Guild Wars 2

One of the original ideas of WvW, was that two servers could team up against a single server, if that server was ahead on points. But when playing WvW, this is not something that really happens, other then by coincidence. Mostly, each server tends to just grab the camps/towers/keeps that are the easiest to take. So I was thinking, since we are starting on a new matchup system, that could potentially make one server dominate two others, how about adding a system that literally allows the two servers, with the lowest amount of points, to team up?

This is how it could work:

• Blue server is ahead of Green server by 50.000 points (just as example)
• Green and Red server both get an automatic message, that says something on the lines of (from Red server point of view); “Blue server is now 50.000 points ahead of Green server, would you like to team up with Green server? – Yes/No”
• Blue server would not be able to see this message
• Votes are then received by all the players of Green and Red server, that are logged onto a WvW map, over a period of time (like 12 hours)
• The final result of the votes are shown as a message to all three servers
• If the end result is “yes”, the team up between Green and Red server would then last one or two days
• If the end result is “no”, nothing happens
• During this team up, Green and Red server would still be able to attack each other
• But by killing players, or taking camps/towers/keeps, from the server you’re teamed up with, there would be a point penalty, as indicated by a bar
• When that penalty bar becomes “0”, the team work will end, regardless of the official end time (the one or two days)
• The penalty bar, and official end time of the team up, would be located under the quest log, and be visible by all three servers when logged into a WvW map

That is the rough idea I got. As for the benefit of being in a team, I’m not sure what should be. I think that an indicator that says “you’re in a team work with another server”, will do a lot on its own. But maybe there would be a buff associated with the team up, as well?

What do you guys think?

TL;DR
A voting system that gives each lower scored server the option of work together for a common goal. This teamwork would be indicated in the form of a “visual agreement” (placed under the quest log), much like how the commander icon is also visual indication that gather players for a common goal. Next to this visual representation, there should also be some form of buff gained from being in a team work. The team work would be for a limited duration.

Here’s an idea, how about…

No I don’t think that idea is good. The thing with 2v1 is that it is based on blind trust where you don’t really communicate with anyone on the other servers. Yes I know people talk to opposing players on others servers. But hypothetically if you didn’t you don’t really know what the other server will do exactly (if you are part of the 2 servers attacking 1 server). So like sure both servers may 2v1 another server but at some point maybe one of the servers are like hey letkitten something completely undefended by the other server. In a way this is an interesting dynamic.

As for implementation, it will never work because if you are 2v1 a server and attacking their keep say in EB. You will obviously kill people from the other server when both servers break into inner. You (for your own server) want the keep for PPT but not let the other server who may have “helped” you with the 2v1 get it. It doesn’t solve anything since you have to consider who captures it and PPT

CuRtoKy.8576:

No I don’t think that idea is good. The thing with 2v1 is that it is based on blind trust where you don’t really communicate with anyone on the other servers. Yes I know people talk to opposing players on others servers. But hypothetically if you didn’t you don’t really know what the other server will do exactly (if you are part of the 2 servers attacking 1 server). So like sure both servers may 2v1 another server but at some point maybe one of the servers are like hey letkitten something completely undefended by the other server. In a way this is an interesting dynamic.

As for implementation, it will never work because if you are 2v1 a server and attacking their keep say in EB. You will obviously kill people from the other server when both servers break into inner. You (for your own server) want the keep for PPT but not let the other server who may have “helped” you with the 2v1 get it. It doesn’t solve anything since you have to consider who captures it and PPT

The fact that the majority of people on each server have to agree to work together, is all the communication that is needed. The message of the agreement would be constantly visible under the quest log, as long as it is effect. What each server does with it, is up to them.

It would be a “written agreement”, not a merging of two servers. The point would be to work together with a common goal, not to literally be on the same team. The dynamic would still be there. You could potentially agree to be on team with the other server, and then when they go to attack the high score server’s borderland, you break the agreement. Or when the server you’re working together with, are about to take the high score server’s keep, you kill them all.

The difficult part of this system would be cause and effect. If you chose to cancel the agreement, by killing the server you were working together with, there would have to be some sort of lose. Maybe in the form of a buff, similar to the ‘outnumbered’ buff.

If you step into the Tier 2 thread, apparently that’s already happening

lol.

There will always be rebels who want to ‘go against the flow’ and do what they please unless they are forced to.

But with our new super weapon fully operational. Blue and red will be fighting each other for some time whilst we take what we want.

Few flaws (though I agree that the 2v1 should somehow be worked out)
100 players in green server – 30 players vote no, 50 vote yes, 20 don’t vote at all
100 players in red server – respectively 20, 50, 30
Now you still have about 20-50 players in each server who are “allied” who’ll still kill each other despite the fact they are allies.

Also, when a battle is won by temporary allies, a lot of backstabbing will happen.

Azure Prower.8701:

There will always be rebels who want to ‘go against the flow’ and do what they please unless they are forced to.

But with our new super weapon fully operational. Blue and red will be fighting each other for some time whilst we take what we want.

How is that different from how it works now?

Gwalchgwn.1659:

Few flaws (though I agree that the 2v1 should somehow be worked out)
100 players in green server – 30 players vote no, 50 vote yes, 20 don’t vote at all
100 players in red server – respectively 20, 50, 30
Now you still have about 20-50 players in each server who are “allied” who’ll still kill each other despite the fact they are allies.

Also, when a battle is won by temporary allies, a lot of backstabbing will happen.

All players can still kill each other, even if on team. But the idea would be that the decision would be based on highest vote, not personal vote.

Backstabbing is fine, and fun.

We got a system in place already. Its call talk to them. most commanders have a sig under each post like me that saidds server and commander on it. pm 1 of them and set it up.

IoJ and SF have done that to a point and the back stabbing has been great. NO NO NO NO to anyone being forced to be ally with anyone. its wvw not wv2w.

Lord Rager.8543:

We got a system in place already. Its call talk to them. most commanders have a sig under each post like me that saidds server and commander on it. pm 1 of them and set it up.

IoJ and SF have done that to a point and the back stabbing has been great. NO NO NO NO to anyone being forced to be ally with anyone. its wvw not wv2w.

The point of this would be to include everyone on a server, not just a commander or two. People who read the forum are a minority.

I don’t know where you read that there would be anything forced? What each server does with the team work, is up to them. Nothing would be changed beyond a visual indication of the team work, and a possible buff to go with it.