Congratulations on EP 100!
I can certainly agree with not rewarding losers in pvp, but I don't think it would be too bad provided the reward was crummy - I don't mind an AB team that lost by 20 points getting the honor reward, but no conquest. Wouldn't transition over to rated games or arenas, but in a random then the honor is still useful to the team since lots of random players are just gearing up, but the conquest is the big prize, certainly enough to make the winner have a far more prestigious reward than the losers honor consolation prize.
Also, I'm done with my dailies - exalted with everyone bar Nat Pagel. I still feel overwhelmed, so many achievements, pet battles, alts etc.
To add to the burning legion's return speculation, Metzen said during the live streamed MoP launch that Sargeras was going to be in the next expansion. He then showed the crowd that his fingers were crossed when he said that, and in context he seemed to just be saying that because the crowd didn't like his previous answer so he was messing with them, but he still said it!
Either way, grats on 100 episodes!
They have an MMR system in SSFIV that sounds a lot like what they're proposing for WoW. If that's the case, I support this change wholeheartedly.
In SSFIV, you start with 0 Player Points. Player Points generally can be used to judge how good a person is. Then there are letter grades that rank you: D, D+, C, C+...
From D to D+, I don't think you can even lose Player Points.
From C to C+, you lose a little bit of Player Points based on the difficulty of the opponent. I.E, C beats A+ they get a LOT of Player Points. C loses to A+, C barely loses any Player Points.
Later, from B+ to A is VERY hard. Every time you lose to someone, you lose quite a bit of points. It takes a win percentage probably close to 75% to get to rank A. Probably even more to get to A+.
Essentially, it becomes harder and harder to get more points because you lose proportionately more than the previous rank. This could be a check & balance in the WoW system to keep scores from getting impossibly high and it would ensure that Scrubby Team A can't get to the top by just playing MUCH more than Pro Team A.
Just like in SSFIV, a scrubby player (like myself) would max out around rank B. Because no matter how often he plays, he just can't get the win percentage against other good players to get to rank B+. And it doesn't pay enough to beat up on low players (Rank C, C+, etc) to get the rank up because losing to a rank B or a rank B+ as a rank B player negates probably 10 wins against a C or C+ player.
I hope I'm explaining this well. I feel like I'm not. The ultimate point is, the system doesn't go to infinity. Even the best players in the world can't get above a certain number of player points because even at the A+ rank, it requires about an 80% win percentage against the other best players in the world just maintain rank.
Is the Blizzard system zero-sum for rankings? Seems like with the frequency of season resets you could fix the problem of people shelving their rating by making games a slight positive in terms of rating. Then a team that races out to a 90% win rating and stops playing could be overtaken by a team even with a slightly lower win % that played significantly more games which would encourage people not to shelve their rating.
I have no idea what PVP game you people play, but in the little low-level PVP I have done it is the rule and not the exception that one team just gives up almost immediately. Very few BGs are contested beyond the first few minutes and its not uncommon for the game to be decided before the door even opens when a few people leave or AFK. Most people just join a BG to see if they have won the almost 50/50 roll of getting a win and once it looks unlikely they either leave or afk - the cost of seeing if you got the team thats going to steamroll is low and the cost of fighting against the team thats going to steamroll is high.