2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Rizalee.4593

Rizalee.4593

Is it “working as intended” for servers to be able to work together to tag team one server in their match up??

If it is not.. Why not just make it so that you can not tell what server the other side is from? Instead of using “Blackgate Invader” make it just “Mist Invader” would that not help to prevent some level of “working together” when they are supposed to be at war?

~ Rizalee – Human Mesmer ~
~ Rizzae – Asura Guardian ~
Tarnished Coast Server

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: DaMikenatr.7041

DaMikenatr.7041

No, server identity is huge, people hate the lack of it in EotM and they’ll hate it even more if they force it on us in WvW. There have already been responses that things such as alliances, spies and the like are perfectly legal.

Tsyborg – human guardian – commander
Vicious Instinct [VI]

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: style.6173

style.6173

Because it is smart strategy to 2v1 other servers at times. It is working as intended. Every server does it as needed, and we certainly do it on TC.

There are a lot of times where we allow an enemy server to take another enemy’s keep. Why? It is more valuable to get a fully fortified keep reset than to win that particular fight.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Zylonite.5913

Zylonite.5913

You need server identity to kill the server with the highest PPT. You also need to know which opposition guilds you facing to know what to expect in a fight.

If your server has the highest ppt on the map, then you most likely get 2v1’ed.

Betrayed by the gods of ANet

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Rizalee.4593

Rizalee.4593

There are a lot of times where we allow an enemy server to take another enemy’s keep. Why? It is more valuable to get a fully fortified keep reset than to win that particular fight.

That is completely different from what I am talking about, that is just letting the other side do the work, then taking it from them.

I’m taking about the two other servers not attacking each other, and only focusing on one side in the fights. I was online for hours last night, and very rarely saw Camps/Towers switch from BG to JQ or vice verse. They only went from TC to either BG or JQ. Another example from last night was when BG and JQ had two zerges hit North camp. BG attacked until they were nearly wiped, then they pulled out and JQ attacked, when JQ was nearly wiped they pulled out and BG attacked..

Thats the kind of thing that requires communication from outside the game.. IMHO…

~ Rizalee – Human Mesmer ~
~ Rizzae – Asura Guardian ~
Tarnished Coast Server

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Rizalee.4593

Rizalee.4593

You need server identity to kill the server with the highest PPT. You also need to know which opposition guilds you facing to know what to expect in a fight.

If your server has the highest PPT on the map, then you most likely get 2v1’ed.

I could understand if we had the High Score, or PPT, but I don’t think that was the case… At least I am not 100% sure.. But I think its different from two different Zerges coming in at the same time.. and two servers commanders talking in voip about how to tag team a specific location with a specific strat….

~ Rizalee – Human Mesmer ~
~ Rizzae – Asura Guardian ~
Tarnished Coast Server

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Radian.2478

Radian.2478

It is kind of working as intended when there is a 2v1 situation. From what I understand, part of the initial reason of having 3 servers compete against each other was so that the second and third place team could team up against the first place team and there’d be close WvW matches. Due to population imbalance, it doesn’t take long for the first place server to pull away from the rest and you often have the third place team wanting to get second and thus hitting the second place team and then the first place team also hits the second place team to try to stay in first and then the first place team ends up winning my miles and it becomes a competition for second place instead of first place.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Lord Kuru.3685

Lord Kuru.3685

The whole point of 3-way fights is to have strategic 2v1s. The only problem is that Anet botched the ranking system so that it actively discourages #2 and #3 from teaming up on #1.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Zikory.6871

Zikory.6871

There are a lot of times where we allow an enemy server to take another enemy’s keep. Why? It is more valuable to get a fully fortified keep reset than to win that particular fight.

That is completely different from what I am talking about, that is just letting the other side do the work, then taking it from them.

I’m taking about the two other servers not attacking each other, and only focusing on one side in the fights. I was online for hours last night, and very rarely saw Camps/Towers switch from BG to JQ or vice verse. They only went from TC to either BG or JQ. Another example from last night was when BG and JQ had two zerges hit North camp. BG attacked until they were nearly wiped, then they pulled out and JQ attacked, when JQ was nearly wiped they pulled out and BG attacked..

Thats the kind of thing that requires communication from outside the game.. IMHO…

It really doesn’t require any communication at all. Most commanders have been playing this game (as well as the T1 meta) for quite some time. I have seen plenty of times where BG and X server are attacking the 3rd server and the commander says over comms “I hope X server doesn’t attack us so we can paper this keep”

It’s about common goals, if all 3 servers are in JQ’s garrison. It would be smart for BG and TC not to attack each other to keep JQ weak. If TC attacked BG, TC would have BG and JQ to deal with, when in the end the only reason they are there is to paper the keep.

The 2v1 is working as intended, just it is a bit different in T1 (maybe T2 as well) then in lower tiers. All 3 T1 servers are power houses, a 2v1 can be pointed at any server and be completely dictated by map politics. 1 bad call on 1 map could change the focus of which server is getting 2v1’d.

[KnT] – Knight Gaming – Blackgate
Zikory – Retired Thief
Zikkro – Zergling Necromancer

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Johje Holan.4607

Johje Holan.4607

The whole point of 3-way fights is to have strategic 2v1s. The only problem is that Anet botched the ranking system so that it actively discourages #2 and #3 from teaming up on #1.

This exactly. Took the words right out of my mouth.

Which means it is not working as intended – because there are not enough of the proper 2v1’s.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Jamais vu.5284

Jamais vu.5284

There’s no reason for 2 and 3 to team up against 1 because one party of the two gains nothing by it. They would just help their more immediate competitors secure a (even larger) lead over them, while their difference to Nr 1 decreases only relatively at best.
Ergo, 2 and 3 cannibalize each other over place 2.

Seriously. It’s not hard to figure out. This works only in a system where the parties can also actively lose points, but ANet decided for some mysterious reason (probably the same that explains all their other questionable game design choices) to use a scoring mechanism that makes underdogs vs leader completely infeasible.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: DeadlySynz.3471

DeadlySynz.3471

I actually like the 2v1 thing. TC got 2v1 hard last night while I was on and I enjoyed it. Got far more bags than I would have got from capping towers. It keeps things interesting because your constantly fighting. I know some don’t like it, but in a 3-way battle it’s to be expected.

I’m surprised though as why any servers would 2v1 anyone but the leader. Shouldn’t TC and JQ being teaming up to topple BG down to more respectable points that those servers can reach? IMO, it makes more sense to say, team up to the point the top server is wiped off every map then spawn camped until the scores are more leveled out.

I like the 2v1 system though, though i’d much prefer if Anet upgraded their systems enough that we can add a 4th server to the mix.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Kincaidia.3192

Kincaidia.3192

shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: SpellOfIniquity.1780

SpellOfIniquity.1780

There are a lot of times where we allow an enemy server to take another enemy’s keep. Why? It is more valuable to get a fully fortified keep reset than to win that particular fight.

That is completely different from what I am talking about, that is just letting the other side do the work, then taking it from them.

I’m taking about the two other servers not attacking each other, and only focusing on one side in the fights. I was online for hours last night, and very rarely saw Camps/Towers switch from BG to JQ or vice verse. They only went from TC to either BG or JQ. Another example from last night was when BG and JQ had two zerges hit North camp. BG attacked until they were nearly wiped, then they pulled out and JQ attacked, when JQ was nearly wiped they pulled out and BG attacked..

Thats the kind of thing that requires communication from outside the game.. IMHO…

As a Jade Quarrian I can tell you straight up… Our server will never side with Blackgate for anything. And as far as I’m aware, never has… BG and JQ are mortal enemies. We may occasionally ignore each other for the greater good but we’ll never plan to double team another server.

Necromancer, Ranger, Warrior, Engineer
Champion: Phantom, Hunter, Legionnaire, Genius
WvW rank: Diamond Colonel | Maguuma

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Straegen.2938

Straegen.2938

2v1 is a valid strategy but tends to work against the mid server in a tier. The first place server wants to stay there so they focus on the 2nd place server. The third place server often doesn’t want to deal with giant zergs from first place so they quietly attack second place. This means the second place server is frequently the server with a giant target on its back not the actual leader in the tier.

This is also why when there is one really strong server in tier, the other two servers have similar scores even though they may be very far apart in population.

Sarcasm For Hire [SFH]
“Youre lips are movin and youre complaining about something thats wingeing.”

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: sminkiottone.6972

sminkiottone.6972

It works has intended, I cannot find the post, but a dev actually said he wished there where more 2vs1 back on season 1, thats why we have 3 servers and not just 2.

Usually 1st and 2nd fight more against 3rd because it’s easier and more rewarding, but sometimes the most hated server is the one who has to defend against 2 – back in season 1 SFR had so many trolls that PS and VS fought a lot more them than each other just to teach them a lesson
That didn’t end well and the fight PSvsSFR hurt both servers so much that JS ended up 2nd, they(JS) also had an easier season, but the hate between PS and SFR was blind that ended up in a bloodshed.

You can find those legionaries who fought bravely during the first season on the streets of tyria, buy them a drink and they will tell you the most amazing stories you have ever heard.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Ptolemy.5086

Ptolemy.5086

I actually like the 2v1 thing. TC got 2v1 hard last night while I was on and I enjoyed it. Got far more bags than I would have got from capping towers. It keeps things interesting because your constantly fighting. I know some don’t like it, but in a 3-way battle it’s to be expected.

I’m surprised though as why any servers would 2v1 anyone but the leader. Shouldn’t TC and JQ being teaming up to topple BG down to more respectable points that those servers can reach? IMO, it makes more sense to say, team up to the point the top server is wiped off every map then spawn camped until the scores are more leveled out.

I like the 2v1 system though, though i’d much prefer if Anet upgraded their systems enough that we can add a 4th server to the mix.

In regular weekly matches 2v1 might work. In seasons it is all wrong. For example TC knows well they can’t win but can get second place by double teaming JQ. I am not saying it is wrong coz JQ did same thing at the end of season 1 by double teaming SOR for second place and pulling TC to 3rd. Personally i would love to see few 1v1 matches between BG and JQ. It might be interesting

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: jojojoon.8607

jojojoon.8607

Looking at MOS, it appears that TC decided to play for 2nd place at around Sunday and started a 2v1 on JQ which lasted until early Tuesday. With 1st place out of the picture, it looks like JQ started retaliating on Tuesday and are now focusing on TC, leading to a 2v1 on TC.

The ex-SOR on TC did not learn anything from their mistake in Season 1 and basically repeated the same mistake a second time. Just not smart at all…

(edited by jojojoon.8607)

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Obie.3268

Obie.3268

Looking at MOS, it appears that TC decided to play for 2nd place at around Sunday and started a 2v1 on JQ which lasted until early Tuesday. With 1st place out of the picture, it looks like JQ started retaliating on Tuesday and are now focusing on TC, leading to a 2v1 on TC.

The ex-SOR on TC did not learn anything from their mistake in Season 1 and basically repeated the same mistake a second time. Just not smart at all…

I can confirm that this pretty much happened. It was a really a low point for us in JQ, watching 1st place being served to BG by TC, and probably commanded by the ex-SoR players who jumped ship to TC.

I don’t know why there so so much fixation on JQ from TC or why they basically ensured BG got first again in this round, especially considering BG’s flawless wins in the first season. It’s something I don’t think I’ll ever understand.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Reverence.6915

Reverence.6915

Looking at MOS, it appears that TC decided to play for 2nd place at around Sunday and started a 2v1 on JQ which lasted until early Tuesday. With 1st place out of the picture, it looks like JQ started retaliating on Tuesday and are now focusing on TC, leading to a 2v1 on TC.

The ex-SOR on TC did not learn anything from their mistake in Season 1 and basically repeated the same mistake a second time. Just not smart at all…

I can confirm that this pretty much happened. It was a really a low point for us in JQ, watching 1st place being served to BG by TC, and probably commanded by the ex-SoR players who jumped ship to TC.

I don’t know why there so so much fixation on JQ from TC or why they basically ensured BG got first again in this round, especially considering BG’s flawless wins in the first season. It’s something I don’t think I’ll ever understand.

We haven’t deliberately 2v1’d anyone. You let yourselves get 2v1’d with terrible map politics (such as attacking TC when they’re attacking us). Also your SEA guilds have been a no-show so far. Haven’t seen WvW or NUKE out in force and haven’t seen much of Ge lately either. Just been stOP, FOO and MERC/SoX doing overtime. They hiding out in EoTM?

Expac sucks for WvW players. Asura master race
Beastgate | Faerie Law
Currently residing on SBI

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Reikan.2908

Reikan.2908

The whole point of 3-way fights is to have strategic 2v1s. The only problem is that Anet botched the ranking system so that it actively discourages #2 and #3 from teaming up on #1.

This.
I sometimes I wonder if devs have played game.
It shouldn’t be hard to fix
I could easily make a list of ideas

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Ptolemy.5086

Ptolemy.5086

Looking at MOS, it appears that TC decided to play for 2nd place at around Sunday and started a 2v1 on JQ which lasted until early Tuesday. With 1st place out of the picture, it looks like JQ started retaliating on Tuesday and are now focusing on TC, leading to a 2v1 on TC.

The ex-SOR on TC did not learn anything from their mistake in Season 1 and basically repeated the same mistake a second time. Just not smart at all…

I can confirm that this pretty much happened. It was a really a low point for us in JQ, watching 1st place being served to BG by TC, and probably commanded by the ex-SoR players who jumped ship to TC.

I don’t know why there so so much fixation on JQ from TC or why they basically ensured BG got first again in this round, especially considering BG’s flawless wins in the first season. It’s something I don’t think I’ll ever understand.

We haven’t deliberately 2v1’d anyone. You let yourselves get 2v1’d with terrible map politics (such as attacking TC when they’re attacking us). Also your SEA guilds have been a no-show so far. Haven’t seen WvW or NUKE out in force and haven’t seen much of Ge lately either. Just been stOP, FOO and MERC/SoX doing overtime. They hiding out in EoTM?

Yep we are missing a lot of people by some reason. I think JQ start hitting TC hard and ignore BG as much as possible coz it is obvious BG will win season and we don’t have enough players ATM to fight both sides. I have no idea why we can’t cover all maps even during pick hours. SOR did same thing as TC doing now. I remeber SOR zerg covering our EB border WP helping BG to take our keep. WHere is SOR now? #12 i think? TC got a lot of WvW commanders and players from SOR. Good luck with it guys. Did you already find next server to move?

(edited by Ptolemy.5086)

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Seigfried.5938

Seigfried.5938

Good to see Blackgate going strong! When it comes to map politics and server organization, JQ and TC are miles behind. BG does so well because of the hardwork of server leaders behind the scenes who don’t get much, if any, credit for all the time they put in. Seeing JQ in 3rd makes me more happy

Gandara → SoS → BG → Gandara → SFR

New bunker meta sux

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Sardonia.8196

Sardonia.8196

There needs to be more 2v1 against the server in the lead. However leagues do not make that favorable. If a server feels they cannot win 1st, the play for second only, which I think is wrong. If you look at the matches now everyone 1st place in guaranteed to win this week. Nothing is close.
If you look at BG/JQ/TC. TC and JQ should have came out of the gates 2v1 BG. Everyone know BG is the main competition and if they would have 2v1 them from the start, this matchup could of looked a lot different. People keep saying that it is bad map politics and such, not in the server’s best interest. So it is in the server’s best interest to play just for second?
How the scoring should go for the tournaments should be 2 points for 1st and 1 point for 2nd and 3rd. To me this make it more exciting and may encourage more servers to gang up on the power server.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: style.6173

style.6173

There are a lot of times where we allow an enemy server to take another enemy’s keep. Why? It is more valuable to get a fully fortified keep reset than to win that particular fight.

That is completely different from what I am talking about, that is just letting the other side do the work, then taking it from them.

I’m taking about the two other servers not attacking each other, and only focusing on one side in the fights. I was online for hours last night, and very rarely saw Camps/Towers switch from BG to JQ or vice verse. They only went from TC to either BG or JQ. Another example from last night was when BG and JQ had two zerges hit North camp. BG attacked until they were nearly wiped, then they pulled out and JQ attacked, when JQ was nearly wiped they pulled out and BG attacked..

Thats the kind of thing that requires communication from outside the game.. IMHO…

It sounds like you were on TCBL. The home BL tends to get double teamed. That is to be expected.

As I’ve said though, everyone double teams at times. There isn’t really anything wrong with it. Frustrating? Sure.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: style.6173

style.6173

I actually like the 2v1 thing. TC got 2v1 hard last night while I was on and I enjoyed it. Got far more bags than I would have got from capping towers. It keeps things interesting because your constantly fighting. I know some don’t like it, but in a 3-way battle it’s to be expected.

I’m surprised though as why any servers would 2v1 anyone but the leader. Shouldn’t TC and JQ being teaming up to topple BG down to more respectable points that those servers can reach? IMO, it makes more sense to say, team up to the point the top server is wiped off every map then spawn camped until the scores are more leveled out.

I like the 2v1 system though, though i’d much prefer if Anet upgraded their systems enough that we can add a 4th server to the mix.

Normally, yes, but in a league scenario, it is about maximizing points. Think about it this way. BG is too far in front this week. The real fight is for second place. If TC takes a camp from BG, then TC gains 5 points over JQ. If TC takes a camp from JQ, they gain 10 points over JQ. JQ targets are more valuable right now.

You’ll likely see strategies switch later in the season as servers make decisions based on overall standings.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: babazhook.6805

babazhook.6805

This does have me thinking as to what changes one would see in strategies if the matchups were 4 servers rather then 3?

Would a smaller population server then have a relative greater impact ?

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Avster.1935

Avster.1935

I ..just want to point out that a WvW’er from TC is complaining about being double-teamed. That is all

Evelyn Whitehawk | Exalted Legend | Demons’s Demise | I Transmuted My Legendary Medium Coat

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Peetee.9406

Peetee.9406

Good to see Blackgate going strong! When it comes to map politics and server organization, JQ and TC are miles behind. BG does so well because of the hardwork of server leaders behind the scenes who don’t get much, if any, credit for all the time they put in. Seeing JQ in 3rd makes me more happy

I agree. Blackgate is the better organized server.

That being said, I do NOT want to play against dead weight Maguuma and Dragonbrand. The only way to avoid having to play those two is to team up with BG against JQ.

The Swiss style scoring system basically forces us to ignore Blackgate.

Kayku
[CDS] Caedas
Sanctum of Rall

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Ptolemy.5086

Ptolemy.5086

The rest of season 2 will be a fight between JQ and TC for second place and BG comming out to kick anyone too close to their PPT. Nothing new. Have seen it during season 1.
I think in seasons only winning should count. All other places should go with same reward or no reward at all. That might make playfield really interesting.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: ykyk.2740

ykyk.2740

The rest of season 2 will be a fight between JQ and TC for second place and BG comming out to kick anyone too close to their PPT. Nothing new. Have seen it during season 1.
I think in seasons only winning should count. All other places should go with same reward or no reward at all. That might make playfield really interesting.

Actually SoS will most likely clinch second if the current landscape of Gold League persists for the entire season. JQ and TC will be fighting to not place fifth or something, from what I remember.

That is assuming BG continues to win of course. Anything can happen in a 9 week season.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: jojojoon.8607

jojojoon.8607

I question TC’s strategy in 2v1ing JQ and playing for 2nd from the start. If it is 5-3-1 point format, winning second twice yields the same points as winning 3rd and then winning first in the 2nd match. Why give up playing for first without even trying? SOR did the same thing last season and now the ex-SOR on TC are doing exactly the same thing again this season.

BG has the best coverage out of all servers on NA. I’ve been saying this months ago even when they were intentionally tanking to recruit more guilds. You want squash any momentum BG has from the start, but by 2v1ing JQ, TC has essentially made BG stronger.

Something smells fishy and I’ve been hearing a lot of things that can’t be mentioned here..

(edited by jojojoon.8607)

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Lasica.5068

Lasica.5068

As a TC player, this is how I saw the week play out.

To start with we were being 2v1’d by JQ and BG not just on TCBL but on other borderlands and in EB as well to the point were we fell out of the running for 1st place by a significant margin and the other two were neck and neck. This was an obvious strategy to remove TC from the race for 1st and ensure BG and JQ tied up the first 2 places and worked quite well for 2 days.

Then on Monday (my time) TC and BG joined up on TCBL to take the hills and then continued that temporary alliance on for the rest of the day to point where I came home on Monday evening to find TC now roughly even with JQ. After another day of this, JQ had dropped to about 10-12K behind which is where they’ve stayed for the rest of the week.

Now from a strictly tactical point it made perfect sense for JQ and BG to 2v1 TC at the start as that cut the number of potential winners from 3 to 2. It also made perfect sense for TC, once they were out of the running for 1st, to help BG eliminate JQ and take 2nd place.

Why make sense, when it’s so much more fun to make nonsense?

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Terok.7315

Terok.7315

Three servers are matched up against each other so that 2v1s are possible. At least I thought the whole idea was to avoid a single server/faction from becoming ridiculously lopsided.

Vile Necromancer||Defender of the Beastgate||Slayer of Moa’s

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: nerovergil.5408

nerovergil.5408

I question TC’s strategy in 2v1ing JQ and playing for 2nd from the start. If it is 5-3-1 point format, winning second twice yields the same points as winning 3rd and then winning first in the 2nd match. Why give up playing for first without even trying? SOR did the same thing last season and now the ex-SOR on TC are doing exactly the same thing again this season.

BG has the best coverage out of all servers on NA. I’ve been saying this months ago even when they were intentionally tanking to recruit more guilds. You want squash any momentum BG has from the start, but by 2v1ing JQ, TC has essentially made BG stronger.

Something smells fishy and I’ve been hearing a lot of things that can’t be mentioned here..

I play from 1st day and i still remember TC snatched BG Bay when BG was defending from JQ. (Clearly TC and JQ team up to beat BG here)

Even when this 2 server team up to defeat BG, they still cant succeed.

When BG lead JQ by 5k ++, TC change strategy and double team JQ because they know they cant get 1st but 2nd place they can.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: quercus.9261

quercus.9261

The way I see it is that BG has been driving this from the start: a hard 2vs1 on TC to eliminate them early and then strategic help to TC to keep JQ down.

JQ has been played from the start. If you really hate BG so much then prove it next time.

(edited by quercus.9261)

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: WINSON.3278

WINSON.3278

Coward bg tc 2v1 jq

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Blackarps.1974

Blackarps.1974

Coward bg tc 2v1 jq

Cloud! Yes yes. Its been a nasty 2v1 all week but its something to expect whenever a season or tournament comes along. I don’t mind a 2v1 because its a comforting feeling knowing you look like that big of a threat to the other servers. The kind of 2v1 I’ve seen this week is the same I saw in season 1 though where you literally see one of the servers just waiting on a hill for a solid hour for you to make a move while the 3rd server hits you. It killed our morale in EB numerous times to the point you get guild groups having to try and save it.

The proposed idea isn’t worth it though. Even if you see an enemy zerg, you’ll recognize the guild tags and if those are removed, it won’t take long before you realize who is who.

Maguuma Guardian

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: WINSON.3278

WINSON.3278

Coward bg tc 2v1 jq

Cloud! Yes yes. Its been a nasty 2v1 all week but its something to expect whenever a season or tournament comes along. I don’t mind a 2v1 because its a comforting feeling knowing you look like that big of a threat to the other servers. The kind of 2v1 I’ve seen this week is the same I saw in season 1 though where you literally see one of the servers just waiting on a hill for a solid hour for you to make a move while the 3rd server hits you. It killed our morale in EB numerous times to the point you get guild groups having to try and save it.

The proposed idea isn’t worth it though. Even if you see an enemy zerg, you’ll recognize the guild tags and if those are removed, it won’t take long before you realize who is who.

Do not play the game like a coward, like victory just a joke

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: ykyk.2740

ykyk.2740

Coward bg tc 2v1 jq

Cloud! Yes yes. Its been a nasty 2v1 all week but its something to expect whenever a season or tournament comes along. I don’t mind a 2v1 because its a comforting feeling knowing you look like that big of a threat to the other servers. The kind of 2v1 I’ve seen this week is the same I saw in season 1 though where you literally see one of the servers just waiting on a hill for a solid hour for you to make a move while the 3rd server hits you. It killed our morale in EB numerous times to the point you get guild groups having to try and save it.

The proposed idea isn’t worth it though. Even if you see an enemy zerg, you’ll recognize the guild tags and if those are removed, it won’t take long before you realize who is who.

Do not play the game like a coward, like victory just a joke

You need to take a chill pill

Have you considered treatment for your QQ problem

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: jojojoon.8607

jojojoon.8607

I question TC’s strategy in 2v1ing JQ and playing for 2nd from the start. If it is 5-3-1 point format, winning second twice yields the same points as winning 3rd and then winning first in the 2nd match. Why give up playing for first without even trying? SOR did the same thing last season and now the ex-SOR on TC are doing exactly the same thing again this season.

BG has the best coverage out of all servers on NA. I’ve been saying this months ago even when they were intentionally tanking to recruit more guilds. You want squash any momentum BG has from the start, but by 2v1ing JQ, TC has essentially made BG stronger.

Something smells fishy and I’ve been hearing a lot of things that can’t be mentioned here..

I play from 1st day and i still remember TC snatched BG Bay when BG was defending from JQ. (Clearly TC and JQ team up to beat BG here)

Even when this 2 server team up to defeat BG, they still cant succeed.

When BG lead JQ by 5k ++, TC change strategy and double team JQ because they know they cant get 1st but 2nd place they can.

I do think that it was a mistake on TC’s and JQ’s part also for not launching a full 2v1 on BG on reset. What I saw was the standard strategy on reset where you 2v1 the server on their home border. Hence, JQ was getting 2v1 on JQ bl. TC was getting 2v1 on TC bl and BG was getting 2v1 on BG bl. So for the first couple of days, JQ and BG were neck to neck while TC was falling behind (but still a shot at 1st place).

TC then shifted strategy on Sunday and launched a full 2v1 on JQ with BG for almost 2 FULL DAYS ON ALL MAPS, essentially securing BG 1st place since TC is now playing for 2nd place. The question here is why pick JQ to 2v1 instead of BG.

This is just my opinion, but I thought a better strategy from the start should been a full 2v1 on BG by both TC and JQ to demoralize their PVE population early and eliminate any momentum BG may have. In a way, I feel that the tanking BG did intentionally for 2 months worked again despite numerous warnings on the forums since there are still many from both servers underestimating BG heading into Season 2. If both servers didn’t underestimate BG, both serves would have 2v1 BG from the get-go.

(edited by jojojoon.8607)

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Sardonia.8196

Sardonia.8196

I question TC’s strategy in 2v1ing JQ and playing for 2nd from the start. If it is 5-3-1 point format, winning second twice yields the same points as winning 3rd and then winning first in the 2nd match. Why give up playing for first without even trying? SOR did the same thing last season and now the ex-SOR on TC are doing exactly the same thing again this season.

BG has the best coverage out of all servers on NA. I’ve been saying this months ago even when they were intentionally tanking to recruit more guilds. You want squash any momentum BG has from the start, but by 2v1ing JQ, TC has essentially made BG stronger.

Something smells fishy and I’ve been hearing a lot of things that can’t be mentioned here..

I play from 1st day and i still remember TC snatched BG Bay when BG was defending from JQ. (Clearly TC and JQ team up to beat BG here)

Even when this 2 server team up to defeat BG, they still cant succeed.

When BG lead JQ by 5k ++, TC change strategy and double team JQ because they know they cant get 1st but 2nd place they can.

I do think that it was a mistake on TC’s and JQ’s part also for not launching a full 2v1 on BG on reset. What I saw was the standard strategy on reset where you 2v1 the server on their home border. Hence, JQ was getting 2v1 on JQ bl. TC was getting 2v1 on TC bl and BG was getting 2v1 on BG bl. So for the first couple of days, JQ and BG were neck to neck while TC was falling behind (but still a shot at 1st place).

TC then shifted strategy on Sunday and launched a full 2v1 on JQ with BG for almost 2 FULL DAYS ON ALL MAPS, essentially securing BG 1st place since TC is now playing for 2nd place. The question here is why pick JQ to 2v1 instead of BG.

This is just my opinion, but I thought a better strategy from the start should been a full 2v1 on BG by both TC and JQ to demoralize their PVE population early and eliminate any momentum BG may have. In a way, I feel that the tanking BG did intentionally for 2 months worked again despite numerous warnings on the forums since there are still many from both servers underestimating BG heading into Season 2. If both servers didn’t underestimate BG, both serves would have 2v1 BG from the get-go.

This is exactly what I stated in this thread or another. I would of came out heavy 2vs1 BG for 4 days straight and then sort it out afterwards. Playing for second gets you no where since it basically is getting 3rd and moving to Tier 2 for the win the following week. Nothing is gained except BG taking 1st each week. People keep falling for the tricks BG does which is quite sad. Not BG’s fault since it works, I blame others that fall for it

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Reverence.6915

Reverence.6915

The 2v1 on JQ or TC really depends on which time zone. SEA time zone, JQ and BG guilds like to duke it out with each other and there’s not much TC to speak of besides HIRE and GC pulling overtime and remnants of Hi and AT (Those that didn’t transfer to JQ). In EU, there’s not much JQ to speak of besides NA guilds pulling overtime and starting early, so Kazo gets chased around. During NA prime, it’s all about map politics since all maps get filled up and during Oceanic, it’s a giant kitten of standing around staring at each other over T3 keeps and towers until one side gets in range of siege (I’m honestly starting to hate playing during Oceanic, not enough action LFM Oceanic for T1)

Expac sucks for WvW players. Asura master race
Beastgate | Faerie Law
Currently residing on SBI

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: quercus.9261

quercus.9261

Maybe JQ should have done something else at SEA other than roll TCBL and sing kumbaya with BG in garrison? Maybe something like hitting BG?

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Sardonia.8196

Sardonia.8196

Maybe JQ should have done something else at SEA other than roll TCBL and sing kumbaya with BG in garrison? Maybe something like hitting BG?

Unfortunetly now it is too late to really do anything

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: RusShiro.9241

RusShiro.9241

This is something I have noticed happening as well in the current match up i’m in. I reckon that it is very reasonable for alliances and team work to occur. I think that it makes for some very unique game play experiences and occurrences. Their are some that say it is not fair, it is indeed quite disheartening to be on the receiving end of to enemy zergs. I do think it is part of the game play though and completely fair. I say this because it is the nature of war for people to do what ever it takes to win. Forming a partnership with your enemy to kill another enemy is just how it happens sometimes. I have watched my enemies fight on more then one occasion waiting for my moment to strike. It works on the small scale, and guilds who pay gold to influence the outcome make it work on the large scale. This is the nature of war. All is fair.

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Kigera.9584

Kigera.9584

I’m starting to think that people don’t know what a real “2v1” is. TC/JQ double teaming SoR during leagues is one. SBI/Yak/EB is another. This current week is nothing in comparison to the hand holding in those match-ups. I know some folks on JQQ are upset but I assure you, I’ve fought more BG this week than JQ. Look on the bright side, you still get a gold medal this week

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: Zikory.6871

Zikory.6871

The question here is why pick JQ to 2v1 instead of BG.

There was a post on Gw2wvw for a TC post that said there was a “incident” where instead of pushing a 2v1 on BG, JQ hit some TC objectives while TC was attacking BG. So if there is any truth to this is looks like JQ (or the JQ commander involved) made a bad call shifting a possible 2v1 on BG to JQ.

This is almost the same thing that happened in week 1 of season 1. SoR made some bad map politic calls and BG took advantage. Thus taking the lead.

You have been around long enough to know how easy things like this can shift and how commander will change focus depending on who is attacking who. If the above statement (from the TC player) is true, it could have easily been BG on the wrong end of the 2v1 if we would have made a bad call (Map politics wise)

[KnT] – Knight Gaming – Blackgate
Zikory – Retired Thief
Zikkro – Zergling Necromancer

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: zeus.2375

zeus.2375

Yes, it is intended. /thread.

Added – Oh also, everybody will feel like they are being 2v1 at some point within a week long match because it’s true. It’s depends on the situation, commander, PPT, overall score, future matches, pure hatred, etc.

One example:
- Server 2(S2) and server 3(S3) are 2v1ing server 1(S1) both see S1 as a threat.
- Hours and hours goes by, both S2 and S3 have been getting wiped repeatedly by S1.
- All of the sudden, S3 started attacking S2’s zerg/objects to boost morale.
- S2 retaliated.
- S1, at this point is sick of running around from East to West, defending their objectives from 2v1, saw the opportunity and took it.
- 10 minutes later, S3 (or S2) get 2v1 instead of S1.

So there. Unless you sit down with all commanders or communicate server-wide and make it known, solid week long 2v1 will never happen. Even with that, what if other 2 servers decided to 2v1 you? It’s situational. It’s a valid tactic, and it is intended.

(edited by zeus.2375)

2v1 in WvW Working as intended?

in WvW

Posted by: jojojoon.8607

jojojoon.8607

The question here is why pick JQ to 2v1 instead of BG.

There was a post on Gw2wvw for a TC post that said there was a “incident” where instead of pushing a 2v1 on BG, JQ hit some TC objectives while TC was attacking BG. So if there is any truth to this is looks like JQ (or the JQ commander involved) made a bad call shifting a possible 2v1 on BG to JQ.

This is almost the same thing that happened in week 1 of season 1. SoR made some bad map politic calls and BG took advantage. Thus taking the lead.

You have been around long enough to know how easy things like this can shift and how commander will change focus depending on who is attacking who. If the above statement (from the TC player) is true, it could have easily been BG on the wrong end of the 2v1 if we would have made a bad call (Map politics wise)

Nah, that’s not it. That incident led to JQ losing a wp keep but everything went back to normal after that. That incident occurred on reset night, and the coordinated server wide 2v1 on all maps for 2 full days started on Sunday. I seriously doubt someone would go “hey, let’s 2v1 this server because I remember that guild attacked us 2 days ago.” Remember, on reset night, all servers were using standard reset night strategy and you see fights between all 3 servers.

From what I heard from TC, there was some “fishy stuff” going on that cannot be mentioned on the forums, so I won’t go into details here.