Is something in the works to fix Frostmourne faction disbalance?

[Obnoxious]

For the min-max progression guilds, I'm sure this would still be the case. For the more casual raiders and guilds (the ones that don't care that you didn't go engi/jc for that extra .03% min max), they're able to fill a slot regardless of faction, and if the player plays well, it doesn't matter if they're doing the min-maxed 12,648 dps if they can do 11,000 that's still viable, follow the boss mechanics (ie avoiding fire), and still pull their weight. It would allow those on alliance to be able to join pugs and fill the slot...some dps is better than no dps as long as they don't cause wipes by triggering mechanics that heal the boss or spawn unnecessary adds that ends up wiping the raid.

That's based on the wild assumption that Hordes would want to do that, when they had the option to just do it with other Hordes, more numerous and better suited for PvE content. While sure, there would be some outlier cases of that happening, expecting that to be the major aftermath is more wishful thinking than I could muster.

The good Alliance players would already have been picked by the minmaxers. What would be left would be the ones with the same skill level as the Hordes outside those guilds as well, so it isn't even a consistent case of "picking a skilled human over a trash orc."

[LezChap1]

I think most of the more casual raid guilds and pugs care more about class (or spec) then race or professions of those characters... "They think: we need a shaman for bloodlust/heroism, a paly for their buffs, a feral for that one buff, etc etc"...but maybe I'm wrong on that.

[Obnoxious]

I think most of the more casual raid guilds and pugs care more about class (or spec) then race or professions of those characters... "They think: we need a shaman for bloodlust/heroism, a paly for their buffs, a feral for that one buff, etc etc"...but maybe I'm wrong on that.

You're not wrong, you're just ignoring what I said, even if unintentionally serving my point.
For starters, they do go for race - or they could be in Alliance in the first place. So if faced with two options of the same class, one of an Alliance race with a PvP racial and a Horde with a PvE racial, which one would they pick, considering both are around the same skill level?

Add to that the fact in general Horde will have a higher population no matter what in a server with progressive PvE content and achievements/titles for that. Mix in the fact players in general are both more likely to "go with the flow" with the bigger faction and to pick the side with the better-suited racials and not just rely on the chance they will be picked despite having an inferior one.

How often would it really happen for an Alliance to replace a Horde in content, outside tryhard guilds wanting to minmax some specific things for that small edge? Do you really imagine it as enough to "fix" the faction ratio?

[Persivaln]

Yes, you are wrong. Because players already created such situation. If there would be enough players who don't care about it, we wouldn't be speaking about it here in this thread.

[Dreadnought741]

This isn't really something that can be "fixed." Not without messing with the very foundation of the game, at least. By creating a game with factions that don't have parity (ie. differences being just cosmetic and in background, while with identical mechanical versions on both) Blizzard ensured that people would min-max and find "the best" for each situation. As it is, Alliance is for PvP and Horde is for PvE.

Like rpgfan says, that's the same on retail. Their populations shift to massively on one side sooner or later, and they have never solved it themselves.

Private servers have implemented xfaction to various degrees of success, and Blizzard themselves are adding xfaction to retail (idk what their moves are for classic servers)

[Mercy]

Private servers have implemented xfaction to various degrees of success, and Blizzard themselves are adding xfaction to retail (idk what their moves are for classic servers)

Can't say that we ever have, nor ever will, use another private server as a basis for any decision making. As far as retail is concerned, that is a completely different game than what we host. That's not to say it's not a discussion worth having, but these points don't get anywhere.

[Obnoxious]

Private servers have implemented xfaction to various degrees of success, and Blizzard themselves are adding xfaction to retail (idk what their moves are for classic servers)

That's all well and good, but no one is questioning whether it can be done with success or not.

The thing is: would it really do anything to consistently help, much less solve, the issue of players gravitating towards Horde for diverse reasons, and would it be to a significant and sustainable (the faction split has to remain through at least the major part of the cycle, not last a few months and then it's back to just Horde) enough margin to justify the work and changes involved?

PS: Oh yeah, Blizzard adding something? They're the ones that added goddamn pathetic pandas to the game. If anything, them adding something translates to requiring quadruple the scrutiny when considering if it's a good change.

[Xyrax]

"Bribing" players with advantages only goes so far, as we have already tried and seen the results. Making the server PvP again wouldn't make that much of a difference, as it didn't on the first two seasons.

It's not binding, but Im gonna take this as my only hopeful piece of info so far that suggests season 4 will stay PVE.

I really hope it does. This is the only highly populated PVE WOTLK realm and as a bonus its seasonal. I love it here and have been concerned that it may flip back to PvP.

[Obnoxious]

It's not binding, but Im gonna take this as my only hopeful piece of info so far that suggests season 4 will stay PVE.

Going to burst your bubble before more people make that a bandwagon... I was just addressing things I've seen thrown around as supposed solutions for people ditching Alliance, nothing more. What you quoted has no bearing whatsoever, one way or another, on what type of server an eventual Season 4 could be. It could still return to PvP, that just wouldn't magically make more people play Alliance.

[WebstAr]

Maybe im just an *****, and i will admit immediately to that, but if the problem is just about racials why not make those available on both sides, as in: u pick them when u generate a character. Dno if this has been tried or is not technically possible.

[Dreadnought741]

That's all well and good, but no one is questioning whether it can be done with success or not.

The thing is: would it really do anything to consistently help, much less solve, the issue of players gravitating towards Horde for diverse reasons, and would it be to a significant and sustainable (the faction split has to remain through at least the major part of the cycle, not last a few months and then it's back to just Horde) enough margin to justify the work and changes involved?

PS: Oh yeah, Blizzard adding something? They're the ones that added goddamn pathetic pandas to the game. If anything, them adding something translates to requiring quadruple the scrutiny when considering if it's a good change.

If your afraid of the examples listed, then I'll just simply say that xFaction has the benefit of increasing community output, especially alliance side for PvE content in finding groups, guilds, raids, ect. and the old advantages of roleplay, pvp, and worldbuilding are no longer necessary for a fun game.