Another Warhammer quibble

by | 4 Comments

I was reading Tobold, who finally acknowledge how Warhammer strengths are also its weaknesses.

Nothing new, but it kinda fueled some fancy thoughts:

I suspect that one part of the solution is technical: More players per server. The current numbers worked great when all of us were in tier 1. But now half of the players are in tier 3, and the other half distributed over tiers 1, 2, and 4. With 6 races, 20 chapters per race, and several PQs per chapter, there simply aren’t enough players around to man the PQs. It is really crazy to first have to queue, and then have an underpopulation problem. I can only assume the limit is hardware related, not game design related.

Yes, the limit is technical because, as in DAoC, if you go above the 3000 cap the server will crash.

But I was thinking that, abstractly, Warhammer doesn’t behave the same way of DAoC, and the solution to all this may be technically plausible. If all the players are in scenarios, why you can’t rise the population cap on the world zones?

IF the great majority of players, like everyone is repeating, is just playing into instances, then you can “virtualize” the server structure. They aren’t crowding the same game area, they are instead just playing inside private rooms. So, abstractly, you can separate these private rooms from the rest of the game world. This would allow to increase the population cap per server, since very few players actually play “together”.

The fancy idea would be “clustering” the scenarios between servers the same way Blizzard did with Battlegroups, so that you make sure you never run out of players and that the faction balance is more even. While also increasing the population caps on the world server, since most of players run scenarios anyway and so do not keep it busy.

Split the scenarios servers from world servers so that you can then increase the cap significantly on the world servers. It is plausible, but then it depends on how Mythic is organized and how long it would take to rework things this way.

Then, if you’re willingly to go through this significant change, you may as well take the ball and run with it. Because you can surely increase the cap per server and make tiers 1, 2 and 3 more alive, but you also continue to risk to blow everything up when all those more players crowd the endgame, it’s just a bigger and less predictable unbalance, like a time bomb. The risks increase since you cannot regulate the way the players behave. It may well work 99% of the times when all of them sit in the scenarios, and then blow up the day they all decide to join a big siege.

The other idea is: Virtualize all the server structure like I’ve been suggesting for a long time. Make the population caps zone-specific, like Guild Wars, so that a new instance of the zone only opens up when the previous is full.

Sure, both for clustering and this other, more radical, idea you would also need to rework a lot of things on the design side since the “campaign” needs a degree of persistence. I’m not forgetting this aspect, but I think it can be all worked out.

The drawback is how you bring a revolution to the server structure without fucking everything up. This kind of migration wouldn’t be easy. You can’t bring the servers down and then, a few hours later, everything is different. Or maybe you can.

What if instead of recoding the current servers, you develop the new server structure as an independent cluster. Like a wholly different game. When the work is done, you start migrating some characters accounts on the new cluster, same way they did with the “cloning”. Basically you develop the new cluster, then only copy over, progressively, the accounts. This means that the “old” server structure is unaffected and may as well continue to run, while you can start testing the new game, and progressively migrate to it without the risk of disrupting the players experience.

Fancy, but plausible.

And worth the big programmers’ headache.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

We live in a pretty, dream world

by | 3 Comments

Bad interview with Jeff Hickman.

Where he says how they “talked about all this stuff” for two years without coming out with anything at all. Pretty clever.

Everyone with a minimal experience with MMOs knows how the concept of PQs is flawed without an adaptable system. Everyone knows that low level zones WILL have serious population issues. Moreover just everyone can experience those problems simply by logging in and playing: things are working correctly on a MINORITY of the cases. That is on high/full populated servers during prime time. If you’re lucky.

That’s NOT how you design a game. You don’t design it so it’s fun only “sometimes”, or only if picked the right server, or only if you play at a set hour.

Two years that you work on the concept of Public Quests and open RvR. Outside the idea itself, the implementation is deeply flawed. And it required two years of talking and figuring out.

“What we found,” he continued, “in Dark Age of Camelot and Ultima Online (these are games that are old, old, old games) there are still people in the low level areas. New people, people re-rolling, people coming through the game, so for months and years to come, we will have a constant stream of players rolling and going up through the ranks. What you’ll find is that you go into an area and there’ll be some people there… multiple people generally, doing PQs. Yes, some of the time you’re going to run into a PQ and there won’t be anyone there. Run to another one.”

That goes without commenting as it’s pure bullshit.

Outside the comments about DAoC that right now has a bazillion of clustered servers that together don’t make 1/5 of what is required to make a single server playable, it’s false that “some of the time” you run into a PQ and find it empty (and let’s not even talk about open RvR). It’s true that MOST OF THE TIMES it happens. If you’re lucky you find a couple of players to farm the first two phases and then get slaughtered at the last. Or that you find a decent group somewhere deep in the zone through Open Parties. But sometimes to rarely. And we are two weeks from launch and things can ONLY get worse.

In the meantime Mark Jacobs talks about open RvR being essential for the success of the game, as well as population balance. And that they’ll approach this with baby steps, because they don’t want to overreact.

Nothing really wrong with being careful, but I’m not sure if the players will be still there when you’re done with the talking and considering. Especially when it took two years to come out with… no solution.

The rest of the interview isn’t better, especially when he says that players aren’t participating in open RvR because they don’t know the best loot is there. Huh? Maybe that’s why Blizzard put raids only at the level cap? When you are leveling up you do not care where the best shiny piece of loot is. You care about moving up as faster as possible, and gear isn’t a problem there. That’s why it’s becoming “Scenarios Online” and not Warhammer.

Jeff told me that in the end, this really comes down to players not yet having discovered en masse that these things exist (in fact, knowing this, it actually somewhat addresses the issue of fewer people participating in open world RvR thinking that the rewards aren’t great enough).

If the players have not yet discovered “en masse that these things exist”, it’s because you’ve done a crappy work directing them.

Don’t put the blame on your players if you are bad at game design.

P.S.
Who the fuck wrote that interview? By way of answering this question, Jeff told me… What the fuck?

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

To add to the reading list

by | Leave a comment

I was reading Pat’s blog and found an excerpt from K. J. Parker first standalone novel, The Company.

When you have no idea what a book is about, reading the first few pages and some reviews could help. But reading online is the suck and I get distracted or tired rather quickly.

This time I was intrigued instead and almost made to the middle part ;)

Mysterious female writer, probably under a pseudonym. Even the wikipedia has no clue.

Anyway, I really liked this description of an house:

Then, before he was ready, he was standing at the top of the yard, looking down the slope. Directly in front of him was the old cider house, which had finally collapsed. One wall had peeled away, and the unsupported roof had slumped sideways, the roof-tree and rafters gradually torn apart by the unsupportable weight of the slates; it put him in mind of the stripped carcass of a chicken, after the meal is over. A dense tangle of briars slopped out over the stub of the broken wall, and a young ash was growing aggressively between the stones. It must have happened so slowly, he thought; neglect, the danger dimly perceived but never quite scrambling high enough up the pyramid of priorities until it was too late, no longer worth the prodigious effort needed to put it right. There would have been a morning when they all came out of the house to find it lying there, having gently pulled itself apart in the night. They’d have sworn a bit, shaken their heads, accepted the inconvenience and carried on as before.

I like a lot the introspective, tight kind of prose. It seems that no line is outside a precise purpose. Short, precise sentences that perfectly define not just the character’s thoughts, but even the perception, mood, awareness. Carefully selected and measured words.

That’s an example of perfect characterization (I mean the whole part I read, not just this quote). Precise, insightful and yet not overwritten or unrealistically explicit.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

Books at my door – Late September

by | Leave a comment

I need to get a camera, so i can join all those book porn fetishists. But then I’m also almost done collecting the stuff I’m interested about, there’s not much left beside new releases and leftovers from long series. No more big orders or significant discoveries to be made, sigh.

Just the plain covers then:

Both books arrived a couple of weeks ago, I’m just late reporting.

Anathem – Neal Stephenson
I already bought Quicksilver, the first book of the Baroque Cycle trilogy, but whenever I decide to actually start with this writer I’ll read this standalone first, then Cryptonomicon. This book came out in early September in the US and a week or so later in UK, the cover up there is from the british edition and it’s the one I got just because I liked it better. Internally even the graphic and typeset should be the same. It is another of those huge doorstops, really impressive to see and heavy to hold. It also has good paper. A beautiful book to own.

900 pages plus forty pages or so of glossary and two appendixes explaining some sort of abstract philosophical problems. On the site I linked there are even some creepy “songs” to listen even if I can’t fathom what they are based on. I’ve read the first few pages to have an idea of the style and I like it. It seems well written even if I get a bit lost when he describes some buildings in detail. I wish I didn’t have already a huge to-read list because I’m so curious about what it is about. It seems a book that you can sink in, deep and challenging. It was first in the New York Times Bestsellers and readers seem to love it. For more insight check these two reviews.

It also seems that the WHOLE Cryptonomicon can be read online for free. I don’t know who could survive, but it seems there.

Return of the Crimson Guard – Ian Cameron Esslemont
This one to complete the Malazan collection. From what I read on the forums it seems that those who didn’t like “Toll the Hounds” (book 8) because it’s too slow and introspective, liked this one much better. The plot seems to move quickly and lots of significant stuff happens, culminating into a huge battle. But for now I can’t read it, this week I’ll finish Erikson’s three novellas, then I start “Memories of Ice” (book 3). This one is supposed to be read after book 7, so a long way to go. In the meantime I skimmed the book here and there because I wanted to see if Esslemont was a decent writer that could hold up the confrontation with Erikson. I can’t really say before I actually read it properly, but the impression wasn’t all that great. He seems to cut the prose into short “denotative” sentences and seems to have some bad habits in the form of repeating the same few sentence structures over and over and over. I really love Erikson because of *how* he writes and the way he experiments a lot with the writing itself and the style. Esslemont seems more “plain” and with less literary intent. For some readers this may be as well a quality since Erikson is seen a bit as pretentious and navel-gazing by some. For me, it’s the main reason (along with many, many others) why he’s my favorite writer in the genre.

It ended up being exactly 700 pages in the hardcover edition, written slightly bigger compared to the same edition of “Toll the Hounds”, so about 800 pages in mass market. The only map included is the one showing Quon Tali and taken from The Bonehunters, so no new stuff. While skimming through it I also got the impression that it’s heavy into references to the Malazan world without explaining much. I doubt it’s readable as standalone by someone who isn’t already familiar with the setting. I really hope it’s a good book because the series only improves by opening all these threads and complexities, like a real world.

In the meantime it’s already October and Erikson should be near the end of the writing process for book 9. When this series is complete it will be a major achievement. I hope it won’t disappoint.

I’m having serious doubts about Warhammer

by | 3 Comments

This is not backpedaling, actually it’s realizing how significant are becoming the potential flaws I was pointing out.

I’ve been playing some more these days and experienced concretely those problems. And I think these problems are crippling. I said long term, now I think I was optimistic.

My “fun” has been spotty. The game has a HUGE potential, as the huge potential was always there if PvP was done right. In Warhammer it is done right, but only occasionally realized and well executed. Too many variables affecting the fun, and this means that it’s not consistent and most time the game isn’t fun at all.

1- The client doesn’t have a good performance. It has serious problems with memory management, and even more in video memory management and caching. On new systems these flaws are much less noticeable and the gameplay is smooth, but over a number of different configurations there are PLENTY of players who report a lot of problems. This doesn’t seem a priority issue, but it is. Mass market means that your game HAS to work flawlessly on a wide range of configurations. Conservative graphic doesn’t guarantee good performance. It helps, but the really high number of little and major problems in the game client risks to cripple the sales and subscriptions in a substantial way. Those who can’t play well rarely spend weeks hunting for “magic” trick on the forums or sending feedback, they go back to play WoW, where technical execution comes above everything else.

2- Terrible flow. This basically summarizes all kind of critical problems. The fact that the “fun” is spotty. The zones have too much wasted space. Too much traveling without shortcuts. The death penalty may be trivial but here there are HUGE downtimes due to traveling, waiting for scenarios to pop or running aimlessly for half an hour or more around huge open PvP areas without meeting a single other player. In the last days I’ve been having serious problems to find even ONE open party for Public Quests. Even during prime time. This also gives a very bad perception. I have no idea how successful is the game, but the world feels empty and lonely as if I joined two years after launch. Instead how long is it? Two weeks? It’s all wasted, all those open PvP areas with all sort of objectives. Carefully designed to hold zerg of players. And there’s NO ONE. If you are lucky you see a tumbleweed in the distance. Developer time completely WASTED. Money wasted. And fun crippled.

So what were Warhammer strengths? The variety of gameplay alternatives it offered: normal questing, PQs, Scenarios and open RvR.

Pragmatically, which one of these alternatives are really viable if I decide to log in now? Normal questing and Scenarios when they pop. Sometimes, if I’m lucky, a PQ party that holds for ten minutes only to be wiped at the third phase because it was badly designed and it’s not doable with a single group, escalating difficulty in the worst way possible (from trivial but slow -kill 120 level 10 zombies- to impossible -five linked level 12 heroes-).

I don’t like PvE questing much. So what? Just scenarios, and they grow old after a while, same as WoW.

So that’s the downward spiral. Some deathmatches for shit and giggles and some boring PvE to slog through. Not exactly a masterpiece of game. Not even the WAAAAGH they were claiming it was going to be. You read on the forum a lot of similar feedback, players that try to explain how great was the battle they had yesterday. Sure, it was, but it’s inconstant. You have fun once every few days, when all the celestial bodies align properly. And Mythic’s design doesn’t help it.

I’m back feeling like when I was playing DAoC. Feeling bad because the game is THIS close to *be* a masterpiece.

What if?

What if Mythic planned the server structure form the start not as this prehistoric shard/server division, but a dynamical system where characters are an autonomous entity and where a new zone instance is only spawned when the previous reaches the cap? Think if, no matter when you decide to log in, no matter the server you picked, the zones always had players running around, with lots of activity, where all the PQs have players, where instances pop frequently and where open RvR is active at all time, where faction and population balance are more even than how they are currently. Utopia? Not. It’s vision, careful observation and experience. It’s knowing the right thing to do. It’s about knowing what the game needs to work well and to plan ahead with that in mind. It was possible by just planning the server structure in the way I was suggesting.

What if they actually designed the zones so that the three campaigns had ONE open PvP area for each tier (excluding endgame), like a convergence, instead all that ridiculous wasted space?

What if there was a de-levelling system so that all those PvP spaces were more consistently alive, and more consistently counted in the overall campaign? While also allowing PvE junkies to hunt down their Tome of Knowledge tricks without the fear of outlevelling the zones.

Well, it’s useless to repeat it again, but I was pointing all this out years ago when Warhammer didn’t even exist as a project. Trying to be as loud as possible but obtaining once again no result beside the evidence I was right.

I don’t fucking care if I was right. If it does not make a difference, it’s of no use to be right.

So, since I’m powerless, someone out there PLEASE WAKE UP.

But instead I’m talking to a deaf wall. No matter if I’m loud or not, in the best case I’m seen just as an arrogant idiot, or a troll, or a fraud who is accused of re-dating and rewriting his posts to claim undeserved wit.

I repeat myself I can’t start another of those useless crusades, no matter how much I think I’m right. Maybe I’m not? They say I’m not. So I wait the probable: Mythic to repeat the same mistakes, announcing soon all kind of fancy bonuses to encourage players to reroll on specific servers, obtaining no tangible difference, and later an expansion with some new classes, races and brand new zones to dilute what is already too diluted and wasted.

‘No, it comes with living long enough to appreciate the value of the time you’ve got left. Long enough to recognize the fallacy of a crusade when you’re called to one. Hoiran’s teeth, Gil, you’re the last person I should need to be telling this to. Have you forgotten what they did with your victory?’

P.S.
I truly admire who did art direction for Warhammer. Stylistically I love it, more than WoW. But what the fuck was he thinking about all those white, textureless cloaks? Or the utter lack of variety in the graphic of items?

Of course with the time these issues will vanish, but probably only at the level cap as more shit is added. And this doesn’t make a good game at all. It just leaves a sour taste.

Emancipor Reese to Kalgan

by | Leave a comment

This is what you get from mixing books and games in a blog.

From Erikson’s novella, this seems fitting describing WoW’s Kalgan. I only had to change two words:

And was not this zeal for fanatical “competition” an identical delusion of superiority, this time bound to moral tenets? As if “skill” was innately virtuous?
Sadly, it was part of the sordid nature of humanity, Emancipor reflected as he walked down the wide, long colonnade, to concoct elaborate belief systems all designed to feed one’s own ego. And to keep those with less obnoxious egos in check.

And this descriptions of undead is magnificent:

Emancipor suspected they would soon begin seeking out their living loved ones, since that was what the undead usually did, given the chance. Driven to utter last regrets, spiteful accusations or maundering mewling. Mostly pathetic, and only occasionally murderous.

Fire in the hole!

by | Leave a comment

It’s fun how things are developing. After Kalgan pathetic defense of Arenas we got Tigole turning things on their head.

But first an explanatory, spontaneous discussion I spotted on guild chat earlier today:

Now the wonderful backpedaling:

Actually, we have been discussing new battlegrounds quite a bit lately. Wrath of the Lich King will feature Strand of the Ancients (attack/defend) as well as Wintergrasp (non-instanced, world PvP).

But past that, we are exploring ideas that would involve expanding our Battleground content in future patches and beyond. We believe we have some strong ideas for improving Battlegrounds and PvP as a whole in the game and we’re definitely going to focus on improvements in the future. Now, it’s very early to be talking about some of this stuff but I think it’s important for the community to know that it’s on our minds.

Our general thought is that we could provide more BG content over time. The BG content that we could provide could be of higher quality with a higher degree of accessibility. Overall, we’d like to have more content and variety. We also want the gameplay experience in the BGs to be better directed. We’re also exploring the concept of a complimentary “competitive” bg system as well. Over time, we’d like the focus of PvP to shift back to being more BG-centric and more focused on Horde versus Alliance — the core of our game.

We’re also planning on improving some Battleground and PvP features in general. For example, we want to give you the ability to queue for Battlegrounds from anywhere in the world. We’re also going to explore EXP gain through the PvP system as well as low level itemization to support that.

Please don’t take this post as a promise. This won’t be an overnight process. Not all of these things are set in stone and guaranteed to happen. It would take us a while to shift in this direction. But these are some of the current thoughts on the development team. I think it’s important for you guys to know some of our thought process in regards to PvP.

Yep, not an overnight process. It requires Kalgan to be fired first, now that he is way beyond recovery.

Third and fourth paragraph are a shameless Warhammer rip-off. “We believe we have some strong ideas”. Oh yeas, I’m sure. Just that they aren’t yours.

And it’s late for you. The “core of your game” doesn’t exist anymore.

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

Kalgan is worth a parody

by | Leave a comment

It seems that my personal crusade isn’t anymore personal.

Why wasting words when some players can make the perfect summary:

YOU’RE GOING TO ARENA, AND YOU ARE GOING TO LIKE IT, YOU HEAR ME?!

AIN’T NO WAY IS THE BOTTOM FALLING OUT OF THE GLORIOUS PYRAMID OF SKILL MY ARENAS HAVE CONSTRUCTED, I WON’T PUT UP WITH THIS CRAP. COME WOTLK, YOU’RE ALL GOING TO GET YOUR HANDS DIRTY IN MY LINE-OF-SIGHT, COUNTER-COMP, RUN-AWAY-AND-DRINK, BURST-THE-WARRIOR, TRAIN-THE-LOCK, OOM-THE-HEALERS, FLAVOUR-OF-THE-MONTH, SAND-BOX CREATION THAT IS THE BE-ALL-END-ALL OF ANY KIND OF PVP EXPERIENCE YOU PATHETIC RETARDS WILL EVER SEE IN ANY MMO OF YOUR SHORT INSIGNIFICANT LIVES. I MEAN JESUS CHRIST YOU GUYS SHOULD BE SIPHONING OFF SOME OF YOUR GRANDMOTHERS PENSION TO ME CAUSE THIS IS JUST SO GOOD.

AND IF ANY OF YOU SKILLESS WORMS DARE THINK OTHERWISE YOU"RE GOING TO HAVE TO SETTLE FOR PVE BLUE GEAR, GOT IT? GOOD LUCK PVPING IN THAT CRAP, YOU’RE GOING TO BLOODY-WELL NEED IT. THEN AGAIN, THAT’S ALL YOU BATTLEGROUND / WORLD PVP LOVING FAILURES DESERVE. HELL, YOU’RE LUCKY YOU’RE EVEN ALLOWED TO BUY WOTLK WITHOUT HAVING A PERSONAL RATING OF 2200. WOW ISN’T ABOUT FUN ANYMORE, IT’S ABOUT GODDAMN SKILL, YOU HEAR ME? AT LEAST WATCHING THE GLADIATORS (THAT ARE PROBABLY BETTER THAN YOU IN RL AS WELL) MORTAL-STRIKING / DIVINE-STORMING / SHADOW-STEPPING YOUR NOOB ASS INTO OBLIVION IN BATTLEGROUNDS WILL KEEP ME AMUSED AS I CREATE THE NEXT TIER OF ARENA GEAR WHILE BENCHING DOUBLE YOUR BODY WEIGHT WITH ONE ARM.

LOVE,

FROM YOUR PVP OVERLORD AND COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF,

KALGAN

Posted in: Uncategorized | Tagged:

Tom Chilton and his righteous game design

by | 4 Comments

When I first read about this issue I misunderstood it and thought was related to arenas items requiring a certain rating to be used and not just to be earned, which was discussed months ago. Then the second time I got it right: they were putting arena rating requirements EVEN on battlegrounds/honor items.

It was so utterly stupid that I thought right away that it was some unintended beta transition. No way it could make into release.

Instead it’s deliberate.

What a fucking rambling idiot. He was always, but he’s now surpassing every record and even PRETENSE of plausibility. Who the fuck runs Blizzard to allow that this jerk is still around AND a senior designer who continues to fuck and ruin the PvP in every way possible? How it’s possible that most of the rest of the design is so brilliant while this guy can still do as he pleases? Where is the rest of the team? Why no one says anything?

The reason behind the retarded change is summarized this way:

However for now, we don’t have a way to measure “skill” in a battleground in a way that getting the “best” items in the game through battlegrounds would feel equitable when compared to what is required as far as co-ordination and success in pve to get items of equivalent power.

it’s more of a natural consequence of the fact that because we have a way to measure success that feels reasonably balanced against pve, we’re able to put high-end items there, which on its own creates the focus of importance.

They want a “morally right” game where rewards come for “skill” and not for sinking time.

Since in PvE endgame the rewards only come if you “win” the l33t raid game, and if you keep failing you get nothing, they wanted this even on PvP and thought that rewards should only come from “winning” and not for trying, or participating. They don’t want to reward persistence, they want to reward success. You have to be worthy.

Now, as a principle, the idea is even plausible even if unacceptable for a *game*, since players are supposed to have fun no matter of their limits. You know, the best game is the one that makes you think you are very good, not the game that slaps you in the face and laughs every time you fail and makes you feel like you are the very bottom of the food chain.

But let’s put this concern aside for a second. Rewarding “skill” as opposed to time sinks and grinds. Sounds palatable. And maybe it is, if it wasn’t for the fact that the principle of rewarding “skill” through “power-ups” is one HUGE CONTRADICTION. It’s just plain stupid. Unmotivated.

What if for next Olympiads Usain Bolt starts 20m ahead of everyone else since he won this past edition? But, oh, Kalgan replied to that argument:

Of course, I realize that the subject of “skill” is another topic of debate on its own, with many players citing gear quality and team comps as factors in determining the outcome (some seem to go as far as to imply that it’s all that matters). Clearly, those factors do influence the outcome, but not in a way that makes skill irrelevant. If that were the case, it wouldn’t be very hard to step onto the stage with some of the pro-gamers in the tournament and take them down in a match of even gear and comps. However, I can assure you that while I consider myself (for example) a pretty respectable player when it comes to arenas, I and a pair of similarly skilled teammates probably wouldn’t win more than 1 in every 100 games against the top players despite using identical gear and comps. Like it or not, that’s skill.

First. The case of competing with identical gear is not a playable case. It doesn’t happen. And what happens isn’t that players who wear crap are “bolstered” to the item quality of “top-players”. What happens is that those top-players HAVE A FUCKING ADVANTAGE OVER PLAYERS WITH LESS SKILL *AND* LESS POWERFUL.

It’s not equal footing and it’s not even weaker players brought to the level of stronger ones. It’s just giving advantages to who is already ahead, so that this relative situation is preserved.

Second. The implication that there’s skill in the game doesn’t justify in ANY way that those who have the skill must have artificial advantages added on top of that skill. QUITE THE CONTRARY.

Sure there’s skill. Usain Bolt may as well win even if *I* start 20m ahead of him. But this doesn’t fucking justify the fact that HE has the right start 20m ahead *of me* simply because he has that skill. QUITE THE OPPOSITE.

So it’s really a matter of plausibility, not game design. We are far away from any possible game consideration. This is plain obvious: you just CAN’T justify an irritating change in the game as a moral principle. Because the premises of that principle are, as demonstrated, completely wrong and unacceptable. So that justification doesn’t work.

The true reasons why this is happening are twofold. The first well explained on Q23:

A lot of players have simply given up on the arena due to the fact that they don’t find it fun getting pounded 10 times for a meager amount of points. Unfortunately, those lower-tier players are needed to keep the arena ladder functioning properly, since somebody has to have a shitty rating in an ELO system. Instead of finding a creative or rewarding way of luring players back into the arena, Blizzard is simply requiring them to come back in because they can’t get battleground PvP gear otherwise.

The other reason is Tom Chilton and his e-peen.

It’s all about the rewards, and these rules are made SOLELY so that these rewards stay “secured” in the hands of a selected few.

And then I thought it was genius.

Politically it’s the metaphor of capitalism. The concentrated power and wealth in the hands of some limited few and wasted mindlessly, while the rest of humanity has nothing and is treated like garbage. And the “righteousness” of it all.

The game is the celebration of that. The self-preservation of power through rules made by those who exercise that power and self-made morals to justify it. Selfish and blind.

You can’t learn anything more useful than that.

P.S.
Feedback starts from here.