Guild Wars 2

Darkdanjal.3401:

I can understand that people dont really care about winning, honestly what is the point in winning, there is NOTHING or NO ONE to compare you with, it proves to me how casual this MMO is in PvP.

The PvP in this game needs a lot more and the way this is going its getting worse each patch with false promises…..

Im playing other PvP games now like bloodline champions, archeblade, that last one is in open beta and has more features then GW2 after 8 months, it makes you think…..

For me I PvP to earn glory, get better ranks and show off in that way. tPvP is the best way of getting glory if you win otherwise it’s a waste of time since you sacrifice personal glory for the big reward at the end.

Which is why it’s so kitten important for me to win there.

There are no ranks mate….

Glory is just a useless so called rank that gives you no comparisen and is even worse in rewarding players as the armor is exacly the same in PvE and PvP…..

As to why people dont communicate, dunno maybe because these are new players and dont understand what you mean, or they just dont care and do what they like…

When i play with experienced-enough pugs we all know what to do and there really is no reason to say anything. If at the beginning i see that no one is going for our close point i will do that and if i don’t then someone else will, If on legacy 3 of us are going far point and i see that there’s only 1 enemy i will switch to middle etc., we’re not dumb.

Darkdanjal.3401:

There are no ranks mate….

Glory is just a useless so called rank that gives you no comparisen and is even worse in rewarding players as the armor is exacly the same in PvE and PvP…..

As to why people dont communicate, dunno maybe because these are new players and dont understand what you mean, or they just dont care and do what they like…

Each to his own. I like the rank system and I enjoy showing off with the “/rank” emote. After all, showing off is one of the only reasons people play MMOs in the first place.

kaplis.7195:

When i play with experienced-enough pugs we all know what to do and there really is no reason to say anything. If at the beginning i see that no one is going for our close point i will do that and if i don’t then someone else will, If on legacy 3 of us are going far point and i see that there’s only 1 enemy i will switch to middle etc., we’re not dumb.

And what if other people have a different strategy in their head? Like some people prefer 1-3-1. Others like 4-1. How do you know what they’re thinking?

bhagwad.4281:

kaplis.7195:

When i play with experienced-enough pugs we all know what to do and there really is no reason to say anything. If at the beginning i see that no one is going for our close point i will do that and if i don’t then someone else will, If on legacy 3 of us are going far point and i see that there’s only 1 enemy i will switch to middle etc., we’re not dumb.

And what if other people have a different strategy in their head? Like some people prefer 1-3-1. Others like 4-1. How do you know what they’re thinking?

If they want to strategize (is that even a word?) then by all means, the point is – if everyone knows what is needed to be done we can play without saying anything.

kaplis.7195:

bhagwad.4281:

kaplis.7195:

When i play with experienced-enough pugs we all know what to do and there really is no reason to say anything. If at the beginning i see that no one is going for our close point i will do that and if i don’t then someone else will, If on legacy 3 of us are going far point and i see that there’s only 1 enemy i will switch to middle etc., we’re not dumb.

And what if other people have a different strategy in their head? Like some people prefer 1-3-1. Others like 4-1. How do you know what they’re thinking?

If they want to strategize (is that even a word?) then by all means, the point is – if everyone knows what is needed to be done we can play without saying anything.

What’s needed to be done depends on what strategy is agreed upon. And you can’t agree upon something unless you talk about it.

P.S. “Strategize” is a pretty common word

bhagwad.4281:

What’s needed to be done depends on what strategy is agreed upon. And you can’t agree upon something unless you talk about it.

P.S. “Strategize” is a pretty common word

There is no strategy, we improvise.

kaplis.7195:

bhagwad.4281:

What’s needed to be done depends on what strategy is agreed upon. And you can’t agree upon something unless you talk about it.

P.S. “Strategize” is a pretty common word

There is no strategy, we improvise.

Speak for yourself. Tell that to all the other winning teams who have a strategy.

bhagwad.4281:

kaplis.7195:

bhagwad.4281:

What’s needed to be done depends on what strategy is agreed upon. And you can’t agree upon something unless you talk about it.

P.S. “Strategize” is a pretty common word

There is no strategy, we improvise.

Speak for yourself. Tell that to all the other winning teams who have a strategy.

I could say “Tell that to all the teams who don’t communicate.”. I know i sound like a broken record but if the group is filled with people who know the game then we can be just as good as those who do strategize.

bhagwad.4281:

If you’re in niflhel and you have two thieves, which one goes to try and steal the creature?

None of them, because if you’re facing a good team they’re not going to kill boss at the beginning…

Archaon.6245:

bhagwad.4281:

If you’re in niflhel and you have two thieves, which one goes to try and steal the creature?

None of them, because if you’re facing a good team they’re not going to kill boss at the beginning…

This is a perfect example of how there are differing strategies. There’s no single “dominant strategy” since then you have to posit there there is just one Nash equilibrium for the game.