That's not a valid comparison. People don't PuG raids to compete against other PuGs for a reward or anything of the sort. PuGs are (marginally) successful because the content is part of the gearing up process, and even then low skill is compensated by bloated requirements to join. PvP doesn't work like that, people don't PvP to get a piece of gear and then never PvP again, like would happen with a raid once you have everything. The purpose of PvP is on the label, it's to compete against others and come out of top of as many as you can. If people would only compete in case they were bribed into it with rewards other than what's already offered, they aren't interested in the competition. 3v3 is dead because players made it so, not because of some imaginary lack of rewards to promote it.
That's because, as much as it triggers some people when I point it out, PvP in World of Warcraft is a side-activity. The game is group-balanced for PvE content, because that's the real meat of the game. Classes are balanced and continuously tweaked so they have a chance at similar performance when doing PvE - and even at that they repeatedly fail, players always find "bests." Just look at any expansion. New PvE gear, new open world areas, new Dungeons, new Raids... while PvP gets an update on iLevel, some tweaks, and rarely some new Arena. When was the last time an expansion had even an equally split amount of new PvE and PvP content? The first time hasn't happened. PvP isn't balanced to this day on WoW, and it definitely wasn't meant to be back on WotLK, that's just part of what you'd expect anyone playing the expansion to know and accept.
-
Moderator
-
Member
I think if you got people into 3v3 with a small carrot they would realize that it's by far the most balanced and fun bracket, that's all I'm saying. The endgame in PvP is of course to beat other players and climb as high as possible, accruing rewards by doing so. But people in this thread are complaining about balance, and balance is better in 3v3.
Blizzard (2.2k weapon/2k shoulders) and Warmane were/are already incentivizing this on Blackrock (3v3 hour), so why not do it on other realms? Personally, I don't have a problem with not having rewards, I just want people to realize 3s is a much better experience, less gear dependent and a lot more balanced overall.
-
Member
I'm not saying it will fix it, rather that pugs happen despite it.
On a brighter note, there are definitely some non-toxic players, just hard to find :)
-
Moderator
Nah, take a look at the bigger picture. It's not a matter of balance, it's a matter of required effort and organization. The mass of players seem to rather play solo - which is as imbalanced as it can be when you have zero control who you'll play with - than deal with the "hassle" of organizing a duo and learning to work together. A trio is just even worse in the investment required to be successful. Meanwhile the minority who would in fact be interested in 3v3 are stuck in a loop of "waiting for someone else to do something" instead of all just playing. Players have everything they need to "revive" 3v3 in their hands.
-
Member
I agree that it's a matter of effort and organization that 99% of the playerbase seems unwilling to do. But a 3rd of the topic in this thread is about balancing of 3.3.5a, which is balanced around 3v3, so I definitely think it's a valid discussion point. It is mainly in the players hands, of course, but there are things that can help from the Warmane side of things.
-
Moderator
Eh no, 3.3.5a isn't balanced around 3v3. It's balanced around PvE, as I already said. 3v3 just "feels" more balanced because of what the extra member brings. That's just natural, as each additional member would allow more flexibility to deal with a larger number of situations you can go against. You can see the same thing when you go from 1v1 to 2v2.
And sure, discuss to your heart's content, I'm just saying we shouldn't have to bribe players into doing what they supposedly want to do anyway. I mean, that's what PvPers want, to PvP, no?
-
Member
Of course we do, you know it.
-
Member
PvE has always come first, I know. However, there was actually a PvP-balancing team back in wotlk along with PvP-specific changes and tweaks which imply that it's not as black and white as you want to paint it. This PvP team mentioned that they tried to balance the PvP for the 3v3 bracket, hence the 3v3-tournaments (still the format for AWC), as well as 3v3 specific rewards.
It's not that it just "feels" more balanced, it is intentionally made to be more balanced than 2v2.
-
Moderator
Then list some tweaks that were made to the game as a whole, therefore not affecting PvE despite being there, as they existed only for the sake of making 3v3 - not duels, not 2v2, not 5v5, not Battlegrounds, not open world - "more balanced" in 3.3.5a.
-
Member
If Blizzard organizing tournaments in 3v3 and removing gladiator title and t2 weapon + shoulders from the 2v2 bracket doesn't make you realize which one they saw as competitive I don't know what will.
Of course there has been tweaks/patch notes motivated by PvP, but I won't go digging through 10 year old patch notes to prove that.
-
Moderator
All that says is they were heavily trying to promote it, not that it was "intentionally made more balanced than 2v2."
-
Member
Didn't Blizzard actually put shoulders and all the stuff back into 2v2 as well? I don't know if memory serves me well but in Cata/MoP you didn't even need to touch 3s in order to get best PvP set.
In any case, sadly yes, Obnoxious is right about PvP being a side-activity that comparing to PvE gets barely any love from Blizz.
-
Member
Well you needed Battleground raiting for some stuff in cataclysm if my memory serves me right.
Quote
