I know Im a poor looser, BUT this is ridiculous...

[Skavenged]

Drudatz, that's why I usually run him with something that can tag my opponent with Black Claw. Makes Sandstorm irrelevant, and its also great for clearing decoys and bubbles while I'm swapping to my next pet. As far as evading the forced swap, its a chess match. Are you sure you know when I'll do it? That's why I included the caveat "when played well". Hehe

[Awq]

Drudatz, that's why I usually run him with something that can tag my opponent with Black Claw. Makes Sandstorm irrelevant, and its also great for clearing decoys and bubbles while I'm swapping to my next pet. As far as evading the forced swap, its a chess match. Are you sure you know when I'll do it? That's why I included the caveat "when played well". Hehe

Lets say that it is Val'Kyr against Imp. You want to swap me the first round, because you do not want the CoD doom on the imp. So I swap in the right pet and the Val'Kyr gets swapped back in. You pretty much HAVE to swap the imp out now, without having immolation up.
It depends on the match-up, but it is (normally) very easy to predict the swap. I use this swap turn to get the most favorable match-up.

I've played the Imp myself and I noticed that very few people do this. So this weakness will not impact your winratio much.

[Wilderness]

You make some very valid points. Losing is hard to do, especially at first. Still, if you come up through pet PvP on easy-street by using the OP pets, what have you really accomplished, other than hanging around? I guess a case could be made that you learned something, but you often learn more from defeat than an easy win. I could have 5k wins easily by now (I think so anyway!), but I refuse to use the nonsense pets. If I had my 5k wins using the OP pets, in my mind I wouldn't have earned half that number. Also, someone who becomes accustomed to using the OP pets (i.e. winning most of their matches), is not going to want to stop winning. There was a post a long time ago about this, about how the player base finds itself always reverting back to the OP pets when the losing starts. Having an easy fallback hampers creativity. Also, if the new player using the OP pets so he can learn whilst coming up queues into new players who aren't using them (or do not know about them), and crushes them, isn't said player taking actions that could cause the other new players to quit?

For me, I would rather have people quit if all they are going to do is run FotM constantly, so that is one reason that I don't advocate starting off with the OP pets. I would gladly wait 5 mins each time in the queue if it meant that I wasn't going to constantly run into the same FotM nonsense that we have now, because people are so afraid of "losing". I will take a much smaller pvp community any day if it meant more creativity and cerebral play. There is an old saying; Don't poison the well. We have HUNDREDS of pets to choose from. Do you really mean it when you say you would rather have more people running the same teams (and by that we can assume FotM teams) over and over, as long as it meant a larger community? A larger pvp community using the same percentage of FotM pets is of no help to anyone. Not knocking your opinion here. I realize that I am in the vast minority when it comes to my take on OP pets .

No offense taken. But I think where you aren't quite correct is that a new player using FotM teams isn't going to be winning 90% or even 70% of their battles. They aren't just going to be rolling over everyone because you do actually have to have some knowledge and skill to adjust during a battle. Obviously take 2 newer players and give one a random team they picked because they like those pets and another a Valk/Pup/DAH and its not going to be a 50% chance for each of them. But you can't just run a FotM team and use the exact same moves all the time and do THAT well. Because of the popularity of several pets, there's always plenty of hard and soft counters going around, and even without a direct counter a knowledgeable pet battler can minimize a stronger pet and play to his/her own advantages. If the person with the FotM team doesn't realize that's happening or know how to stop it then they can and often will lose.

I have found that while playing with stronger teams and the popular OP pets that I have, I still lose regularly and I still make mistakes. Even when I win though, I learn a lot. I see what sort of different comps people try and the synergy that they do or don't have between them. I see what they were trying to do against my team and occasionally even realize why. I learn to look at what types of pets I'm going up against and how that should change my responses, along with knowing the types of moves pets have and how they interact. These are all things that more experienced people do probably without thinking about much, but its very much not the case for someone who is new to this. That's why I said that I found the advice in a lot of places I read where people would tell new players to avoid FotM pets/teams to be not very helpful. Its very frustrating to lose over and over and over again, and I think that if someone takes that advice and tries to create their own teams they are not only going to lose because there is so much that they don't know, I think its going to be harder for them to determine why they lost and what they should do. You may disagree on that, but that's my 2 cents.

I really disagree with you regarding having people quit rather than running FotM teams. I think that the best thing for pet battles and the meta as a whole is to have a larger community. That's the only way to attract any sort of serious attention and faster response times from Blizzard, as well as the best chance for achieving an overall meta that is more balanced and allows that creativity that you want. If the pet forums have a bunch of people complaining how Valks are OP, and Blizzard sees it and sees that 2% of players are actively involved in pet battles then even if they agree that its something that should be adjusted, its going to be well down their priority list. In the same scenario if they see that 15% of players are doing pet battles, then that balancing or adding more pet battle features and content is going to be a higher priority.

No matter what, human nature is what it is, so you're going to have players who will always only play whatever is the most OP so that they can win. That's what they like, that's what is fun for them, and its never going to matter what anyone says about it, that is how they are going to play. And there is always going to be people like you, who enjoy getting creative and refuse to use OP pets because you believe it cheapens the wins and you'd rather feel like you earned them. That's perfectly ok as well. But the players who will always only use OP pets are going to use OP pets from the start, because that's what they do. And the players who might end up like you are more likely to just end up quitting if they consistently get stomped their first 30/40/50 games and feel hopeless so they don't stick with it. We can be idealists and hope that people will just have fun and play around with different pets, but I think we all know that's not going to happen. But if you take the meta as it currently is, with all sorts of OP pets and teams (I still see a decent variety though, my experiences haven't been as dire as some peoples from what I've read) but increase the number of people playing by 10 or 20 times, then at least you have a group that is going to get more attention from Blizzard.

I could be wrong about how many people do pet battles, but to me it seems like a rather small community and part of the playerbase. And as long as it remains a smaller, niche group then balancing/adjusting/nerfing of abilities is generally going to take a while and not be a high priority, which is exactly what will keep preventing you from seeing a meta where things are relatively balanced and creativity and cerebral play can excel. To achieve that sort of balance requires that Blizzard be at least somewhat hands on at least somewhat regularly in monitoring pet battles and making adjustments as necessary. The same goes for actual PVP which is what they do (or try to). Pet battles have not had the same sort of attention and interest in balancing, nor will it if it is only a very small community doing it. That's why I say the more people who play the better we will be in the long run, even if those people who start playing keep the percentages the same of FotM stuff vs actual creative and fun teams.

[Genome]

No offense taken. But I think where you aren't quite correct is that a new player using FotM teams isn't going to be winning 90% or even 70% of their battles. They aren't just going to be rolling over everyone because you do actually have to have some knowledge and skill to adjust during a battle. Obviously take 2 newer players and give one a random team they picked because they like those pets and another a Valk/Pup/DAH and its not going to be a 50% chance for each of them. But you can't just run a FotM team and use the exact same moves all the time and do THAT well. Because of the popularity of several pets, there's always plenty of hard and soft counters going around, and even without a direct counter a knowledgeable pet battler can minimize a stronger pet and play to his/her own advantages. If the person with the FotM team doesn't realize that's happening or know how to stop it then they can and often will lose.

The problem with this is, if a new player is even using FotM teams, then they either researched them beforehand or someone told them how strong they are. Chances are, they will at least know the rudiments of how to play them by researching them or being told about them, and with FotM teams, sometimes rudiments are all that you need. A Valk/DAH/Pup or Valk/DAH/Qiraaji can almost auto-pilot to a 70% or better winrate unless they run into counters (or mirrors) all day, or they are so terrible at playing that they can't even win using the OP pets (i.e not using BP or Haunt, which is what makes the pets good in the first place). I probably hover around a 50-60% winrate, but my teams are constantly changing and I consider myself an above-average player (shameless plug!). Now, if I were to start using the FotM pets, I could certainly improve on this, but that wouldn't make me a better player. I would still be a 50-60% winrate player, just artificially elevated by using pets that are OP. The problem with starting out using the OP pets, is that while the new player "may" learn some lessons coming up, he or she is also going to learn that they can often power through their mistakes anyway because of the drastic gulf in strength between the top pets and the normal or even strong pets. It is hard to give up that kind of power once one is accustomed to it.

I really disagree with you regarding having people quit rather than running FotM teams. I think that the best thing for pet battles and the meta as a whole is to have a larger community. That's the only way to attract any sort of serious attention and faster response times from Blizzard, as well as the best chance for achieving an overall meta that is more balanced and allows that creativity that you want. If the pet forums have a bunch of people complaining how Valks are OP, and Blizzard sees it and sees that 2% of players are actively involved in pet battles then even if they agree that its something that should be adjusted, its going to be well down their priority list. In the same scenario if they see that 15% of players are doing pet battles, then that balancing or adding more pet battle features and content is going to be a higher priority.

While you are certainly right about a higher population getting more love from the devs, further saturating an already fairly saturated with OP/FotM queue is not the answer. If more and more players almost solely use these pets, then the new players who don't know to use the OP pets are going to leave even faster than they would under today's scenario, as the FotM users are going to stomp the new players, and the new players will just queue into more of the same on a more frequent basis. If the new player sticks it out, they will soon realize that they too have to use the OP pets to have a chance to win regularly, and we wind up with a community using about 10 pets to battle with. By proliferating the OP pet use, the community is only hurting itself as a whole by chasing away new talent, and limiting it's own options to FotM and counters. While we are waiting for attention from Blizz, who would really want to pet battle at all if these were the only two comps that you saw, outside of the more specialized/unique matchups that are becoming more-and-more rare?

No matter what, human nature is what it is, so you're going to have players who will always only play whatever is the most OP so that they can win. That's what they like, that's what is fun for them, and its never going to matter what anyone says about it, that is how they are going to play. And there is always going to be people like you, who enjoy getting creative and refuse to use OP pets because you believe it cheapens the wins and you'd rather feel like you earned them. That's perfectly ok as well. But the players who will always only use OP pets are going to use OP pets from the start, because that's what they do. And the players who might end up like you are more likely to just end up quitting if they consistently get stomped their first 30/40/50 games and feel hopeless so they don't stick with it. We can be idealists and hope that people will just have fun and play around with different pets, but I think we all know that's not going to happen. But if you take the meta as it currently is, with all sorts of OP pets and teams (I still see a decent variety though, my experiences haven't been as dire as some peoples from what I've read) but increase the number of people playing by 10 or 20 times, then at least you have a group that is going to get more attention from Blizzard.

This is very true. Some folks, either out of a desire to be the best and win (nothing wrong with this), or for the desire to just coast to wins or frustrate people, will just run FotM stuff. Unfortunately, if enough of the latter group hang around after their initial fun, and they have chased away people like me who eschew the OP pets and enjoy getting creative with teams, all you have left are FotM/OP pets and counter matchups with no room for improvisation, which we already have to some extent now, at least if you want to win regularly. If everybody using OP pets for easy wins until the queue is so saturated as to make it all but unplayable is the only way to make changes happen, it really isn't worth it.

Now, how to fix the problem is a bit more complicated. I used to be a fairly hardcore PvP'er, and lived in BG's and Arenas. When something got out of control, Blizz would often swing the nerf-bat too hard and make something too weak (think Warriors after Cata patached some things). I don't want the OP pets to be destroyed (how often do you see FFF in teams anymore?). But if they cant fix them, maybe Blizz wouldn't even have to nerf these pets at all if they put in matchmaking parameters. It could be something like the lower level Twink queues. Players who ran the OP pets and counters to try and be the best could fight each other till their heart's content, and leave the rest of the community to be creative, and at the same time give new players a chance to come up without having to rely on the crutch pets. Using certain pets would dictate your queue. Maybe something such as a simple grading system, along the lines of:

Level 1 - Quilrat, Owl, Coilfang Stalker, Mouse
Level 2 - Crab, Raven, Sunreaver Micro Sentry, Warbot
Level 3- Anubisath, Valk, DAH, Murk, Jademist

This is probably way too simplistic, but it would be a possible remedy that could keep everyone (or at least more people) happy. Of course, grading the pets would be a bit subjective, but I believe that win-loss ratios could tell the tale pretty convincingly (and hell, the tooltips can be pretty convincing too just reading them). For instance, in the semi-old days of PvP, Locks were usually on like 7 of the top 10 teams at any given time. If the same can be said of Valks and Adders, then they are likely candidates for level 3 status. While the queues for the Level 3's would likely be long like the Twink queues are, at least you would be going in knowing that you are going up against the best, and not just steamrolling most everyone else with your OP pets. It would likely weed out the less dedicated FotM users when they couldn't just abuse the lower-echelon pets with their broken comps, and had to fight other high-end pets all the time. Just spit-balling here. I remember someone posting about a special randomized pet queue a while back as well. I like that idea very much (if the normal queue could still be chosen of course!), as I believe it would revitalize pet battles greatly being out of your comfort zone.

Also thanks for keeping it civil and eloquent (a true rarity on forums of all types!), and I do appreciate what you are saying

[Wilderness]

You do have a valid point about people getting used to winning and thus not wanting to switch to more creative teams. It is not easy to go from a 70% win rate to a 40% win rate, and human nature will probably dictate that at some point after that 8th loss people are going to say “screw it” and bring out the big bad FotM pets/teams. But I think that’s something that everyone does to some degree or another (unless you’re truly masochistic!) – I’m sure you have teams that you’ve created that are strong and that you do well with, and if you are trying new things out and its going fairly poorly you might want to swap in one of your better teams to get a win or two. There’s nothing wrong with that.

I don’t know, maybe I’m being a little too naïve or optimistic, but I don’t think that a lot of people would/will stick with those kinds of teams long-term unless they really enjoy a particular pet or team, because it would get too boring doing the same thing over and over and over again. I think that most people who are getting into pet battles are doing so because we have all these awesome pets and want to be able to do things with them. That’s why I’ve been doing my pandaria tamer run pretty much every single day since I started getting into pet battles – so I can get 2 or more pets to 25 daily. I know that most of them won’t be that great, particularly in PVP, but there are some really interesting ones out there.

Sure, some people are just going to chase achievements and wins – I’m guilty of that myself, as I want to get the 250 win achievement. I love my Clonedancer team and I still use it regularly, but I’ve been trying out other teams with pets that I think are fun or unique as well. Even though I like the synergy and the individual pets on my Clonedancer team, it just gets boring using them too much and I’ve only had it for a couple of weeks. I don’t think that I’m alone and I think that most people who stick around with pet battles are going to end up somewhat more experimental than just running a couple FotM teams, because I can’t imagine the sheer boredom of using the same team or couple of teams to try to get to 5k wins for example.

As you said though, fixing the problem is a rather complicated issue. My very first thought when reading through your post towards the end was “MMR for pet battles? That would be amazingly awesome!”. But then I realized that it wouldn’t work, and I don’t think the simplified system you mentioned would work either. There is an issue of subjectivity, and I’m sure that there’d always be at least a couple pets that would be thought to be graded incorrectly. Plus you’d then run into the problem that pet battles are designed to be rock/paper/scissors but how are you going to make those different level queues work regarding counter pets. An emperor crab isn’t an OP pet at all, but its great against several of the currently popular pets, except you’d either never be in the same queue as those people, or you have to try and work in all the counters and counter counters and before you know it we’re just back to one big open queue.

The other main problem comes back to the number of people playing. How many people are active in a pet battle queue at various times? What’s the queue like for your average meta during popular playing times? Off-hours? I don’t think its ever that high – it looks like we can all agree that the number of people actively participating in pet pvp is rather low – so how is any sort of MMR/ranking system going to work? It would effectively just create longer queue times for most people.
If pet battles were more popular, I would LOVE some sort of MMR system. I think that could be so cool, and it would be great to pair newer players against each other and more experienced people who have decent win rates against each other and so on. It’s a really exciting concept, I’m just having trouble figuring out how any sort of grading system, MMR, or whatever could actually be implemented and have it actually work out.

P.S. I love the idea of a random pet queue – I assume you mean that it would basically pick any 3 of your level 25 rare pets and pair you against someone else who does the same? That would be a lot of fun.