something more reasonable, perhaps a third of that. Reducing the Honor gained from other Wintergrasp objectives, as they are doing on the PTR, seems like a step in the right direction. Limiting Honor is fine, but actively trying to reduce the number of people playing the game? That sounds like a really bad deal.
Zarhym notes that there is "an overabundance of players" in Wintergrasp, "resulting in poor realm performance during peak play times." It's sad and ironic that Blizzard has to take steps to control something so successful. Before we start to examine things, though, let's get one thing out of the way: Blizzard underestimated Wintergrasp. Between hardware capacity and how much data is communicated from server to client, there are a lot of opportunities for performance to bog down. And Blizzard simply didn't seem prepared for what happened.
Without having to understand the intricacies of just how servers handle load, it should be noted that excessive player activity concentrated in one area can lead to realm crashes. Blizzard knows this, which is why the response is so unexpected. City raids and other massive player-organized events have been known to crash entire realms before, so how can a non-instanced Battleground with ambitions of hosting multi-raid battles be a surprise? Admittedly, the requirements of something so massive might just be too much, even for Blizzard's top-of-the-line machines. They've also explained that upgrading everything is no simple matter, a process that takes several months and entails meticulous planning.
So where did it all go wrong? From the onset, Blizzard already had scenarios with hundreds of players. They said as much at the Worldwide Invitational last year. Even though they said they expected anywhere from 50 to 200 people in the zone at once, the success and popularity of Wintergrasp still caught them with their pants down. One of the problems is the design of the zone, which concentrates most of the activity in one place, Wintergrasp Keep. During games, for example, it's possible to escape lag by concentrating on the Southern objectives.
Unfortunately, despite the changes to gameplay, participating in the battle for the Keep proper still grants the most Honor owing to the sheer number of Honorable Kills players can soak up through sheer proximity. By extension, it makes it easier to complete the kill quests and is the only way to complete Defend the Siege. Even though dispersing activity won't eliminate lag entirely, it will certainly help. If I experience lag during a game, I usually escape it by having the Spirit Guide port me to a Southern graveyard.
Having multiple objectives all over the Battleground would help disperse players but also run the risk of diluting the epic feel of the zone. As bad as lag can be, there's something truly amazing about having hundreds of players take to the battlefield. It's one of the things that make Wintergrasp so amazing and exactly the thing that makes it so terrible. Would it be as fun if there were numerous points all over the map (not just the South) where the game can be won? I don't think so. Not only that, low population servers with low PvP activity will almost certainly suffer from the additional dilution.
It's not a simple problem, and Blizzard seems to be taking an extreme approach to solving it. It's hard to imagine there being no other way to fix the problem than to discourage players from participating. Will enabling aerial battles alleviate the problem or make it worse? Players who enjoy Wintergrasp are looking forward to the next iteration of the zone, and these changes aren't very reassuring. It's one thing to tune the zone's gameplay, and it's another to disincentivize it. Weekly quests? Does Blizzard really want players to visit Wintergrasp that much less?
That doesn't give much confidence for further development of the zone, does it? Introducing new, cool elements such as flying machines might just encourage more players to play Wintergrasp. The way Blizzard has tried to make solutions on the PTR, you'd be inclined to think that that would be the last thing they want. This is a case of success gone all sorts of wrong, and it's unlikely that there'll be further refinement to Wintergrasp itself in the near future. Not with the focus on a new Battleground and efforts to improve instanced Battleground participation. Blizzard is intent on ushering player traffic back into instanced Battlegrounds.
The one bright spot in this whole thing is that we know Blizzard is learning. Wintergrasp is the culmination of years of learning from Alterac Valley and other world PvP objectives. This is merely another lesson learned. While Wintergrasp will quite conceivably plateau from hereonforth, the successes of the zone herald a much more interesting and equally massive world PvP objective in the next expansion. Blizzard proved it can work -- a non-instanced Battleground as massive as other zones in Northrend that probably sees more traffic than any other zone save perhaps for Icecrown and The Storm Peaks. Considering Blizzard's keen pursuit of improvement, it's almost a sure bet that we've got something grander in store. Let's just hope the hardware matches the ambition.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, PvP, The Art of War(craft) (PvP), Battlegrounds






Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
Tridus May 17th 2009 12:11PM
This is pretty backwards if you ask me. Wintergrasp is the actually good PvP in Wrath. They should do whatever it takes to make it work better, not discourage people from playing it.
You don't see them working to discourage people from going into arena, despite the players themselves not wanting to (as seen by massive popularity drops the instant welfare epics were removed).
Clbull May 17th 2009 12:54PM
In my opinion, if Blizzard want to improve Arena, they have to greatly reduce or remove Rating requirements on items. It was great in Seasons 1 and 2, despite the win trading.
Making 1 or 2 classes overpowered and making us need to get very high ratings with season 3 onwards sucks tbh.
Ever wondered why people don't bother with Arena? Because the rewards really suck unless you're very good at it and hit very high ratings.
Jack Spicer May 17th 2009 1:33PM
The problem with Wintergrasp is that it needs to be instanced.
Rollo May 17th 2009 7:17PM
I wonder how many people in a WG battle, turn in a daily quest at the end? I don't believe most people do, I think many join just because they hear the /yell in dalaran and they're borde, or perhaps they are gathering wg marks for a mammoth.
My point is , turning daily quests to weekly won't reduce the number of players to 14%. Perhaps wg battles of half the size is what they're aiming for? 75% of the current size?
Personally, playing on a low-pop server, I just wish they left things as they were over here, and only punished the lemmings who deserve it! :p
Andrew May 18th 2009 12:05AM
They don't care about making it better. They are doing whatever it takes to increase shareholder returns.
Blizzard: "You don't want lag in wintergrasp? But that would require some upgrades, and we've already billed your credit card for the month, so GTFO"
Para May 19th 2009 8:43AM
I agree entirely with you clbull. The new rating system is utter trash aswell, for the last few weeks me and my parter win 5 games lose 2 and our rating is reduced to less than what we started. Blizz really need to sort these things out.
Also as for WG lag waiting 10 sec for an instant to do something on my server does not make me want to do WG but since its about the only good way to make lots of honor beside premades on my battlegroup im forced to do it.....
riker700 May 17th 2009 12:11PM
Saddening there trying to stop it
Stomy May 17th 2009 1:31PM
for the love of god people blizz has the best tech money can buy, it's not the server it's the combined lag between hundreds of people, yes their are hundreds of people in zones at a time and you'd never notice it, the difference being in WG these people are interacting in a PvP seance and a server has to try and take leg into account while communicating the effect of any spell cast to all players in the it's affected area, yes WG would be less laggy if on one used AoE's but that's not no fun, anyways it's the internets fault that WG lag suxs not blizz. so their decisions to make the dailies into weeklies to see if less people will go into WG is the smallest change they have left to make WG less laggy.hey could have made it like any other BG and only have so many people in it at once and so on and so forth.
Roflpanda May 17th 2009 2:52PM
I love you, Stormy.
Stomy May 17th 2009 10:09PM
lol my only fan
Andrew May 18th 2009 12:14AM
Yes he is your only fan.
I mean... making excuses for Blizzard... who do you think you are? :P
Blizz built their game knowing the state of the net but still promised us epic battles in the promos for wotlk. So they have no one to blame but themselves.
If I order a pizza delivered but the road is damaged and the driver can't get through, does he still get paid? No. But Blizz can make a game, promise us the epic battles, and then say it isn't their fault and instead blame the internet? Please. Gimme my money back if you can't keep your promises Blizz.
Keleron May 17th 2009 7:34PM
WG is by far my favorite part of the game now. Raiding takes too much time. BGs feel stale and are always unbalanced. Started AV today 39ally to 23horde:( WG on the other hand is fun no matter what. Being totally outnumbered adds some excitement to it. Totally outnumbering the enemy also feels great. Lag does suck, but I always drop whatever else I am doing to join in WG.
Blizzard may not be able to spruce WG up in fear of adding more ppl to the already crowded area, but what about another area? Somewhere back on Outland maybe? Have them be around the same time, same amount of dailies..err weeklies. I don't know. I would love more WG type of fun.
Scott Cabot May 17th 2009 12:13PM
I don't understand why they don't just instance wintergrasp then? We already take ports from Dalaran when the fight begins, when we fly over it we enter a no fly zone and have the opportunity to A) Turn around or B) Fly into the zone as we intended anyway. Can't they just put a giant instance around the zone, but have it act the same as the no fly zone? If you stay there for 8 seconds (or whatever it is) you get ported, if you turn around you go on your merry way. I'm not sure how this would effect flight paths, but the concept seemed to work for the Death Knight starting zone although I guess that is a little different. Most PC's these days would easily be able to swap from Northrend to the instance if the terrain is all pre-loaded which it probably would be because we can see it?
Anyway I am no computer buff but it just seems like a logical step. That way everyone can play Wintergrasp but it can be handled by instance servers or something.....
Kaphik May 17th 2009 12:18PM
It seems to me also that instancing Wintergrasp is the only solution, but it also leads to more problems. What happens when the maximum number of players is reached? Do the rest get shut out of Wintergrasp entirely? Say there are two instances, what happens if Horde wins one and Alliance wins the other?
There's no simple answer for this. I guess Blizzard is taking the right steps for now, until they can come up with a better plan.
TheSipe May 17th 2009 12:20PM
While I totally agree with you, most of us are aware of having to "dance" in and out of an instance portal before we can get one to pop during peak hours. Not sure the instance servers are up to the load they have on it now. Like an oversized star, wow is starting to collapse under it's own weight. I hope they can keep up.
oliver.lieu May 17th 2009 1:22PM
How about 3 instances, the side that wins/defends 2+ instances wins WG and has access to VoA and all that. It would change the 150 vs 150 WGs to 50 vs 50. Still pretty big overall and less lag.
chris604 May 17th 2009 12:17PM
Are people stupid? Wouldn't you rather play Wintergrasp with no lag, no problems, all fun rather than 500 vs 500 and everyone lagging their ass off? Right, common sense shows you'd pick the first option. Point made. They need less people in the zone at a time, hence spreading the dailies into a week long thing instead of a daily thing. It doesn't mean you can't play every day or every few hours, if you really enjoyed Wintergrasp you'd be there all day. But if you're just farming dailies, we don't give a shit about you, do your dailies and get the hell out. Do you want to do dailies or do you want you PLAY WINTERGRASP? Use common sense people, or else we're going to have a world full of idiots in the next 50 years (not saying it isn't already bad enough as it is).
Shilling May 17th 2009 12:27PM
My thoughts exactly. Turning dailies into weeklies seems like an excellent solution - everyone can get their rewards, everyone will still play WG, just not -all at the same time-.
The internet has its limits. Blizzard cannot simply "make da servers betta" or magic up a solution. Encouraging people to spread out their wintergrasping is the best thing to do.
VSUReaper May 17th 2009 12:35PM
Nerd rage much?
On my server, which is one of the low pop ones, the balance between Horde and Alliance is pitiful, usually leaving the Alliance with a full stack of tenacity at all times. I have actually seen a 5 man group of Alliance almost take out an entire 40 man group of people.
IMO, nerf the honor, nerf the way that tenacity works, and the problem shouldnt be quite as big.
Instancing the place might an attractive option as well, but then it limits the amount of farming (fish and eternals) that can be conducted there and prohibits the amount of world PVP that occurs in between battles.
Xanwryn May 17th 2009 1:11PM
Personally, I'd rather play 500 vs 500, so in saying that, I see no point you're trying to make proven.
Sure 40 vs 40 BG instances are fun as hell, but 200+ *WARS*? That's insanely fun. You can't imagine that. I can ignore the lag to fight 200 fucking people. THAT'S JUST SHEER EPIC.
Yes dammit, I want my cake and I want to eat it too! And why shouldn't I? Blizzard needs to get with the times, they haven't updated their hardware in a LONG time (for PC standards) and they really should at some point... y'know, before another expansion or something big?