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 6 of 6)
Jawbone Dec 26th 2010 4:36AM
I just had the 'pleasure' of visiting Fail Barad for the first time. The criticisms in this article are dead on. (I've been talking to most of the Horde WG veterans and majority hate the white 'failephant' that is TB).
This is coming from someone that has read and understood Sun Tzu's Art of War and Machiavelli's Prince.
I've played easily 300+ WinterGrasps on various toons and given that Ghostlands US owns it 71.0% that makes 213+ wins.
Lol Barad in comparison is a crock of horseshit.
Heck simplest modification that Blizzard could make is 2 buildings need to be controlled. Requiring the capture of all 3 with the defender's GY in the middle is utterly ridiculous.
In the mean time, servers will need to have teams ready to win just after server reset so that their side can keep the zone owned for a week, even tenacity + the balancing mechanics of WinterGrasp meant that Alliance on Ghostlands managed to capture WG about 1 out of 8.5 battles (or just under once a day).
Here all the defending side has to do is zerg between 2 nodes - it is mathematically unlikely that attackers have a chance to win, and if you figure in afker-honor leeches, and the confusion caused by noobs who haven't read up on the battle... yeah whomever thought this 'balancing' act up is an idiot.
Comito Dec 18th 2010 9:39PM
Just did Tol Barad for the first time as a defender, and won, reading this afterwards has shown me the flaws for the attacker! But I thought base capturing wasn't based on the number of players situated at the capturing bases, but based on the number of players kill of the defending team!
Though a flaw in that idea would be defender having the base, and having no players defending that spot with the attacking faction not being able to kill, and take over the base. Only way around this would be spawning defenders not at the centre of the map, but at the bases randomly.....but that'll make zerg defenses a little hard to regroup.....until they have one base....
Deleuze Dec 18th 2010 10:44PM
I play on Terenas EU, a server with Horde minority. I am a Horde player.
Before tenacity was removed, we hardly ever won WG. As someone mentioned earlier, the ability to hit harder doesn't help with snares, mind control etc. Tenacity simply wasn't working as intended. The moment it was removed and we got into 1:1 battles, we started winning. It's almost as if the opposite faction didn't know how to fight when they're not outnumbering us 3:1.
The first time I joined Tol Barad we were on the attacking team and we won. Sure, now we defend it more often then attack, but the 4 times (out of 15) I joined TB and attacked, we won every single time. I honestly don't know how to explain it. Possibly the months upon months of getting our outnumbered asses kicked in WG taught us to communicate. And report, re-position, adjust, give up on points not worth defending, and generally stay alert. I think that's the key.
As someone's said before - Cata seems to be about cooperation. A well coordinated 10 man team will roll over a chaotic 20-man, just like a pre-made will roll over a random group.
As for the "difficult" dailies: why not group up? I'm a clothie (and got stuck in the D-Block once. Did you know they lock the doors 15 minutes before the battle? anyway) I *always* team up for the harder dailies. In fact, the first question asked, still in the raid channel, after we win is "who's up for Problim"?
TLDR: Yeah, Tol Barad probably needs some changes. But you can still win it if you play smart, communicate and cooperate.
Peter Akesson Dec 19th 2010 5:39AM
You're actually wrong about the capture mechanics, if you kill someone close to a flag, the capture meter moves in favour to you. So if you have a group of 10 really good people against 40 noobs they have no chance of taking the point.
Augustulus219 Dec 20th 2010 6:13PM
Tol Barad is beautiful in design, but entirely uncreative in its mechanics. In Wintergrasp, there were far more actions that needed to be executed at any given time (ex: on defense, defending southern towers, defending the train, sieging the keep, defending workshops), but in Tol Barad, its: Move. Kill. Capture. Move. Kill. Capture. It's basically Arathi Basin on crack, in a very bad way.
iceveiled Dec 20th 2010 5:53PM
Let the BG be the BG for people who are into that, and let both factions do the content that is normally reserved for the winner.
On realms like mine, where the horde outpopulate and out talent the PVP spectrum, it's frustrating to rarely have an opportunity to reap the rewards of winning the scenario.
Chris Dec 30th 2010 9:43AM
What do you think of changing the cap mechanic for the defenders. Make the defending team clear the area within the walls for say 20 seconds before the meter begins to move their way. Keep the attackers cap mechanic the same. This would make it easier for the attacking team to force defenders into a "last stand" defense at 1 keep and severely limit their ability to just zerg defend.
digitalwindow Dec 22nd 2010 6:10AM
I haven't actually done this BG yet but I feel that capturing the towers should also add time to the defenders respawn time. This would, if balanced correctly make tower defence essential for the defenders because if left unchecked you could end up with a lot of the defending team waiting for a respawn instead of zerg defending a tower.
Minutia Dec 24th 2010 11:18AM
How about instead of selling us wonderful new broken boards, fixing the boards that were never fixed from the last expansion.
Clbull Dec 27th 2010 6:21PM
Or better yet.
Remove Tol'Barad altogether and improve the Honor rewards from Random Battlegrounds or give Honor rewards for doing Rated Battlegrounds.
kingerz Dec 30th 2010 9:18AM
I was bored with TB even on the first lot of routine and derivative, dreary dailies...How can you say 'the daily hubs associated with the content are the best Blizzard has done yet'???
Overall the whole zone is drab and a pale reminder of WG. I do agree with your suggested changes overall though, currently it's hideously broken.
Lhyon Jan 5th 2011 11:51AM
Frankly, I could care less about who wins and who loses TB. My problem is that the victory conditions are unrealistic. As mentioned in this article, no amount of tactical skill can *realistically* counter the very simple Circle Zerg strat, which requires almost no advanced coordination and is easily doable with your average pug.
My favored idea for changing TB is this - the attackers win if they get 3 bases at once OR if they control 2 of 3 bases when the time runs out.
I understand this may make the towers work in a bit of an odd fashion... thus I would also suggest that the defense starts off with a small buff that goes away after, say, the initial duration of the battle.
This would give the defense a strong incentive to protect the towers - the shorter the battle, the more of an overall advantage they have. However, they'd also have to manage not to overcommit to the towers, or the attackers could swoop in and snatch up territory under their collective noses.
Of course, I don't do this for a living. I'm sure that Blizz has something good up their sleeve.
Meadowfish Jan 31st 2011 11:18AM
I used to agree with the viewpoints expressed in this article, until I learned how to attack Tol Barad.
The trick is to BREAK the endless going in circles cycle. Split your offensive group and meet that circle zerg which, as you pointed out, is extremely predictable, wipe it and you've suddenly got a big advantage.
Horde has held Tol Barad for all but a handful of battles for the past week on my realm, but we -have- lost it on a few occasions. Even so, we have managed to take it more or less straight back. This is possible because our horde has learned how to attack Tol Barad. Let the D lead you in circles all battle and you won't win.
I for one am sad the BG is being changed because people couldn't comprehend the mechanics of winning on attack.