Breakfast Topic: Have rated battlegrounds met your expectations?
by Aiden James Kosciesza 
Mar 8th 2011 at 8:00AM
When Blizzard announced the concept of rated battlegrounds, many players, including myself, were ecstatic. Only my old vanilla main has a PvP title, and I'd always wanted to try getting one on my druid. I imagined that we would queue for battlegrounds as usual, but that our ranking on the ending scoreboard would combine with our personal win/loss ratio to create our personal battleground rating. Over time, players would be separated by rating and would wind up in battlegrounds with others of similar skill. The way I imagined it, forming premade groups would be an advantage, but not a necessity for rated play.
Needless to say, that's not how things turned out.
I understand the reason why Blizzard requires full premade groups for rated battlegrounds, and I can see how very good players could wind up with a less than stellar personal rating due to unlucky battleground groups. Still, it's not what I had envisioned, and the fact that my favorite large battlegrounds like Alterac Valley and Isle of Conquest are not represented is disappointing. Blizzard recently announced that it's eliminating the 15v15 bracket, making all rated battlegrounds 10v10, which might help groups that are scrambling to find enough players -- but will (at least for the moment) exacerbate the problem of battleground diversity. Blizzard plans to adapt other maps for the 10v10 bracket, but for now, the available rated battleground scenarios are much less numerous than normal, unrated battleground options.
Have you tried rated battlegrounds? Were they everything you'd hoped for? What do you think Blizzard could do to improve the system ... or do you like it just the way it is?
Filed under: Breakfast Topics, Guest Posts
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 5)
Firestyle Mar 8th 2011 8:09AM
I think part of the appear of battlegrounds since inception is the lack of planning required. That being said, rated BGs adds a planning factor along with rating for greater rewards. I haven't seen any guilds functionally form on my server for the purpose of rated BGs - the same gear is available from arena matches, which takes less time to organize and less time to execute.
Also, while waiting for raid members to show up last night, we decided to do a few BGs together. Lo and behold, 8 people can't queue for anything - even 40 man BGs......so that spoiled our fun.
All in all, I'd like to try them, but can't give up raid time to do it.
Chris Mar 8th 2011 9:37AM
I think the OP nailed it - having the same conquest points (and therefore same gear) come from arenas is the problem. Motivation in wow is carrot/stick - and whipping out 5 2v2 matches is much easier and faster to organize.
Firestyle Mar 8th 2011 9:41AM
Yes, it's a problem of motivation. In all honesty, it's that arena points are too easily earned. I can't think of an easier way to get epics in this game right now than arena.
Hensonite Mar 8th 2011 9:48AM
To me, it's just the other way around. I hated the egotistic and chaotic behaviour of most bg-puggers. Finally, there's an incentive for good PVPers to organize and play a bg.
Elmouth Mar 8th 2011 10:51AM
Rated BGs are one of the biggest disapointment I had in cataclysm.
They were first introduced as something people could queue up for on their own as a means to avoid having to go trough the painful process of arena in order to get decent PvP loot.
In the end, it only became another arena, only this time you needed a team of 10+ people to even have a shot at queuing up, a total joke.
loop_not_defined Mar 8th 2011 11:40AM
Elmouth: "They were first introduced as something people could queue up for on their own as a means to avoid having to go trough the painful process of arena in order to get decent PvP loot."
Normal Battlegrounds already accomplishes this goal.
Netherscourge Mar 8th 2011 12:31PM
@loop_not_defined
No they don't. Regular BG's don't reward you anything but EXP points and Honor Points.
If they added Arena Points and a rating system for Regular Battlegrounds, I guarantee you more people would take them seriously and more people would be queuing to do them.
Rated BG's are nothing but big Arena Teams. Nothing more, nothing less - and nothing worth wasting our time on.
loop_not_defined Mar 8th 2011 12:47PM
Netherscourge, yes, they do. You asked for "decent" PVP loot. Honor Points purchases "decent" PVP loot. Conquest Points purchases "the best" PVP loot. You literally cannot argue that decent PVP loot is only obtainable through Arena/Rated Battlegrounds without killing the english language.
Even then, Normal Battlegrounds still reward you with Conquest Points, only at a much slower rate. Personally, I feel the daily Normal Battleground reward is laughable, but I would argue that Blizzard needs to up the daily reward.
Alysandir Mar 8th 2011 1:20PM
@Elmouth: This. There are people who like the randomness and chaos of BGs, as well as the instant gratification of saying "Hey, I've only got 40 minutes, but I'd like to squeeze some playtime in." But rated BGs really are just large scale arenas. And to make matters worse, those folks who do convince enough people to dip their toes in the water and try it out typically get a bloody nose from the first Vent-enabled premade that comes in and roflstomps them in oblivion for no tangible reward. Instead, why not make a minimum iLevel or resilience level be the gateway to whether you can get in, and allow folks to queue up like they would for a regular BG?
Firestyle Mar 8th 2011 2:01PM
I like the idea of separating players in pvp. It's much like separating normal and hardmode raiding. I'm not sure resilience levels is the way to do it, since people would game the number to get into a lower bracket (here's looking at you former twinks).
Sally Bowls Mar 9th 2011 12:00PM
exactly "I think part of the appeal of battlegrounds since inception is the lack of planning required."
When I want scheduling conflicts, attendance issues, group class makeup and who goes/who doesn't drama, I raid.
They took away the best thing about BGs - let me go queue and do something before I have to raid/loggoff in 40 minutes.
Obviously, nothing was poorer designed than Tol Barad, but rBG are certainly a disappointment.
Roguesan Mar 8th 2011 8:16AM
I, like you, was personally a bit disappointed with the way rated battlegrounds turned out. Being a late entry to WoW, coming in shortly after Wrath dropped, I never had the opportunity to earn one of the battleground PvP titles. I was overjoyed when I heard they were coming back, but the system we've been handed has rained on my parade to say the least.
I concur with your assessment that allowing rating to be affected by any old random battleground could cannonball the rating of good players, but I suggest that there would be ways to mitigate this. Have the rating stem from your actions in the battleground, rather than from the win/loss. You cap a flag? Points. You kill 20 players in a row without dying? Points (possibly with streak multiplier..) And so on.
Because of the 15 man, 10 man requirement you either have to rely on a guild group - very difficult when you're in a small guild, like the one I keep most of my alts in for social reasons - or you have to PuG. Tried Pugging for one of those? We run into the PvP equivalent of "Link ach for inv" - "What's your rating?". If you have a low rating, through not having managed to build one up, or worse yet have not managed to compete at all yet, then good luck to you - it's not going to be easy.
Simply put, if you're not in a large guild or one that is oriented toward PvP, then many people will find this section of the game locked to them. Far more so, I would argue, than with raiding.
CrossEyed Mar 8th 2011 8:45AM
My issue with these ways to get personal ratings from PUGs (flag caps, # of kills, etc) is that in proper run BG's, one player may have been the most valuable player on the map and not use any of your "requirements" to get any points. These types of incentives discourage playing defense (you get more kills on offense rather than standing by this graveyard for 3 min while it caps) you get fights over who carries the flag, who gets to "assault" a base, etc. Having personal rating come from things YOU did in the BG overall discourages team play, which is the OPPOSITE of what BG's are about and what they need.
I've not gotten to play many Rated BG's myself because I find it hard to find groups, I hate that... but the alternative, while nice on the surface, when you break it down goes against the BG grain... I like how it is now, there is accountability within the group (you screw up, the group knows, and won't invite you back for another BG) and you get just as much credit for the win standing guard at Fel Reaver as the guy who captured 14 flags.. which in a good BG group both jobs are equally important.
CrossEyed Mar 8th 2011 8:51AM
For anyone not following my previous post, let me give an example:
I have a REALLY nice GFX Card, so in BG's like EoTS and AB, I can stand at a node playing defense and see pretty much every node ( given terrain issues like AB, its hard to see enemy players at the mines when you're at the lumber mill). But I can stand here at my one node playing D and never have an enemy player come attack... Throw this in with my ability to see basically the entire field and I can call out enemy movement to my team. I may just be the MVP of my team for my contribution, but the game would barely be able to determine the diff between me and a bot.
The gray areas are why the system exists as it does today.
Netherscourge Mar 8th 2011 9:11AM
Blizzard screwed up, IMO.
They should have been done exactly like the Dungeon Finder Groups - YOu queue up for a Rated Battleground, either a specific one or a random one and let the "Rated Battleground Finder" put you into a group automatically -OR- you can join as a group with a pre-made team.
Instead, Blizzard made it so you HAVE to start a pre-made group BEFORE you enter a Rated Battleground, and thus, ruined what could have been some good Battlegroudn action.
It sucks now. It's too small too - boring 10v10 or 15v15 or whatever stupid garbage Blizard dreamed up.
------Let us run AV as a Rated Battleground with randomly created 40 v. 40 teams-----
Otherwise, GTFO off my monitor because it's just another wasted idea by Blizzard to shrink the idea of a "Massively" Multiplayer game.
/rant over
loop_not_defined Mar 8th 2011 9:51AM
Netherscourge, the purpose of Rated BGs was to provide an entirely new approach to BGs, one that would almost require working together and strategizing....much like Raiding.
What you're asking for is just Battlegrounds 2.0. It functionally wouldn't be any different and would instead reward Conquest Points.
Tell me...if Rated BGs were exactly like BGs, except with better rewards, then who do you think would queue for normal BGs? Absolutely nobody. Blizzard would then be left with the decision of scrapping Rated BGs entirely.
CrossEyed Mar 8th 2011 10:30AM
Tell me...if Rated BGs were exactly like BGs, except with better rewards, then who do you think would queue for normal BGs? Absolutely nobody. Blizzard would then be left with the decision of scrapping Rated BGs entirely.
^This.
Tomatketchup Mar 8th 2011 10:37AM
I have to agree with loop_not_defined. Netherscourge, isn't what you said the exact same thing as the Battleground Finder we've got now - except it's conquest points?
Sky Mar 8th 2011 1:42PM
I should be able to pug rated BG's cause I pay 15 dollars a month and want my conquest points to buy epics. I don't wanna put the effort to find a group and practice with them cause I pay 15 dollars a month and I want my points. herp a derp.
fionaholder Mar 8th 2011 8:22AM
I was very disappointed as I have always casually played battlegrounds and saw them as a method of getting some recognition for doing well. I know it is not really straightforward to work out who has done well in a battleground, but it should be possible to hash together killing blows/damage/heals/objectives into some kind of score and award people conquest points and rating accordingly, say for the top 25% of participants.
Maybe that could sit alongside the fully arranged rated BGs, and the proper ones would award significantly more rating and points, but us casual BG players would still get a few conquest here and there.
I am GM of a good raiding guild, that rarely does PvP and we would really struggle to find 10 people on a non-raiding night. A few of us do arena and are passionate about PvP and it is frustrating to be locked out of the content in this way.