GC recently said the following regarding hunters and arena balance:

---

Q u o t e:
Hunters are betters in 5s than 2s. It's really challenging to have every class or spec have the same representation in small teams as large, which is one of the reasons we offer multiple sizes. Recently the community seems to be focusing on 2s even more than 3s. We are taking some steps to make sure the larger brackets are as rewarding as the smaller ones. (I'm not saying it's a goal that some classes are only viable for some brackets. But it is nice that if you aren't as good for some brackets, you always have the others to fall back on.)

---

And this:

---

Q u o t e:
I don't necessarily want to turn the thread into a discussion of the merits of 5s vs. 3s or 2s. We understand there are logistical (and currently reward) considerations when developing a 5. Burst damage is always going to be higher because you have more people to gang up on someone. But I do want to caution you all a little bit not to steer your arguments towards "Only 2s matter."

---

I am starting to think that the changes coming to "make sure the larger brackets are as rewarding" combined with the above quote from GC that basically says " Your fine in 5's " is the beginning of the end of 2v2 balancing.

Am I reading too much into this, or are we about ot see Blizz give up on 2v2 balance all together?

---

Q u o t e:
GC recently said the following regarding hunters and arena balance:



And this:



I am starting to think that the changes coming to "make sure the larger brackets are as rewarding" combined with the above quote from GC that basically says " Your fine in 5's " is the beginning of the end of 2v2 balancing.

Am I reading too much into this, or are we about ot see Blizz give up on 2v2 balance all together?

---

PVP has balance?

Their goal has never been to balance the game around 2v2.

---

Q u o t e:
Their goal has never been to balance the game around 2v2.

---

I'm quite certain that the recent buffs/nerfs to classes that were SPECIFIC to priests rogues dominating are evidence that they in fact do balance for 2v2.

---

Q u o t e:
I'm not saying it's a goal that some classes are only viable for some brackets.

---

---

Q u o t e:
it's extremely tough to balance 2v2, 3v3, and 5v5 while keeping PVE in check. it's even tougher to stay balanced as the game continues

---

I completely agree, however Blizz has shown recently that they are TRYING to balance 2v2.

I think they are about to give up.

3v3 was never balanced either. It can be as imbalanced as 2v2 at some points. PMR in S2, WLD in S2, they all had really high representation.

---

Q u o t e:
back when BC was new everyone complained that PVP was dead but blizzard managed to get it balanced (well to the best in their power)

---

????


one word: hunters

two loooong years

Read further on. Someone suggested simply making 5's kick out more points, and he said that is what he had in mind in terms of rewards.

---

Q u o t e:
3v3 was never balanced either. It can be as imbalanced as 2v2 at some points. PMR in S2, WLD in S2, they all had really high representation.

---

PMR has topped every season.

Edit: First

Moonkin 2s...lol. Survivabilitywut?

---

Q u o t e:
Ultimately, we just want 2s, 3s and 5s to all feel valid. We think recently there has been a trend among players to say essentially that only 2s matter. We don't really want that to be the way Arenas feel.

The original comment I made was that we think the situation in which a class or spec is untenable in any bracket is worse than the situation in which a class or spec is untenable in a single bracket.

Ideally all classes and specs are equally viable in all brackets. Now that sentinment has a few too many unicorns and rainbows, so we need to figure out which are the most important problems to fix first.

---

just a question for you how enhancement shaman or elemental equally viable in all brackets ? and at least show me the bracket where enhancement shaman can get to at least 2k+raiting

The issue is that when you changed the game to have higher overall damage in PvP, it seemed to be balanced around healer/dps 2v2 comps having the ability to burst someone down. I might be wrong in this and you might have just made damage that ridiculously high on accident, but I don't see how you can balance 5v5 at all if 2v2 is already supposed to have high amounts of burst.

It doesn't make sense to me that damage was somehow considered not to be important in BC, considering the number of rogues in PvE gear and the number of top tier comps that relied on damage and burst to win. I play with a number of ex-PvPers and the number one reason they cite for quitting arena is because damage is too high... number 2 reason being OP DK's :P

Gc, can you look into druids(resto) hardcountering all mage comps (in 2v2). It is a massive imbalance to have one class be compeletely immune to two forms of ccs(roots and sheep) while they do not need to cast anything. Mage comps is all about crowd control and druids are totally immune to it.