Jan 11th 2011 10:22AM Short answer... yes, yes Cataclysm is a let down for me.
Just like the half way 5 more levels, rather than 10, the is half way expansion... more like a big patch, an Ahn'Qiraj patch.
So much seems rushed, hurried, and left undone. I look around the "expansion" with such promise but am sorely let down. Some quests are fine, some zone-parts are fine. The developers gave very little imagination to other areas of the game.
I can safely say that I saw this coming. Considering the very lackluster, very dull, elemental invasion designed to herald in the expansion, especially in comparison to the unbelievably awesome zombie invasion, I already knew that Cataclysm would be just as dull.
Jan 11th 2011 10:18AM I have to admit, I would wish for a better designed BG in mind.
A castle, a fortress, on a high hill. Defenders have to prevent the attackers scaling the walls, drop burning pitch, and fight out amongst the exterior to destroy siege engines. Defenders can control harpoon devices, not to mention casters and hunters can attack from the tops.
Attackers can lob rocks from stationary catapults, use siege engines to knock down the gates, and scale the walls. Sneaking in the back way through the crypts and catacombs beneath the fortress is an easy way to attack from the inside.
This is what Wintergrasp should have been.
Jan 11th 2011 10:11AM Right now, the defenders don't really need to sweat losing Lol Barad most of the time. All you need to do is hold all three bases.
The defenders, to ensure this, merely need to play round-robin by going from one base to the next, around and around, and just cap the next one in line. Keep this up and the attackers won't be able to hold all three at once.
The only time this becomes a problem is when there are more attackers than defenders, and on some faction imbalanced servers, this IS a problem.
Jan 11th 2011 10:04AM @wow
There is nothing wrong with win trading. This allows both factions an equal opportunity to work on the weekly raid boss in Lol Barad, not to mention the the dailies.
Now you can argue that the Blizzard developers aren't, ultimately, interested in designing for balance and equal opportunity, and I'm sure many people can point out examples to verify that claim. :)
Jan 10th 2011 4:25PM @coreycubed
Having one base by the end of game will net you nothing. Honor should be gained by how many towers are still up, or destroyed, and how many bases are held.
Honestly, there should be some great incentive for dominating factions to WANT to lose in order to win the BG back again. Extra rep, extra tokens, etc.
Jan 10th 2011 4:22PM Suppose I should add...
The defender has to prevent the attacker from having a minimum two bases at the end of game, in that, playing a game of round robin with bases will not allow for the attacker to win if the attacker cannot succeed with downing the towers and holding two bases.
What I'm curious about is how Blizzard plans to balance this BG with servers that have horribly imbalanced factions?
Jan 10th 2011 4:19PM An easy fix:
The attacker has to destroy both towers and merely hold onto a minimum two of the three bases to win.
The defender must hold all three bases to win.
Jan 4th 2011 1:55PM I actually find most of the 5 man dungeons in Cataclysm to be quite a bore. I especially love the hour long wait to get into a dungeon, that is the most riveting part. The four hour long 5 man heroics, mmm, gotta love that one. That kind of time is on scale with a raid. I'm still waiting for the fun to happen.
Dec 13th 2010 11:30AM I'm surprised, actually.
Dec 7th 2010 12:58PM /roll 100