Should Arena rankings be determined by class?

The poster goes on to suggest that rankings be based on the class, rather than overall Arena population. This means that the percentile used to determine end-of-season rewards will be applied on a per class basis, thereby granting all classes conceptually equal representation. Ghostcrawler gives the suggestion some merit, even going so far as to say Blizzard isn't "above iteration on the design" of the Arena system as evidenced by their proactive adjustments to it.
Ghostcrawler mentions that their primary concern is how players would feel under such a system, as players who play an underrepresented class would then get the advantage under these circumstances. In essence, he fears that "grading on a curve" can potentially award lower rated players undeserved rewards simply based on the class they play. The bigger concern that I see that shifting towards this system takes the responsibility off the developers to perfect class balance.
Let's face it, the classes will never be truly balanced. But that doesn't mean Blizzard should be content with one or two classes completely dominating the environment. They've shown that they're committed to toning classes down if needed (even if it sometimes takes a long time -- sometimes an entire season too long), and constantly issue hotfixes and patches that address this imbalance. Shifting to a class-biased rating system takes much of that responsibility away and promotes complacency not just on the part of Blizzard but on players, reinforcing the idea that some classes are simply better than others and discouraging true effort.
I find it important to point out that Hunters have traditionally suffered low representation from Season 1 through 4, something many players -- including myself -- blamed on the Arena format itself. The Hunter class simply didn't lend itself well to close quarter environments. Blizzard proved me wrong, however, and made several adjustments that allowed Hunters to compete in the Arena format. The result? Season 5 saw Hunter dominance to the point where Blizzard found it necessary to tone the class down.
My point is that even though the suggestion makes sense on paper, it will create all sorts of problems for the game. It's not just class representation that needs to be focused on but even specs. Blizzard has long stated their intention to make virtually all specs PvP (or Arena) viable. Does that merit a spec-biased rating system, then? No, of course not. Striving for class balance under the current Arena system -- the friendliest and most accessible it's ever been -- is what's key, not a retuning of the system to cater to underrepresented classes.
Composition is an even more significant issue than mere class balance, which can be looked at in a vacuum. Blind was made to share diminishing returns with Fear effects to tone down the dominance of Priest (Psychic Scream) and Rogue compositions, while opening up Cyclone and Blind to work together again. These little things work towards promoting composition balance, and is an encouraging sign that Blizzard is paying attention. Working towards class balance is the best scenario here, not developing a system that concedes to the imbalance.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, PvP, Forums, Arena






Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
Agrona May 28th 2009 5:05PM
What does the gay rights flag have to do with arena?
Remen May 28th 2009 5:07PM
Shhh.... It's Zach's little secret, there are subtle hints everywhere.
Agerath May 28th 2009 5:08PM
Belf male pala/belf male DK comps, maybe?
karoneya May 28th 2009 5:20PM
Best picture ever!
kozom May 28th 2009 5:22PM
I think each colour on the flag represents a class.
e.g. druid are orange, warlocks are purple, etc.
but if this is true, ironically the paladins (class coloured as pink) are missing.
Erogroth May 28th 2009 5:24PM
I think he is saying that arenas are gay.
Utakata May 28th 2009 5:30PM
@ Kozom:
The original Pride flag had a pink stripe at the bottom. Not sure why it's not included now...but if the writer used the original flag, there's your Paladin.
inthemidst01 May 28th 2009 6:03PM
It's not a "gay flag" per se, but can be used to also denote "diversity" (as in the diversity of classes that should be represented in arenas).
Karilyn May 28th 2009 6:30PM
"The original Pride flag had a pink stripe at the bottom. Not sure why it's not included now..."
As the resident local dyke, I can answer that question for you!
Originally, the flag had eight colors... Pink plus the seven colors of the rainbow. However, there was difficulty in acquiring the pink color in the type of cloth used for flags, and thus pink was removed.
After that, the flag only had the seven colors of the rainbow. However, it came to the attention very quickly, that when hung vertically on a pole (as flags are sometimes hung), that the middle green stripe was obscured by the pole, and looked funny. Thus, they removed blue and indigo from the flag, and replaced it with a more moderate shade of blue.
And that's why we have the six color pride flag that we have to do!
The More You Know!
Keyra May 28th 2009 7:15PM
The rainbow flag was used to signify DIVERSITY, not homosexual liberation and pride, LONG before any association with it being a gay pride flag (we're talking centuries here). The first gay pride flag, as has already been pointed out, had a pink stripe in addition to the rainbow colors.
George May 28th 2009 7:57PM
Purple, meaning, Warlocks, at the bottom.
No surprises there.
Evi May 28th 2009 8:31PM
Karilyn: Thanks for the explanation. You learn something new every day. :)
Utakata May 28th 2009 9:54PM
Thanks for sharing that Karilyn. :)
Whitesides May 29th 2009 2:05PM
"What does the gay rights flag have to do with arena?"
included in an attempt to encourage certain wow.com reader's woefully misinformed replies in the comment box
K May 29th 2009 8:33AM
Could anyone explain, why it would be bad if people moved to play underrepresented classes to become a gladiator?
Wouldnt it make the underrepresented classes, oh I dunno, MORE REPRESENTED?
GC's logic is so broken it makes me weep.
Matazuma May 28th 2009 5:12PM
I like the suggestion alot it would be interesting to see it being implemented even if for just one season to see how the wow population would like it of hate.
Seem like a very fair compromise if you are rated by class.
Elffangs May 28th 2009 5:24PM
I would like to raise the slippery slope thalicy against this possibility, 2 months after the change, should it go live, is introduced people will be QQ about gear difference and they'll want gear rating affecting arena team scoring as well, then race due to racials and in the end making arenas worse then ever!!!!!!
Elffangs of fenris (currently unpaid, looking to get back into it)
Worcester May 28th 2009 5:20PM
It might bring me back into the arena.
Mr. Crow May 28th 2009 5:20PM
I wonder if it would be worthwhile to have an MVP-styled awards element. Especially in a team-oriented environment, having additional rewards for "Most Valuable Healer" or "Sixth Man" might help to elevate participation in Arenas and reward people who just do a great job playing the game, instead of just rewarding the victors.
tyler May 28th 2009 5:24PM
The system of Arena is broken, because it's still based on a PvE world. Until we see "PvP specs" in general, rather than a smattering of PvP and PvE talents, why not separate it out completely to break it off from the greater PvE WoW? I've seen nerf after nerf doled out to classes and races because their abilities are unbalanced in arenas, as it's gotten to a point of pure idiocy.
No matter how many subtle tweaks they make to both systems, they will never be balanced and equal and one or two classes will always be OP in arena, period. The only major changes will come when the charts are topped and the forums light up with "QQ n00b".
The only real way to fix this for good is to break them apart. Give us class PvP specs separate from PvE and remove racial bonuses from the arena in general. This way, things are balanced, and changes can be made to the "gladiator tree", keeping both systems apart and equal.
Now give me my stoneform back.