With cata announced changes... leveling any new teams?

[Shodokan]

So far i've decided to level up 4x dk + disc priest... what about you guys? I'm liking some of the boomkin changes though too...

Curious if any changes sparked an interest in a new team for ya.

[Powerwar]

Currently my warlocks are at lvl 76, my boomkins at lvl 70, priests lvl 17 and mages at lvl 16.

Need to say that the warlocks were leveled several levels entirely in BGs. they all already have 2 lvl 80 PvP pieces bought for when they ding :)

After I finish and gear the locks I will go with the priests. I suspect that 5 x holy nova could be pretty hilarious in pvp.

[Ualaa]

Of the teams I was actively playing, not enough has changed for me to switch.
And of the teams I have, but am not playing much, not enough of a gain either.

Still doing:
a) Pal, 3x Shm, 1x Warlock.
b) Druid x5
c) Warlock x4, Disc.

Depending on how essential a dedicated healer is (for dispels), might trade something from the mixed team for a shaman on the main PvE team.

Not really into wow so much at the moment... I go in phases, between not playing much and logging 16-18 hrs a day for a month... so just doing transmutes and auction stuff for the last few weeks. Haven't quite finished the priests, but they've been an hour or two from 68th for a week. Still want to make DK's and get them to 68th for another 5 alchemists... And to level all alchemists to 73/75 or so, so they can immediately skill from 450 to 525 when Cataclysm arrives.

Lots of time still, and I'm making 30k a week even at my half-assed pace.

[Tdog]

I'm going to be leveling up a team of everything x5 so i don't have to make those kinds of decisions anymore :P

[Fat Tire]

I'm going to be leveling up a team of everything x5 so i don't have to make those kinds of decisions anymore :P

I did that. Well not x5 of every class and I gotta say it wasnt worth it unelss you have an insane amount of time. Even then youre talking about burnout 10 times faster than normal.

[Fat Tire]

I will also add that most people do arena to pwn better in BGs. With the focus going back to rated competive BGs I think theyre trying to either phase out arenas or make it a smaller niche.

Remember that the PvP landscape will probably look pretty different for Cataclysm with a focus on rated, competitive Battlegrounds.


This is something to consider when making new teams especially for pvp. I believe at current that there are only a few boxing combos that actually help win BGs and not just own the KB scoreboard while still losing.

[Toonarmy]

This is something to consider when making new teams especially for pvp. I believe at current that there are only a few boxing combos that actually help win BGs and not just own the KB scoreboard while still losing.

I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on this FT. I tend to think that five ele's should make your list ... but AV has been embarrassing for us on Bloodlust the last couple o'weeks ... so maybe not (then again maybe it
just me and cata won't change a thing : ) )

[Kicksome]

Since they are making blood a tanking tree, my shamans won't get that 13% damage buff with my DK.

So I'll probably do a Druid tank and 4x shamans. That's the way I leveled in Wrath.

[Fat Tire]

This was also posted in regards to mages preview and everyone (me included) thinking RMP would be insane.


For everyone focusing on the RMP Arena comp, I really think you’re going to see a shift to more PvP concerns in Cataclysm being about Battleground balance. There will still be players playing Arenas for sure, but a lot of the players currently doing Arenas are going to shift to rated BGs instead.


I am wondering if they are going to drop arena balancing in cata i.e. 2v2 arena.

[Myc]

I am scared... that paladins date is on the 16th for cata info.. only class that is that far out =l

[Ualaa]

Well, I don't see Arena going away, just like hard modes.. they will still want to provide a challenge for the more hard-core player base.

But the game is about catering to the masses; look at the relative success compared to Everquest, which had a 95% market share for the genre. Rated battlegrounds is for the masses; I'd be somewhat surprised to see the non-rated BG's as that active really. I'd tend to think players will just queue for rated instead of non-rated bg's, as the game is the same, but you get much better rewards over time.

Arena will still be somewhat balanced, but rather then the primary concern be Arena and Raids, it will be Mass PvP and Raid balance.
At least that's my suspicion.

[Ualaa]

I am scared... that paladins date is on the 16th for cata info.. only class that is that far out =l


That tends to suggest, larger changes or at least more time needed to decide upon how they want to treat the class. I really hope they don't break Prot.

But with the changes to block, and that being the primary defense and threat mechanic for AoE, it might be a very different class in Cataclysm.

[Velassra]

I don't think I would level from the start again. I don't have any mages, so I might (probably not but maybe) make a trio of goblin mages after the initial rush is passed.

Most likely, I have assorted levels (some on different servers and opposite faction) that I may bring over and level to place maybe as a third team once my shaman are set at 80.

We'll see how multibox friendly or unfriendly Cataclysm turns out to be.

[thefunk]

i never played pally in vanilla - started wow the day bc (or week) came out. I remember being laughed at for suggesting prot in any context so based on that particular line of thought I'm not too worried. In fact there are a few comments over the last few weeks about original developers having left and everyone being worried etc... well it seems to me the latest batch of blizz employees are finally getting all the classes approx right, ret pally is now feasible, druids are getting there, and locks are not as laughed at by mages than before. Although my mage laughs at my lock at the moment so i'll put that one on hold.

Any thoughts?

[Mosg2]

@Fat Tire:

I don't know that there's any BG that's especially worse off for having a 4 or 5 boxer in it other than WSG--And that can be mitigated by not having pure retards on your side.

I feel, generally speaking, that I add more to every BG I play than 5 random individuals do. Maybe I'm conceited but... :)

@OP:

My plan is to get a few different teams to 80 pre-expansion. Once we see exactly what the rated BG's look like and more detailed changes for classes I'll finalize who's getting priorited to 85 first :)

[Gormand]

I just got more excited for my mage team that I was going to be bringing up next anyway :D 5x those shiny new fireballs and 5x the "tripwires" particularly when I figure out how to get my mages in a line front to back to make the walls of fog a lethal zone with AoE on top of it, or fireballs shooting through it, or combined with a rogues new smokebomb to force people to run through the fog to hit me. in fact combine
Mage fog with rogue smoke and unholy DK shell and you have a (however brief) nice little immunity bubble thats going to destroy anyone that comes near you.

*note to self, find willing DK and rogue to run with mage team.

[puppychow]

They have said a few times that rated BGs will require a full team queuing up, if you queue individually you won't get into the rated BGs. AV/IOC are also changing to 25 man BGs from 40. To be honest I don't see this staying in very long, too many people are going to want to queue as 1-5 people and still "get points" if they win. But the problem will be that organized 25 man teams will just faceroll through pugs, and you only rank up for wins.

WOTLK imo wasn't that great for multiboxing, in PVE playing solo has been great especially with the LFG system, badge gear, and how easy its been pugging 10 and 25 man raids. Contrast that with TBC where pugging heroics was messy and pug raiding never got past kara/gruuls.

I'll be suprised if I ever go more than 2 box again in WoW. I might xfer my chars to my main account in cata and that way I'll have a lot of alts for alchemy/tailoring :)

[Mosg2]

They have said a few times that rated BGs will require a full team queuing up, if you queue individually you won't get into the rated BGs. AV/IOC are also changing to 25 man BGs from 40. To be honest I don't see this staying in very long, too many people are going to want to queue as 1-5 people and still "get points" if they win. But the problem will be that organized 25 man teams will just faceroll through pugs, and you only rank up for wins.

Link for them saying they require a full team? I've seen more than one blue post indicating that you still won't be able to que up with more than 5 people.

[Fat Tire]

Link for them saying they require a full team? I've seen more than one blue post indicating that you still won't be able to que up with more than 5 people.



This section discussed changes being made to Battlegrounds. We realize that players want a bit more out of the Battlegrounds, or don’t necessarily want to actively participate in Arenas to acquire some of the best gear in the game. We’re changing this by providing an alternate method to acquiring Arena rating. We’ve introduced rated Battlegrounds, which will allow players to acquire rating for very powerful gear without setting foot into an Arena, so each player can enjoy whichever PvP activity he or she prefers.

We plan to include featured weekly Battlegrounds for players to enjoy; coupled with the changes made, this will help keep the gameplay changing from week to week.

The way the new rated Battlegrounds work is pretty straightforward. The more games you win, the higher the rating you acquire.

In order to participate in rated Battlegrounds, players will be required to join battles as full groups. However these groups do not need to be committed teams as in the Arena system; rather, the group simply needs to have the required amount of players for whichever Battleground they’re entering. As an example, one would need to join the queue as a group for Warsong Gulch with any nine additional players to qualify for a rating.


There are several reasons (these are the highlights) not to allow players to solo-queue for rated battlegrounds.

1. When players have no commitment to any other members of their team, they're much more likely to try to game the system for minimal effort (afk'ing, or near afk-ing). If they're required to form a group in advance, it implies there is a previously agreed-upon power structure in the group (somebody is the leader, and can kick players that need to be kicked).

2. If players can queue for rated battlegrounds as either solo or as a group (and any mix thereof), it becomes far more difficult to matchmake teams appropriately, or determine how difficult of a win a win was, or how significant a failure on the part of the losing players a loss was.

3. The endgame structure we have for WoW rewards for organizational effort (this is the primary reason that 25-person raids are rewarded more highly than 10-person raids). There is no organizational effort in solo-queue'ing for battlegrounds, yet the ilevel of the rewards are on par with 25-person raiding.
Will you add in an option in the LFG UI to find BG groups?Yes, we intend to give players somewhere better than the trade channel to form groups.
This is BS. Yeah, I know I probably shouldn't be calling Kalgan's claims about his game BS, but this is BS. Regardless of how those people get into the BG, matchmaking teams and determining the validity of results is still reliant on all the people in the BG. To claim that the process of filling the BG itself has an impact on those metrics is, at best, absurd. Wait... it's "at best, absurd" to say that it's more difficult to evaluate a team's chances of winning when (for example) one team consisted of two sets of 4 grouped players (that each have a plan and coordinate to some degree) combined with a pair of solo players, and the other team consists of a preformed group of 6 players combined with 4 solo players than it would be if we were able to assume that both teams had 10 people that were all at least on board with some kind of plan before the battle started?


In order to participate in rated Battlegrounds, players will be required to join battles as full groups. However these groups do not need to be committed teams as in the Arena system; rather, the group simply needs to have the required amount of players for whichever Battleground they’re entering. As an example, one would need to join the queue as a group for Warsong Gulch with any nine additional players to qualify for a rating.





The 40-player Battlegrounds are currently planned to be 25v25 when they are available for rated matches.





I am seeing full group here..... would you mind linking that blue post you have saying otherwise? I dont think they are completely sure how they want it to work and i am willing to bet that after its released there will be hotfix changes and buttloads of QQ.

[Ualaa]

They've posted the maximum size you can queue as for Battlegrounds will be 5's.
And then this says you need to queue as full groups.

Unless the first quote is (maximum of 5 queuing at once) is in reference to non-rated battlegrounds. And the queue as a full group is in reference to the rated battlegrounds, this seems to be in conflict. Or maybe they mean, enter rated battlegrounds in full groups of five, with a minimum of "x" groups all queuing for rated stuff at once.

It isn't too clear, but from Fat Tire's post, I would assume 5-man maximum queue size for non-rated, and 10, 15 or 25 for rated BG's... which could make rated BG's a lot harder to get into as a boxer.

[Shodokan]

They've posted the maximum size you can queue as for Battlegrounds will be 5's.
And then this says you need to queue as full groups.

Unless the first quote is (maximum of 5 queuing at once) is in reference to non-rated battlegrounds. And the queue as a full group is in reference to the rated battlegrounds, this seems to be in conflict. Or maybe they mean, enter rated battlegrounds in full groups of five, with a minimum of "x" groups all queuing for rated stuff at once.

It isn't too clear, but from Fat Tire's post, I would assume 5-man maximum queue size for non-rated, and 10, 15 or 25 for rated BG's... which could make rated BG's a lot harder to get into as a boxer.

It means we have to make friends who are willing to do it with us, and not just rely on just ourselves. I'm pissed if it is required for 10 or 15 people to get together for rated things, i mean thats like requiring a PVP guild.

[suprafro]

Well they haven't yet said that you lose rating for losing, only that you gain rating for winning. Even considering the X game limit per week, it seems like everyone would reach the top shelf pvp loot with this system, at worst it just takes some people longer then others. So even if you have to form tradechat groups to fill out the raid, you have a shot of making it there.

[Fishbeak]

Well they haven't yet said that you lose rating for losing, only that you gain rating for winning. Even considering the X game limit per week, it seems like everyone would reach the top shelf pvp loot with this system, at worst it just takes some people longer then others. So even if you have to form tradechat groups to fill out the raid, you have a shot of making it there.

Exactly; they had indicated there will be no "loss" of rating from rated Bgs so it is only the "rate" at which you collect the top tier items not the "possibility" with the new season being the gate for even higher levels of gear.

[Myc]

I am scared... that paladins date is on the 16th for cata info.. only class that is that far out =l

"We haven't torn up the paladin talent trees in earnest yet, so the preview will likely be heavy on design intent and light on details. One of the changes we'll continue to emphasize with Retribution is trading more defenses for offense. A defensive dps spec just doesn't work really well in WoW. " - GC.

Maybe I changed my mind.. more ret dps soon D=? would be cool as long as they don't take out the offensive healing to... hmm (talking about last sentence ^)
time will tell I guess, tho I would love to have a druid healer in team just don't want to level anymore =/


-
I do like the new DK stuff but it prob wont stack so doesn't sound so great to have x2+

[Shodokan]

"We haven't torn up the paladin talent trees in earnest yet, so the preview will likely be heavy on design intent and light on details. One of the changes we'll continue to emphasize with Retribution is trading more defenses for offense. A defensive dps spec just doesn't work really well in WoW. " - GC.

Maybe I changed my mind.. more ret dps soon D=? would be cool as long as they don't take out the offensive healing to... hmm (talking about last sentence ^)
time will tell I guess, tho I would love to have a druid healer in team just don't want to level anymore =/


-
I do like the new DK stuff but it prob wont stack so doesn't sound so great to have x2+

it prob will stack as there are less actions per runic cycle now.

[Tdog]

I am scared... that paladins date is on the 16th for cata info.. only class that is that far out =l
My guess is that its going be an awesome day or a horrible day for my paladins. Seems to be the history with WoW and pallys...

[Ualaa]

They have mentioned six games a week, rated.

Not sure if that means you get rating for your six best games.
That you can only do six rated battlegrounds per week.
Or what not.

They have posted that a loss will be no rating lost.

I would hope it would be your best six games of the week, count for rating.

[Mosg2]

Wow, I hadn't seen those posts. That kind of... Ruins it.

I've never been a "Sky is falling" kind of guy, but... Really? Unless we, as boxers, que together we're *never* going to get a group of people to go with us. For every person I meet who says "Boxers rock!" I meet 10-15 who say "FML I hate you for losing me this BG" even when we win.

I was hoping for no-limit win=more rating loss=nothing with it pairing you against similarly ranked players. This literally throws out rated BG's for me.

[thefunk]

to OP:

i'd like to try hunter + 4 warriors as pets as per an old post, still makes me giggle. Seriously I've got 2 lvl 58 locks and 3 at lvl 41, not sure how i'm going to get them all at 60 at the same time as RAF as run out a looong time ago. Wanted 5xdruid but eclipse kinda turned me off, but with the new changes I'm reconsidering. on idea that i really would like but may never happen is 4 x ret 1 x enhancement shammy or switch a ret with DK having seen 4 x ret 1 x dk work

[Fuzzyboy]

Since they are making blood a tanking tree, my shamans won't get that 13% damage buff with my DK.

So I'll probably do a Druid tank and 4x shamans. That's the way I leveled in Wrath.

They also stated they'd move around some abilities - I really hope they'll enable ebon plague for tank specs, otherwise I'd have to shelf my DK and go back to paladin tanking.

The changes to cleansing totem and bloodlust however, seems a buff to my new composition. I was planning on doing DK/resto shaman/3 x arcane mage, but with the info on the changes, it seems mages are given a bloodlust and with cleansing being removed, there's no need to stick with shaman for healer (except tremor, which isnt that big a deal for PvE), so I can safely opt for the more macro-friendly priest or druid instead.

Still need to get the spell damage buff from somewhere though :(

[Toned]

From what I remember from blizzcon the limited games won't be like 6 rated matches as a cap. But 6 rated wins... that way they cap the maximum points per week so people don't feel like they have to grind. They are trying to make wow more casual so that if you only play a couple days a week you can still compete. I wouldn't be surprised if in cataclysm daily heroics go away and become a weekly heroic like the weekly raid and just award more badges.

[Fat Tire]

From what I remember from blizzcon the limited games won't be like 6 rated matches as a cap. But 6 rated wins... that way they cap the maximum points per week so people don't feel like they have to grind. They are trying to make wow more casual so that if you only play a couple days a week you can still compete. I wouldn't be surprised if in cataclysm daily heroics go away and become a weekly heroic like the weekly raid and just award more badges.

I think I remember them saying something to that effect. Some people feel that they "have" to log in everyday to complete the daily heroic and they want players not to feel that they have to log in everyday to complete certain objectives.

and about that rated BG 6 wins, I think you are spot on.

[suprafro]

From what I remember from blizzcon the limited games won't be like 6 rated matches as a cap. But 6 rated wins... that way they cap the maximum points per week so people don't feel like they have to grind.

Hmm that sounds really odd, but if it's true it seems like bad teams will have plenty of incentive to grind as there is no penlty for a loss. Theorically in this system everyone has the potential to reach the best PvP loot at the same rate, the only advantage playing well provides is that you are rewarded with being able to play less each....going 6-0 instead of say 6-23 for the week. Not that I care what loot other people have, but this would pretty much remove gear progression from PvP which I think for many players is part of the fun.

[Shodokan]

Hmm that sounds really odd, but if it's true it seems like bad teams will have plenty of incentive to grind as there is no penlty for a loss. Theorically in this system everyone has the potential to reach the best PvP loot at the same rate, the only advantage playing well provides is that you are rewarded with being able to play less each....going 6-0 instead of say 6-23 for the week. Not that I care what loot other people have, but this would pretty much remove gear progression from PvP which I think for many players is part of the fun.

It certainly helps us more, thats for sure.