Vault_News
Title: 0110011010
Be Nice to Me I'm a Bot
Posts:
43,785
Registered:
Oct 18, '05
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 42,467
User ID: 1,086,234
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
Bashiok posted:
In patch 4.1 the amount of Conquest earned for both Arenas and Rated Battlegrounds has been changed to a flat amount regardless of team rating, to 135 and 335 respectively. This change should of course have been in the patch 4.1 notes, but due to a fairly straight forward error, was not included.
The current reward now in 4.1 for winning an Arena match is 135 Conquest Points, and for Rated Battlegrounds it's 335 Conquest Points. We're currently evaluating these amounts as we believe they are potentially lower than they need to be, and we'll of course let you know if they need to be changed.
Posted from WoW Vault
-----signature-----
(none)
|
|
Link to this post
|
Deionnara
Posts:
9,463
Registered:
Dec 28, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 9,321
User ID: 580,237
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
Why I don't even ....
-----signature-----
http://www.wowarmory.com/character-sheet.xml?r=Stormreaver&n=Nadja People climbing up the walls Breaking all of my wretched dolls Fingernails they scratch outside In the attic is where I'll hide
|
|
Link to this post
|
Arcilite_I
Title: VN's Most Wanted
Posts:
34,414
Registered:
Jan 27, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 33,674
User ID: 633,598
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
|
lol is really all I can say to this
-----signature-----
PvPing since 1977
|
|
Link to this post
|
Demorak
Posts:
6,097
Registered:
Jan 16, '09
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 5,924
User ID: 1,344,935
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
-----signature-----
"A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer."
|
|
Link to this post
|
Spookysheep
Title: Lieker of Cheese
Posts:
21,595
Registered:
Jan 9, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 21,166
User ID: 601,475
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
Arcilite_I posted:
lol is really all I can say to this
^
-----signature-----
I liek cheese
Pirates > Ninjas
.....................................
|
|
Link to this post
|
Ugh_Lancelot
Title: Ooo...bouncy!
Posts:
5,492
Registered:
Jun 17, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 5,446
User ID: 689,383
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
Considering the latest patch notes, someone needs to stamp the word "homogenize" into the face of a 2-pound (0.90718474kg for you base-10 weenies) maul and go beat them in the forehead with it until they realize what it means.
[edit] lols aside, what were the previous values assuming, say, an 1800ish rated team?
-----signature-----
WoW and DAoC - Too many alts to count
Charter Member - Altaholics Anonymous
|
|
Link to this post
|
TruthyID
Posts:
365
Registered:
Jul 7, '10
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 365
User ID: 1,397,686
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
Used to be 5 wins/week to get capped. Now, depending on your rating, it can be upwards of 20 wins/week.
Just another way to discourage casuals from playing by increasing the time commitment.
-----signature-----
(none)
|
|
Link to this post
|
Azure-TheBlueOne
Title: Made in Alaska
Posts:
7,936
Registered:
Feb 24, '03
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 7,754
User ID: 773,760
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
TruthyID posted:
Used to be 5 wins/week to get capped. Now, depending on your rating , it can be upwards of 20 wins/week.
I'm confused, the change says it's disregarding rating entirely... 
I also didn't get the 'homogenize' maul bit, but then I haven't really been keeping up with WoW patch notes lately.
-----signature-----
"When the government scares people into thinking it must take their liberties away, and the people let the Government do it. They are sheep." - Judge Andrew Napolitano http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php
|
|
Link to this post
|
TruthyID
Posts:
365
Registered:
Jul 7, '10
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 365
User ID: 1,397,686
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
Azure-TheBlueOne posted:
TruthyID posted:
Used to be 5 wins/week to get capped. Now, depending on your rating , it can be upwards of 20 wins/week.
I'm confused, the change says it's disregarding rating entirely...
I also didn't get the 'homogenize' maul bit, but then I haven't really been keeping up with WoW patch notes lately.
Right, you get a flat rate for a win, but the amount of conquest points you can get in a week is tied to your personal rating.
From http://us.battle.net/wow/en/blog/2182385
Blue Post posted:
If you want to be able to earn more than 1,343 Conquest Points in a single week, then you'll need to increase your personal rating above 1,500 by participating in Rated Arenas or Rated Battlegrounds. Only your best personal rating counts, and as you improve and bring your rating over 1,500, your weekly point cap will rise as well -- and if you manage to achieve a very high rating, your weekly cap could approach 3,000. Here are some sample ratings and corresponding point caps:
Rating Weekly Points Cap
1500 1343
1800 1940
2100 2533
2400 2849
2700 2964
3000 3000
-----signature-----
(none)
|
|
Link to this post
|
Shenron_
Posts:
8,665
Registered:
Dec 8, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 6,513
User ID: 746,590
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
|
isn't this better for casuals? means people with higher rating need to play more games to get more points...sounds fair to me.
-----signature-----
(none)
|
|
Link to this post
|
TruthyID
Posts:
365
Registered:
Jul 7, '10
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 365
User ID: 1,397,686
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
Shenron_ posted:
isn't this better for casuals? means people with higher rating need to play more games to get more points...sounds fair to me.
How exactly is quadrupling the time required to cap points better for people with a limited amount of time to play?
-----signature-----
(none)
|
|
Link to this post
|
Ferrydust
Title: Iron Chef Jennifer
Posts:
10,588
Registered:
Sep 4, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 10,382
User ID: 711,372
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
As someone who JUST PVPs... this sucks. HOWEVER it was a needed change and imo should have been that way all along. There is no way I should have been gearing all of my alts this easily. (My main has been fully geared forever now)
Soooo I hate the change but it makes sense. The part that makes me mad though is that rated BG's give out more. They are hellbent on trying to make people do rated BG's. AZt the hours I play and on an rp server there is no way I could do rated BG's with any team.
-----signature-----
I, on the other hand, prefer a command-line system 'cause i'm so hardcore
/north /north *You encounter an [Avatar of the god Set]!*
/cast sheild *sheild spell unavailable*
/csat shield *csat: unknown command*
*[Avatar of Set] beheads [Peasant]*
|
|
Link to this post
|
GutterSludge
Posts:
4,620
Registered:
Nov 6, '05
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 4,545
User ID: 1,091,587
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
I still say if it requires you to make a "team", it's a BS system, and I would not participate no matter what the rewards were.
/shrug
-----signature-----
Guttersludge
People just can't handle the truth.
NeMeFieD said:"Yea I Ucmed for 12 days straight.."
njwCSUS posted:I'm homosexual, so really, its ongoing sexual attraction to my father, not my mother.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Shenron_
Posts:
8,665
Registered:
Dec 8, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 6,513
User ID: 746,590
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
TruthyID posted:
Shenron_ posted:
isn't this better for casuals? means people with higher rating need to play more games to get more points...sounds fair to me.
How exactly is quadrupling the time required to cap points better for people with a limited amount of time to play?
is the time required quadrupled for people with the lowest ranking/points cap as well? if its just for the higher ranked players, then its good for low ranked casuals since it means enemies won't be able to outgear them as quickly.
-----signature-----
(none)
|
|
Link to this post
|
Groooovechampion
Posts:
4,616
Registered:
Jun 30, '03
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 4,485
User ID: 818,115
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
sounds like a typical "disimprovement" 
Like a swing of that normalization bat. BAM!
-----signature-----
DaoC, WoW (retired, inactive); WAR (semi active), EVE (active) "Ye'know, com'on! Giimmeee di Ke$$$HHHHHH!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OADJl-CVDo0
|
|
Link to this post
|
Arcilite_I
Title: VN's Most Wanted
Posts:
34,414
Registered:
Jan 27, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 33,674
User ID: 633,598
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
It's called 'balance' you noobs and only Blizzard will ever attain it.
-----signature-----
PvPing since 1977
|
|
Link to this post
|
Demorak
Posts:
6,097
Registered:
Jan 16, '09
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 5,924
User ID: 1,344,935
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
Shenron_ posted:
TruthyID posted:
Shenron_ posted:
isn't this better for casuals? means people with higher rating need to play more games to get more points...sounds fair to me.
How exactly is quadrupling the time required to cap points better for people with a limited amount of time to play?
is the time required quadrupled for people with the lowest ranking/points cap as well? if its just for the higher ranked players, then its good for low ranked casuals since it means enemies won't be able to outgear them as quickly.
It is doubling the time necessary for the bottom of ranking players. It is now 10 games to reach the 1343 cap instead of 5.(Mind you, the old system use to be 10 games to get points anyway)
If you have a rating above 2400, you are now required to win 21+ games to reach the game. This is a tad more than double to reach cap.
Overall they are just doubling the amount of games needed to win per week to reach cap. This hurts everyone of course, some may see it as a good change due to how easy it was to gear out a character though.
Bottom barrel players now have to suck less to reach the cap if they need to win 10 games a week. Top ranking players now have more of a threat on losing rank, due to the need of playing many more games.
EDIT: This is more or less them patching it back to the old system for the amount of games needed to play, except with different currency.
-----signature-----
"A wise man can learn more from a foolish question than a fool can learn from a wise answer."
|
|
Link to this post
|
Voqar
Posts:
8,454
Registered:
Mar 12, '01
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 8,255
User ID: 73,152
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
GutterSludge posted:
I still say if it requires you to make a "team", it's a BS system, and I would not participate no matter what the rewards were.
/shrug
Yeah, who would ever want to do social things like group, guild, or team in a massively multiplayer game! Everything should be solo ez-mode like leveling and dailies - truly dazzling stuff that keeps your interest forever.
-----signature-----
Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that
- George Carlin
|
|
Link to this post
|
kyrv
Title: Lord Logicus
Posts:
14,420
Registered:
Jan 31, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 14,357
User ID: 639,081
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
Voqar posted:
GutterSludge posted:
I still say if it requires you to make a "team", it's a BS system, and I would not participate no matter what the rewards were.
/shrug
Yeah, who would ever want to do social things like group, guild, or team in a massively multiplayer game! Everything should be solo ez-mode like leveling and dailies - truly dazzling stuff that keeps your interest forever.
I think you are missing his point, your reply has nothing to do with his post.
Rather than getting rid of bots/AFKers, they are screwing the people further who don't have 5 to 9 other people that are on call for whenever they can get online and play.
It is great for those that can do rated BGs, there should be few to no bots/AFKers.
But the hard core/you best join a guild mentality is not how WoW made its onions originally.
-----signature-----
CO, LOTRO, RoM, PWI, CoH
Dragon Age
|
|
Link to this post
|
TruthyID
Posts:
365
Registered:
Jul 7, '10
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 365
User ID: 1,397,686
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
Shenron_ posted:
TruthyID posted:
Shenron_ posted:
isn't this better for casuals? means people with higher rating need to play more games to get more points...sounds fair to me.
How exactly is quadrupling the time required to cap points better for people with a limited amount of time to play?
is the time required quadrupled for people with the lowest ranking/points cap as well? if its just for the higher ranked players, then its good for low ranked casuals since it means enemies won't be able to outgear them as quickly.
Again, how do you figure this is an improvement over the previous system?
Under the previous system casuals could keep up because they could cap their points every week just like those with more time to invest, regardless of their skill level and rating. After the change they're actually more likely to be outgeared quickly since they may not be able to invest 10-20 hours a week every week to cap their points.
More and more I get the impression that Blizzard is giving people an ultimatum to either treat WoW like a part time job or gtfo.
-----signature-----
(none)
|
|
Link to this post
|
GutterSludge
Posts:
4,620
Registered:
Nov 6, '05
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 4,545
User ID: 1,091,587
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
Voqar posted:
GutterSludge posted:
I still say if it requires you to make a "team", it's a BS system, and I would not participate no matter what the rewards were.
/shrug
Yeah, who would ever want to do social things like group, guild, or team in a massively multiplayer game! Everything should be solo ez-mode like leveling and dailies - truly dazzling stuff that keeps your interest forever.
I don't require a group to go 1 on 4 when people attack our lowbie towns, yet that rewards nothing.
Whereas making a team and "wintrading"/pillar humping with your own faction gives you the best of the best.
I will not participate in such a bastardized system, and it has nothing to do with being "social".
Massively multiplayer means targets to me. It does not automatically mean "forced grouping" like so many lemmings such as yourself have come to believe.
-----signature-----
Guttersludge
People just can't handle the truth.
NeMeFieD said:"Yea I Ucmed for 12 days straight.."
njwCSUS posted:I'm homosexual, so really, its ongoing sexual attraction to my father, not my mother.
|
|
Link to this post
|
Arcilite_I
Title: VN's Most Wanted
Posts:
34,414
Registered:
Jan 27, '02
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 33,674
User ID: 633,598
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
GutterSludge posted:
Voqar posted:
GutterSludge posted:
I still say if it requires you to make a "team", it's a BS system, and I would not participate no matter what the rewards were.
/shrug
Yeah, who would ever want to do social things like group, guild, or team in a massively multiplayer game! Everything should be solo ez-mode like leveling and dailies - truly dazzling stuff that keeps your interest forever.
I don't require a group to go 1 on 4 when people attack our lowbie towns, yet that rewards nothing.
Whereas making a team and "wintrading"/pillar humping with your own faction gives you the best of the best.
I will not participate in such a bastardized system, and it has nothing to do with being "social".
Massively multiplayer means targets to me. It does not automatically mean "forced grouping" like so many lemmings such as yourself have come to believe.
-----signature-----
PvPing since 1977
|
|
Link to this post
|
Groooovechampion
Posts:
4,616
Registered:
Jun 30, '03
Extended Info (if available)
Real Post Cnt: 4,485
User ID: 818,115
|
Subject:
Arena and RBG Conquest Change
|
Good point(s). Another crappy example:
Ever since AV was all about bypassing pvp and rushing to "who kills boss npc"... ugh - I stop right here
And it was not even because of the player. Blizzard changed it, not the players. Just because it was more rewarding to do speed kills than actually do warcraft. 
-----signature-----
DaoC, WoW (retired, inactive); WAR (semi active), EVE (active) "Ye'know, com'on! Giimmeee di Ke$$$HHHHHH!" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OADJl-CVDo0
|
|
Link to this post
|
