Thank You for Further Addressing the Faction Imbalance

[Harvy777]

Disabling world pvp until 70 would be better I think. When you reach 65 you must level in zones still populated with 70 and you are a sweet HK for them.

[Drayner]

The easiest way to fix all of this is....

Enable XP Lock :)

[Aryu]

I got triggered because it's one the most annoying things that i ever saw on this forum.

Oh come now, don't be so dramatic. Go take a peek in the off topic threads or some of the Icecrown ones and I promise you that you'll find more annoying things than what I said.

I mean, you wrote things as you were reading and when you reached the end

I'm not trying to deny that but thank you for mentioning it again, it makes your point strong and well received.

and realised you were writing bull****

I'm sorry, I beg to differ. What I was writing was not bull****. I quoted you and acknowledged you were right at the end. I don't consider what you posted bull**** nor do I consider what I mentioned bull**** either. It was legit attempt to get people (other than you) to stop bashing the forum moderators who you yourself are aware don't have much control over things outside the forums.

you didn't even delete it, but went and posted the entire thing. I'm not saying this bcs it was directed at me, but bcs it's dumb as **** and you shouldn't do it to anyone, not just me.

You're not wrong, I could've and should've deleted. After a long afternoon of not liking what I was seeing in response to community members I stepped up and spoke up, same as you. Just because we do it differently doesn't make it dumb as ****. I'll do it to whoever I please thank you very much but since you went full sensitive snowflake on me I'll make sure I don't do it to you again since you clearly didn't handle it very well.

I know people like writing bull**** on net, but what you wrote was on a whole different level. I suggest you re-read what you actually wrote.

Yes, yes they do. I can't tell you how much it pleases me that you feel what I wrote was on a different level, that's exactly what I was aiming for and you couldn't possibly pay me a greater compliment. I'm not afraid to speak out when I feel forum moderators are being unfairly treated for something that's a problem for other teams in the staff. I normally do re-read but something about that end of day/work is almost over on the clock just instilled the worst kind of laziness in myself :D

[joejam116111]

What about some type of honor boost for alliance? Maybe like a 25-30% honor boost, or altering a baseline honor gain for losing an imbalanced BG? That may attract more PVPers to alliance. Could maybe do something similar with heroic badges- like an extra one off the last boss or a rep gain bonus? Also- Implementing EMFH would suck but it might be the only thing that could move the needle in a short amount of time.

[Waytodawn]

Disabling world pvp until 70 would be better I think. When you reach 65 you must level in zones still populated with 70 and you are a sweet HK for them.

I thought of 65 because from then on you are worth honor and thus fair game. Despite that you can still level by doing dungeons and at 65 you have enough options in outland to easily reach 70 and grind rep doing that. (Instance leveling is quite fast on a new server with lots of open world pvp and people contesting quests anyways)

(P.S: I didn't find a ways to implement a poll in my post if there is you could just tell me.)

[Obnoxious]

(P.S: I didn't find a ways to implement a poll in my post if there is you could just tell me.)

There isn't one for regular users, it's disabled from open access, exactly because we reserve ourselves the right to have poll when we find it necessary and only then.

[vnmb13]

Thank god they did their job

[cluelessoranges]

racials are the deciding factor for many people on private servers, in TBC if you wanna pve or pvp horde are just better, doesnt matter by how much or little, the fact is they are in general better, so hardcore pvp and pve players roll horde, all the streamers and content creators roll horde, and then all the random members who don't know what to roll, go horde because they see posts/guides/streamers they know all going horde, all of this spawning 100% from racials.

if racials were gone outside of the priest racial abilities and pally then it would be about flavour and not much more and would be far more balanced.

i mean imagine someone offers you 10$ or euro or whatever, and in the other hand they offer you 15$, both are good choices and both you would be better off, but one choice leaves you better off than the other, of course most people will pick that choice.

racials are literally offering advantages to one faction in both main areas of the game over the other, so most people pick it

completely agree with you

[aiyai]

I hope administration realises, that some people won't roll alliance no matter what you do. If they have, let's say 20 friends playing horde, and 0 playing alliance, they just won't play here till they can create horde character. In my opinion blocking them from creating a horde character is a bad thing that will stop them from playing altogether, or will make them go to other server. Far better thing to do, would be to cap horde population at 7500.
Let me give few examples why that is better:
1) no more faction imbalance, alliance players will be joining, and horde won't be increasing in numbers above half the cap, no matter how many people roll horde,
2) if people see that it's way harder to get in on horde site, they may just transfer to alliance even with whole guilds,
3) not touching anything like racials (making it funserver) which is a big turnoff for majority of people,
4) not influencing economy in any way by giving people free stuff.

To me this is the best solution right now.

[Obnoxious]

To summarize:

There are two car models was offered to you: ModelA (read: horde) and ModelB (read: alliance).
- It has been known for years that ModelA has soft leather heated seats (read: racials) but ModelB does not.
- ModelA has better support and services around you and you have no problem fining a group to ask for or go repair (read: healthy population and easy to find groups) where as ModelB does not have any.
- ModelA work fine and does not really breaks (read: getting camped in the wilds), but ModelB constantly breaks (read: camped and outnumbered in mostly all zones).

Now since you made obvious choice the government says (read: server officials) that it is your problem that ModelB manufacturer going bankrupt because they pick better option.

Yet again, no. To summarize in your terms, there are two equivalent cars that come in different color options. One of them has a turbo and nitro that 95-99% of the drivers will never use, but it's spread left and right that the turbo and nitro are a must-have, just because "top drivers" said so. People buy into that, and the more people buy into that, more other people think that must be real, since so many people are doing it - none of them questioning "what is a turbo and nitro going to do for me, really?" On top of that, people from the "top driver choice" start to go around harassing anyone who preferred the other model, making it so many give in to peer-pressure and join the ever-growing herd.

[LoardPlayer]

Is it not that binary. For some people nitro matters, for other the guarantee and service is the most valuable.

However blaming customers on the fact that manifacturer didn't do it howework whether it be car features, service centers or advertisement of one model after another never went well for the underrated model itself.

[LoardPlayer]

[I accidentially deleted my earlier post by trying to edit it from mobile, so trying to recreate it here]

To summarize:

There are two car models was offered to you: ModelA (read: horde) and ModelB (read: alliance).
- It has been known for years that ModelA has soft leather heated seats (read: racials) but ModelB does not.
- ModelA has better support and services around you and you have no problem fining a group to ask for or go repair (read: healthy population and easy to find groups) where as ModelB does not have any.
- ModelA work fine and does not really breaks (read: getting camped in the wilds), but ModelB constantly breaks (read: camped and outnumbered in mostly all zones).

Now since you made obvious choice the government says (read: server officials) that it is your problem that ModelB manufacturer going bankrupt because they pick better option.

Here is my take on the solution:
- Lets assume X is the number of online players on faction with higher population online last 5 minutes, and Y is the population of another faction (lower pop).
- We take balance ratio R = Log(X / Y) * 100, which will show how balanced the factions are and it is not linear (so it more punishes when balance is way to off).
- Now apply this buff on the faction with highest population which is % of racial spell failure. For example:
1. ratio: 90:10 thus R = 95% thus chance of successfull cast [Will of the Forsaken] or [Berserking] is around 5% and 95% failure. Means that higher imbalance makes the uses of racials less reliable.
2. ratio 45:55 thus R = 8% thus chances that racials fail is fairly low.

Also you want to apply that R% to the reputation gains as well to the factions with lower numbers.

Good luck to warmane stuff in this hard fight to balance things.

[Rekt0rz]

They are FORCING ppl to play alliance, gg. I am ally player but this is funny and something you shouldnt do. You should first add factional QUEUE and then if that doesnt fix problem do something else. Closing reg for faction is worst thing you can do. So you basicly went for make ally or dont play?

[nakedman]

I'm a super simple person. Give me 1000 gold or free mount at 60 and 70 and I will switch in a second. give me stuff!

[Saynt614]

Well good thing I rolled two Horde characters when I did...

Either way I applaud them for trying to balance the server out