The problems with Tol Barad (and how to fix them)

There are six distinct problems with Tol Barad at the moment:
- Defending Tol Barad is too easy.
- The cap mechanics to secure capture points make it too easy to switch.
- The towers in Tol Barad that grant extra time to the attackers have no reason to be defended by the defending faction.
- Tol Barad's victory condition for the attacking faction has created a frustrating environment in light of the mechanics at play in the battleground.
- The graveyards are skewed in favor of the defenders.
- The losing side in Tol Barad receives no Tol Barad commendation for participating in the battle, while the winning team receives three.
The typical Tol Barad
Here's how Tol Barad usually goes when two full raids of players are pitted against each other on the island. The defending faction, which spawns in the middle of the island, moves to one of the three capture points as a group and waits. The attacking side moves to one of the capture points and begins to capture. Defenders are left at the capture point to guard against incoming enemies and to hold the point for the attacking faction. All three points must be held by the attacking faction to win Tol Barad.
As soon as another point is captured (and in most cases, beforehand), the defending team's zerg overruns the first cap point and, because of the way the cap mechanics work (more people = faster cap), switches the cap point almost instantly. The defending zerg then stays at this point until another point swaps in the attacker's favor. The cycle repeats, and after 30 minutes of running around in circles, the defenders have successfully defended Tol Barad.
Strategy should come into play in these battlegrounds and contested locations. Let's answer some common questions and rebuttals to Tol Barad first.
Why not just add more defense to each cap point? The problem is not the skill of the players or even the number of players on defense, but the cap mechanic. Each point can be capped by just having faction members present in the area, not the destruction of the forces there. The side with more forces around the flag begins to capture it. You could have 40 Alliance attacking 35 Horde on top of a capture point and the bar would immediately begin to move in the Alliance's favor. You do not need to vanquish your foes on the flag in order to begin to cap it, and the number of people you have on top of the flag makes the bar move faster with no upper limit.
What this results in is ultra-fast capping by a zerg of defenders against attackers who cannot even use their survivability to hold a point. It doesn't matter how good you are, because it's only a numbers game. Ten of the best Alliance soldiers will not be able to defend a point against 30 Horde grunts, even if those 10 Alliance soldiers were the best players on the server and could easily defeat their haphazard enemy. The instantly lose because of the cap mechanic.
The attackers can destroy the towers and get extra time. Extra time and nothing else. In Wintergrasp, the towers were powerful objectives because without them, the defending side lost a significant buff and the attackers lost their most precious resource, time. By lowering the amount of time they had to capture the fortress in Wintergrasp, defenders stood a better chance and made it harder for the attackers to win. The Wintergrasp towers changed the victory condition of the battle; what once was an easy, slow push to the relic chamber became a fast scramble to plow through the walls and win as soon as possible.
Conversely, Tol Barad's towers do nothing for anyone to change the victory condition of the battle. Adding time does not change the way to win -- you still have to capture all three points at once, while the zerg runs from point to point, recapturing in seconds what took minutes to achieve. Adding time does not hinder the defense in any way, unlike Wintergrasp, where the towers were powerful to both sides because they changed the victory conditions. Right now, there is no reason to defend the towers in Tol Barad.

Making Tol Barad harder to defend would go a long way toward allowing both sides access to the new content and dailies, as well as allowing the playerbase to devise new ways to win and succeed at the battleground. The problem has manifested itself as a way to surely win the fight and keep the defense, instead of making it possible for a skilled and strategy-oriented group to overcome the zerg defense. Strategy does not matter when the only factor that decides how a point is capped is the number of people in the area.
Broken capture mechanics
There are two problems with the cap mechanic in Tol Barad. First, you do not need to rid the area of enemies before the bar starts to move for your faction, and second, the deciding factor of how fast the bar moves scales with the number of people in the area. I understand why the first issue is present -- keeping respawn timers low means more time for players to jump into battle. The last thing someone wants to do is run into battle, die, and then have to wait 30 seconds for a rez. So let's leave the first point alone.
The second point is where the problem lies. Forty people bum-rushing a point results in 30 defenders having the point ripped from under them because they don't have the numbers in the area, despite being able to defend the area. And with the defending team respawning so close to every point on the map, it is hard to overcome the zerg even with a zerg of your own.
Wintergrasp had multiple entry points into the fortress and required people to be spread out, defending the walls of the fortress with an actual, physical barrier between the enemy and their prize inside the fortress walls. Tol Barad has no boundaries or walls -- every person is free to run from place to place, and no area is blocked away from the attackers or defenders.
The problem with the Tol Barad towers is that they do not change the victory condition for either side. Rather, they prolong a static victory condition that actually gets harder to accomplish the more time you are given. Wintergrasp's towers provided a buff to the attackers to help them fell the walls and were important to defend. If you destroyed the towers in Wintergrasp, a battle that was supposed to take a longer amount of time was suddenly cut short for the attackers, forcing them to change strategy as a result of their new victory condition.
The towers in Tol Barad need to change the victory condition for the attacking team in order to make them valuable to defend for the defending faction.
Victory conditions that never change
No matter how good the attacking faction is, the defending faction still only needs to hold one point in contest in order to successfully win Tol Barad. This means that a zerg defense can just run from point to point and steal a point out from under a capable and sizable offensive force just by numbers. As a result, Tol Barad rarely changes hands.
There needs to be a changing victory condition that allows the attacking faction to do something to break the defending faction's strategy and force a different approach. As of right now, there is nothing preventing the defending faction from turtling up in one place and never leaving or running from point to point as a group. It's not that this isn't a viable strategy -- it's just too hard to break. Wintergrasp had this strategy, but because of the size of the map and the many different entry points into the fortress, one large group would take too long to traverse from side to side, where a split force could take on many different fronts.
Tol Barad is much smaller than Wintergrasp, and as such, moving from place to place is much easier and takes less time. Therefore, the victory condition in place for such a small location coupled with the capping mechanics of numbers and not the presence of defenders means that the defense have a huge advantage -- an advantage that the attacking faction has no way to break.
Graveyards that favor the defenders
The original idea for the graveyards in Tol Barad is sound: The attacking force respawns close to the point they are trying to capture to give them an advantage in capturing. The travel time that the attackers save allows them to grab a few more ticks on the capture bar before reinforcements arrive. That works. The problem comes from the defending faction resurrecting in the middle of the map, an equal distance to any of the capture points. Instead of beating back the force that they had originally been fighting tooth and nail against, they'll find it easier to run the same distance to another capture point. There is little consequence to death for the defending faction.
Graveyard positions either need to be changed or spawn times changed to compensate the attacking faction for the defender's innate ability to get from one capture point to the other in the same amount of time it would take for them to refortify the point at which they died. It might not seem like a huge deal, but that proximity imbalances the entire fight, since death is so much more destructive for the attackers than the defenders.

In Wintergrasp, the winning side received three medallions for successfully winning, while the losing faction received one medallion for participating. This gave incentive for the losing faction to play, even if their faction was outnumbered and out-skilled -- you still gained something from playing.
Tol Barad gives three Tol Barad Commendations to the winners and none to the losers. The incentives are only the honor points gained, but the allure of Tol Barad are the unique rewards from spending those commendations at each faction's respective quartermasters. Why not give the losing side one commendation for playing in a contested zone that has specific rewards using those tokens?
How to change Tol Barad
Tol Barad needs to change, and here's how I propose to do it:
- Make the towers worthwhile by changing the victory condition associated with them. When all towers are up, the attacking side must capture all three points to win. When all towers are down, the attacking side must capture and hold two points when the timer runs out.
- By having the towers actually matter in the battle, you force the defending zerg to break up into groups to defend many positions and the attacking zerg to break up and capture different points, as their victory condition can change depending on where they put their forces.
- Change the capping mechanic to cap out at a certain number of people that can contribute to the sliding bar. For example, have the number of people who can contribute to capping be 20, so that overkill on that amount means that those people in excess of 20 are wasted by either side to cap. Instead, those forces would be better elsewhere on the battlefield. This also makes each capped spot more valuable, as they would not change hands as frequently.
- Give the winners of Tol Barad three Tol Barad Commendations and the losers one Tol Barad Commendation.
I love Tol Barad. The design is gorgeous, the lore is amazing, and the daily hubs associated with the content are the best Blizzard has done yet. The battle for Tol Barad itself is a mess and needs work, but it's far from unfixable, and I can't wait to see what Blizzard has in store for it.
World of Warcraft: Cataclysm has destroyed Azeroth as we know it; nothing is the same! In WoW Insider's Guide to Cataclysm, you can find out everything you need to know about WoW's third expansion, from leveling up a new goblin or worgen to breaking news and strategies on endgame play.





Reader Comments (Page 4 of 6)
dashrendar72 Dec 18th 2010 5:53PM
@Sadman71
You sir. aren't playing the same TB as the rest of us or your opposing faction goes to bed early or must leave most of their brain on auto pilot. TB is all about the defender circle jerk zerg and capping mechanics. TB is broke. That is all.
Blayze Dec 17th 2010 7:58PM
I can sum the problems with Tol Barad up in two lines from an actual conversation I had.
Person: Are we the attackers?
Me: You'd never have guessed it from all the defending we're doing.
Vercincor Dec 17th 2010 8:03PM
One way to make the towers worth defending would be to have them increase the time it takes for the Spirit Healer to rez the defenders. If the timer increased 5-10 seconds for every tower the attacker took down, it would force the defenders to actually defend them, or spend so long at the graveyard it would give the attackers time to capture more points.
Sleutel Dec 17th 2010 8:02PM
Yes. Yes. Yes. This times fifty hojillion.
I have no idea how a PvP zone this terribly designed made it onto the live realms. Two seconds of analysis should be able to tell anyone that it's an imbalanced nightmare.
xenothaulus Dec 17th 2010 8:12PM
I think the simplest way to fix it is make it like AB, so at the end of the timer whoever has the most buildings wins. Winners get 3 tokens and their dailies and raid, losers get 1 token and have to leave. To add some incentive to defend the towers, give an extra token if they're still standing at the end of the battle.
I don't know what to do about the player imbalance, other than to suggest it will fix itself as more people hit 85.
Pyromelter Dec 17th 2010 9:58PM
I like that idea. Make it a resource based type situation, instead of "capture every damn thing."
Lachdanan Dec 17th 2010 8:17PM
I agree with all of Mathew's propositions, and I would like to add one: have more battles.
Tenacity was certainly a broken mechanic (since you don't really fight as a group, but more as seperate little fights of no more than 3 or 4 people - which means that even though it helps balance the overall battle, the fights are very frustrating when you don't have it), but the new matching system makes it very hard to participate in a battle that only takes place every 2,5 hours if, like most people, you play between say 8 pm and midnight.
That wasn't a problem with Wintergrasp since the stakes were weekly things (quests, the Vault), but whenever I want to do my Tol Barad dailies, I can only do half of them since the Alliance always has Baradin Hold on my server.
Lemons Dec 17th 2010 8:25PM
Very interesting write-up. It sounds like Tol Barad is a huge step backward from Wintergrasp. Sadly, I think Blizzard didn't bother putting their usual amount of polish on Tol Barad and it really shows. In fact, I don't think they spent almost any time on the actual BG portion of the zone because it seems ridiculously unfinished.
Urufu Dec 17th 2010 9:02PM
My problem with tol Barad is the respawn times and aggro ranges of the mobs for some of the quests.
Cephas Dec 17th 2010 9:36PM
Tol Barad was a very late addition to the Beta and there wasn't much incentive to run it since they were giving everyone premades with awesome free gear. Most people probably ran it one or two times and didn't even really care who won. Plus, a lot of people were only really interested in testing leveling content, dungeons and raids and the people who actually cared about PvP were more concerned with class balance since it was very rough for most of the Beta and the new Battlegrounds. They did a few "PvP against the devs" events to try to drum up people to test it, but it really seemed mostly like they were interested in debugging the place to get it functional rather than polished, and their secondary goal seemed like figuring out some stuff about class balance. Getting the BG itself polished seemed pretty low on the list of priorities.
Even still, a lot of these issues were discovered and pointed out by players on the forums and elsewhere. The general sense I got from the Blues was that they were on top of it and everything was going to be fine. As a Beta tester, I wasn't too concerned about the issues because it was a Beta. A lot of stuff in Beta was unpolished but ended up getting improved by launch. I kind of assumed this would happen for Tol Barad and it's more than a little disappointing that it hasn't happened yet.
ScytheNoire Dec 17th 2010 10:16PM
Tol Barad is very broken, and some of your solutions are good, but the capture point one is not. A major problem is there just aren't enough people often to make it really fun. The even matching makes it broken in many ways. But the fact that defenders need to take one point while offense needs to take three is the major problem.
This was pointed out in Beta and Blizzard ignored it. They continue to ignore the problems. There are many threads about this on Blizzard's site and changes are needed, it's just taking them forever to do anything about it, considering these problems have existed from the Beta.
MrJackSauce Dec 17th 2010 10:21PM
[IDEA] Destroying the Towers:
When the attackers take down a tower, they capture points as if they are 2 people each instead of one. That way attackers get a distinct advantage by doing an objective (destroying the towers), whereas defenders wouldn't want attackers to have it twice as easy to capture so they would do anything to halt that.
JT Dec 17th 2010 11:06PM
Man, I'm sorry to hear so many people are having issues, but on my server (Ghostlands-US) if I queue up 15 mins beforehand, I pretty much get in every time.
I've seen it change hands multiple times in one day. If the attackers break the turtle and they have the other two bases, they'll cap it before the defenders can cap one of the other ones.
And finally, this is a video game, not first grade tee-ball. Losers shouldn't get rewarded for being bad. It's getting honor from losing BGs that makes people queue up and go "Let's just not do anything, faster honor lololol."
Let's give it more than 10 days before pulling out TEH SKAI IZ FALLNIG! posts.
Oriflame Dec 18th 2010 12:50AM
In a bg that most people report not changing hands 90% of the time, rewarding
people bullheaded enough to show up on the losing side seems like a good idea if you want to keep being able to get in most times you queue.
I haven't checked, but is ghostlands about 50/50 for the factions or are you just on the smaller faction? If you had to queue 10 times to get in once and then only had a 10% chance of winning (100 queues per 3 tokens is how that works out) I think your story would change.
JT Dec 18th 2010 1:31AM
I think Ghostlands is pretty close to 50/50. More Horde pvp than Alliance though.
Anecdotally though, (and that's all any reporting is at this point) I've seen it change hands WAY more than 10% of the time. I queued 3 times today and I'm pretty sure it changed hands at least two of those matches.
If I had a one in 10 shot of getting in, and a one in 10 shot of winning I probably wouldn't do the BG. But that hasn't been my experience, and I really do think it's too soon to be saying it's broken. I've had a lot of fun every time I've played it, and it's more interesting than just hopping up in demos and knocking down walls.
My main concern at this point is that seiges have too much HP to make it worth killing them, but I think that'll change as we approach higher gear levels.
Jawbone Dec 18th 2010 1:15PM
Ghostlands USA is 1.1Horde to 1 Ally ratio.
Given that we OWNED WinterGrasp 71.9% of the time out of 6270 battles (as of Dec02'10) since 4.0.3 messed up WG you pretty much HAD/HAVE to sign up 15 minutes early (or you don't get in).
Given that the same players that helped set up that dominance are likely now camping Tol Barad... I'd imagine the situation is the same (haven't been to TB yet).
By my estimate I've attended about 300+ or so of the WG battles on various toons. I loved WG, more so when it was 200 vs 150 or 120 v 120, these days its a pitiful 5v5.
Blizzard, don't listen to the numbnut QQers - bring back tenacity, first 20 players get in for free, thereafter let people queue at a 3:2 ratio with tenacity rules in effect.
Jawbone Dec 18th 2010 1:17PM
Given that we OWNED WinterGrasp 71.9% of the time out of 6270 battles (as of Dec02'10) since 4.0.3 messed up WG you pretty much HAD/HAVE to sign up 15 minutes early (or you don't get in).
Given that the same players that helped set up that dominance are likely now camping Tol Barad... I'd imagine the situation is the same (haven't been to TB yet).
By my estimate I've attended about 300+ or so of the WG battles on various toons. I loved WG, more so when it was 200 vs 150 or 120 v 120, these days its a pitiful 5v5.
Blizzard, don't listen to the numbnut QQers - bring back tenacity, first 20 players get in for free,
gewalt Dec 17th 2010 11:16PM
Every time a tower is destroyed, the attackers should be allowed to have more people. 50% more for each tower. multiplicative.
defense should be significantly harder than offense. (on well balanced servers, wg changed hands almost every battle. and that was good.)
Aynie Dec 17th 2010 11:24PM
Yes, TB is obviously broken, but... there's one major difference between WoW zerg and the original Starcraft race the term originates from - there's no hivemind. So typical Tol Barad looks more like this: 30-40% of defending zerg behaves like you described, running together from point to point, and the rest part is chaotically scattered across the battlefield, fighting on the roads, calling each other noobs in raidchat, alt-tabbing, honor leeching etc etc. WoW zerg is incapable of any basic teamwork, so 10 well-coordinated people have little to no problems in capturing tree points.
Leviathon Dec 18th 2010 12:01AM
Tol Barad had so much potential if they just took Wintergrasp and fixed the issues that it had. Don't want vehicles? Alright then have people bust down the walls in other ways and still have it be a fortress type battle. Now it's just a bad version of world PvP.