We are a PVP only guild.
We do PVP/BGs every day.
+1 for opening Rated BGs btw. Although i would also like to see some of the non working BGs fixed.
-
Member
-
Member
I don't see how I could be wrong. All the serious PvPers have to do random bg's when they see conquest capped or don't have enough players to organize world PvP. This causes random bg's to be flooded with premades. Now casuals going into them with crafted PvP gear or PvE gear trying to get some honor just end up getting graveyard. They get demoralized, come to forums, cry about horde never winning bg's, we then turn it into a cancer thread, and then the op just thinks, **** it I'll just transfer. Seen it many times in the previous months. And if you can't understand it then I pity your naivety.
They are mainly a PvE guild with a few people that form a premade occasionally:P
-
Member
I was in that guild because a friend asked me to join. I never did any bg's with the guild itself. They do pve only. I left it a couple of weeks ago and made a new one with another person just because we needed bankspace.
Guilds mean absolutely nothing to me and I premade with friends from other guilds :D but thank you <3
-
Member
So I fail to understand why Nefarian (which atm is some sort of obsolete fight from old content worth doing only for a bunch of achievements) would have scripting priority over RBGs which basically would be high-end content. While I respect the effort devs might have put in scripting that specific fight, I just feel like there are more important things to focus on.
The impression I'm having is that PvE scripting has always had prio over PvP. SotA never worked on cata, neither IoC. Not even mentioning the dozens of BG achievements which were reported on the bugtracker since last year. Now seeing a fix to those achievements would be an overwhelming plus.
I like obtaining PvP achievements and tbh, lately I kind of lost my interest and motivation on playing because of the inability to obtain most of them (RBGs included). I'm pretty sure other people would agree with me here.
-
Banned
Its the little things i like about you.
-
Member
You really think you can compete so fast with a guild like Infected , who have years of exp in pvp and skill ?
The guild dont exist till yesterday , there is much work behind .
-
Member
Rated Battleground's worked before so I don't get why the staff is hesitant about it because they don't think it's a good priority. Meaning, if the staff "for the most part" already knows how to script RBG, why not just add it back? Adding the most content, with little to no bugs is better?
Summary: It's been added before, just put back in. Correct me if I'm wrong, it wouldn't take that much time or should I say too much extra time, considering it's already been implemented before.
-
Banned
Perhaps Green_dev could make a statement.
-
Member
I don't know if it's because of this thread, but it seems Trayz has been assigned to the bug. Since I'm pretty sure it's not a bug, rather they have been disabled, one would expect this to be fixed soon...
-
Banned
It said "Assignment Trayz" long time before lord and savior Malaco denied it
-
Member
And we have yet to hear from the PvP 'lord and saviour'...Kinda thought this thread would catch his eye.
-
Banned
I hope senpai will notice us
-
Banned
I don't think any staff other than green_dev (on very rare occasions) cares about the Cataclysm subforum, and I don't think Malaco reads any forums other than the major ones and/or Blackrock related (and since recently Lordaeron) so I doubt he'll be reading this. Only reason he commented on the bugtracker report is because it was top of the list, but I could be wrong.
I'd be very happy if someone in charge of development would communicate with us regarding this top priority request, as was promised.
-
Moderator
Feel free to send him an e-mail ([email protected]) and try to talk to him, but he already said the reasons it isn't a priority. Community's opinion is just another attribute to be considered when fixing content.
-
Banned
So he did, but I don't think his three line statement is enough to conclude this topic, and evidently; neither does the community. It should atleast be open for discussion - discussion between community and staff.
