(A)lliance has a 37% win ratio here, which is drastically less than all the others. I’m used to losing slightly more (anywhere from 45-49 win, usually) but this is abnormal enough to raise an eyebrow. My initial response is the default one, to claim that alliance sucks, because that’s usually as good a fallback reason as any…except I can’t see why they would suck so much MORE in this bg than the other ones. It’s the same people playing. And it’s not like IoC has any “new” concepts — it’s recycled different things from AV, AB, and SotA, all of which alliance does significantly better in. So what gives here?
This matches my own experience in the Alliance side of the Ruin battlegroup. My record in IoC is dismal: 2 wins out of 8 played. 25%. Yikes.
Ihra’s theory about the elevation asymmetry of the map is a good one. While the layout is symmetric, the addition of arial combat makes elevation matter in a way it doesn’t in, say, Arathi Basin. The Lumber Mill affords you better visibility and one less way in to defend than the Gold Mine, but both sides can reach it equally without a “weak” or “strong” side. That’s not the case in the IoC because there are cannons and vehicles involved. If there were cannons on the Lumber Mill you better believe it would be the single most important node in Arathi Basin.
I haven’t seen the Hangar Blitz in my recent ventures into the Isle of Conquest; it’s all Docks, all the time. And when the Alliance loses the Docks, sure enough the Ally Keep falls shortly thereafter. So while the Docks convey an offensive tactical advantage to the Horde, they convey no corresponding advantage to the Alliance — except to deny them to the Horde.
The whole article is worth reading, as well as the other Honor per Minute analysis Ihra has done. I’d be lying to say that I’m not pleased my initial hunch that Strand of the Ancients is the best might be right, after all. :-)