Guild Wars 2

Hey Everyone, I’ve been working on a project lately and I believe it’s finally time to share it.

When I started playing WvW, there were many enthusiastic, helpful and skilled players who made it their business to make sure that everyone around them knew what was going on in WvW, and why. However, players come and go, and often they do not pass along the knowledge that they’ve earned to others.

I’ve spent the last few months researching, collecting footage, asking questions of this forum, in order to create a guide that would be an updated, and more combat oriented version of Theongreyjoy’s incredibly comprehensive WvW guide, which you can find here: guildwars2.ro/Ghid-WvW.pdf

So! To the point, I’ve assembled this Commander’s Compendium, which contains all of the information that I was taught, and all of the information that I’ve collected in order to teach myself and others to zergbust, GvG and play effectively in the WvW environment. This is intended to be an educational resource for everyone, the entire forum community contributed to it’s creation, whether you knew it or not.

http://www.tinyurl.com/WvW-Combat-and-Tactics-doc
(Commander’sCompendium.pdf 14,563KB)

What it contains:
Introduction to WvW,
25 player Composition & Party Structure
Combos, Map Objectives, WvW Skills and Concepts
Leadership Skills, Trait Synergies, Siege Outline
Small and Large scale combat basics
Class Roles (GWEN+M+T+Eng)
Advanced Combat Tactics

There are many videos that are referenced inside, which serve as visual examples of many of the tactics and roles that are described in the document.

As with all things, this guide can be improved! Some of the things that I think can improve this guide are:
Video: Thief PoV, Gank Squad in 15v15 or 20v20
Video: Mesmer PoV, Gank Squad in 15v15 or 20v20
More proofing for clarity, grammatical, or spelling errors.

If you find an error, Please PM me with it’s location and description and I will fix them and I will update the document.
If you find material that you posted to this forum and find in the PDF, and you want to be credited, send me a PM and I’ll add you below

Special Thanks:[RG][NS][Agg][HOPE][TA][RE][PYRO][Ark], WvW Forum community, Theongreyjoy …

and I’ll leave this here, because this is where it all started for me: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UYrQMoOBqaI

*all graphic materials are from the Guild Wars 2 Asset Kit

Great thread. Thx for all the info. It must have taken you a long time to make. Cheers.

+1 many times!

Thank you very much!

An interesting read to be sure but no ranger section in the class roles. Ignorance of the class or bias towards it’s usefulness in WvW or just an oversight?

Elenire.7306:

An interesting read to be sure but no ranger section in the class roles. Ignorance of the class or bias towards it’s usefulness in WvW or just an oversight?

Yeah, I often find commanders under utilize rangers and engineers. For example, having power armor with condition runes is self contradictory. Good luck finding engineers to rune the trait set up mentioned. That trait distribution hurts the engineer directly, as well as their ability to aid a small force or a large one.

Wow. You did an amazing job.

This is something anyone new to WvW should read and an interesting read to everyone else.

Great job mate!

Though I am a bit offended that you did not include Rangers in Class Roles. As well as compared them to uplevels, calling them easy kills.

Heh.

Was going to say the same thing. It looses a lot of credibility to not even acknowledge the existence of a profession, especially one that is arguably the best roaming profession.

Like I said ing, amazing job hamster

Elenire.7306:

An interesting read to be sure but no ranger section in the class roles. Ignorance of the class or bias towards it’s usefulness in WvW or just an oversight?

If it were any of the three, it would be a bias towards it’s usefulness in WvW, in large scale combat situations specifically. The overwhelming consensus in the fights and GvG community is that rangers have very limited contribution, and they do not fit a role that they can perform better than any other class due to how they are balanced at the moment.
Rangers can be fabulous roamers and duelers, and their single target damage from range is possibly the highest in the game. They are also hobbled by their pets in bigger fights, as a fair portion of their damage and utility will be dead and limping back to their side after the first push (The pets do not dodge-roll with you) .

Skilled individuals can play them, and make them work, but those highly skilled rangers are very rare. From my personal experience, most of the folks I encounter playing rangers don’t do a particularly good job representing the class, and “go full potato” after their rapidfire is evaded, reflected, or blocked.

I didn’t invent the meta, the compositions, or the class roles, I just collected the information available and presented it. As I said in the beginning, this is about helping people learn to zergbust and GvG, and as it stands today rangers are not well balanced for that type of play.

Hamster.4861:

Elenire.7306:

An interesting read to be sure but no ranger section in the class roles. Ignorance of the class or bias towards it’s usefulness in WvW or just an oversight?

If it were any of the three, it would be a bias towards it’s usefulness in WvW, in large scale combat situations specifically. The overwhelming consensus in the fights and GvG community is that rangers have very limited contribution, and they do not fit a role that they can perform better than any other class due to how they are balanced at the moment.

The GvG community is irrelevant here. We are speaking in the over all context of WvW, not the small, subsection of GvG players.

Hamster.4861:

Rangers can be fabulous roamers and duelers, and their single target damage from range is possibly the highest in the game. They are also hobbled by their pets in bigger fights, as a fair portion of their damage and utility will be dead and limping back to their side after the first push (The pets do not dodge-roll with you) .

Every profession is “hobbled” by something. What does that have to do with intentionally refusing to offer an educational aspect for the players who want to play the profession? just because the author has an irrational dislike for the profession does not make it reasonable to refuse to offer reasonable advice for both the players of the profession, and the commanders that guide them.

Hamster.4861:

Skilled individuals can play them, and make them work, but those highly skilled rangers are very rare. From my personal experience, most of the folks I encounter playing rangers don’t do a particularly good job representing the class, and “go full potato” after their rapidfire is evaded, reflected, or blocked.

And you promote a an intentional roadblock to prevent new or inexperienced players from becoming skilled with the ranger by supporting the bashing of the profession over informed advice in this case.

Hamster.4861:

I didn’t invent the meta, the compositions, or the class roles, I just collected the information available and presented it. As I said in the beginning, this is about helping people learn to zergbust and GvG, and as it stands today rangers are not well balanced for that type of play.

The meta has nothing to do with bad mouthing the profession as a whole in what is being promoted as an informed education tool. One cannot reasonably claim something as an educational tool, then intentional spew ignorance based on a personal bias, and reasonably expect to be taken seriously.

Hamster..

sorry but I think coglin is right… The ranger has a spot .. nuking down low HP targets and pressuring damage dealer classes like elementalists and necromancers… Same as a thief does…

If an enemy ele has no time to meteor/healing rain because of constant rapid fire it’s a gain to the team…

And a ranger can protect the backline against thiefs/mesmers exceptionally well. (knockback, fear, traps).. A trapmaster axe ranger (with Sic’em) can distract any mesmers or thief long enough to let the elementalist escape without spending loads of time to defending…

I’m not saying the Ranger is the new Meta… I say it has a niche where it is useful!

In addition to coglins great points, this is a great way to get newbies slaughtered wholesale by rangers. Nothing in the guide is of particular use to WvW vets, so you’d think a warning for newbies about the effectiveness of rangers in small scale fights would be warranted.

Condi rangers are great at 1vX, but everyone playing WvW needs to know that you can’t ignore a berserker LB ranger in a small scale fight or you’re dead in seconds. That’s critical information for playing WvW at all.

coglin.1867:

- snip-

instead of engaging me in this same old tired debate, you’re welcome to define the role of the ranger in large scale combat; a role that they can fill better than any other class, and recommend a build that fits that role well, and I’ll add a page to the document.

When I collect information on a guide to teach others to GvG, and zergbust – i’m not sure how the GvG community would be irrelevant, considering they invented the play style.

If you want to there’s a thread titled “Rangers in WvW after balance patch” which you can find here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Ranger-in-WvW-after-balance-patch/ where you can engage in this debate.

You are correct when you say that in the overall context of WvW, Rangers can work. But if you’re going to zergbust, I think you’ll find that GWEN classes are better suited to it.

Hamster.4861:

coglin.1867:

- snip-

instead of engaging me in this same old tired debate, you’re welcome to define the role of the ranger in large scale combat; a role that they can fill better than any other class, and recommend a build that fits that role well, and I’ll add a page to the document.

You really shouldn’t toss the “instead” aspect at me. Your the one who created a thread, not I. As well, I am not pushing a flawed guide into the community. that is your doing. I am not sure what your seeking to accomplish by attempting to redirect fault back towards me.

Secondly, why would you limit my option to defining a role they are best at? They do not have to be best at a role to fill it. Many people are going to enjoy the profession, regardless of whether or not it is the best at it. Your guide went out of its way to specifically alienate and insult them. This is your guide, not mine. Do not attempt to push your responsibilities onto others.

Hamster.4861:

When I collect information on a guide to teach others to GvG, and zergbust – i’m not sure how the GvG community would be irrelevant, considering they invented the play style.

Then why do you title it “Commander Compendium : WvW Combat and Tactics” and claim “This is intended to be an educational resource for everyone” simply to sit here and attempt to imply it is GvG focused.

Hamster.4861:

If you want to there’s a thread titled “Rangers in WvW after balance patch” which you can find here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/wuv/Ranger-in-WvW-after-balance-patch/ where you can engage in this debate.

You are correct when you say that in the overall context of WvW, Rangers can work. But if you’re going to zergbust, I think you’ll find that GWEN classes are better suited to it.

We won’t zergbust? You mean you won’t. Please do not claim I can or cannot do something simply because you cannot please, that serves no one.

My only point was that your guide specifically listed an insult instead of a guide, for 1/8th of the professions. That it was a big flaw to do so, and that you might change that.

Your replies are to offer expectations of me to fix your mistake, and offer a guide to rangers, accuse me of incapability of accomplishing things (such as zerg busting), and suggest this is all invented by GvG?

You screwed this up, not me. All you had to do was say “oops” and correct it. Your not going to win any favor by arguing how justified you are to insult the profession and refuse to do your best to educate the community on it, and with draw your bias.

coglin.1867:

My only point was that your guide specifically listed an insult instead of a guide, for 1/8th of the professions. That it was a big flaw to do so, and that you might change that.

As you wish- the one reference to rangers has been removed,

I’ve crowdsourced this entire document so far, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask more knowledgeable players to define what they see as the class’s role.

I’m not sure how pretending rangers don’t exist is much more helpful to newbies than flat out insulting rangers, but ok.

Hamster.4861:

I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask more knowledgeable players to define what they see as the class’s role.

Is this a sideways attempt at blaming others for ignoring at best, an entire profession? Particularly when you posted it originally with a direct insult behind it?

You are the one claiming credit for creating the guide. There for you should accept fault, where fault was made.

By the way, I do not particularly see anyone claiming to be the the best, or even good, rangers. All I see are people asking that you do not intentionally insult them, ignore them, or blame and attack them for not enjoying, being insulted or ignored.

By the way, you list no names at all, yet claim to get this from the so called “knowledgeable players”…………..were they all okay with receiving no credit in the least when you posted this?

Not to mention this >

Fluffball.8307:

I’m not sure how pretending rangers don’t exist is much more helpful to newbies than flat out insulting rangers, but ok.

Hamster.4861:

, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask more knowledgeable players to define what they see as the class’s role.

Shouldn’t you have done that before posting this as a guide? Or were you suggesting there are no knowledgeable rangers?

Rangers arent apart of the META and will not be until either Arena Fixes the class or rangers enmasse can prove they do things better then any of the other classes CONSISTENTLY.

You guys are getting personally upset over things that Arenanet and the Community have chosen to do for the class. He is not saying you cant play ranger, but he is correct in saying there is minimal to no use for ranger in organized zerg busting (Facing 1.5-2+ times your numbers) and GvGs.

If you want to attack someone, Attack the entire community and “Subset” gvg community. Or prove your worth and prove you can do things better then the other classes consistently. (Hint: Yet to happen, Hence they are out of the META)

Tl;dr: Get over yourselves, dont blame the writer.

Banzie.5248:

You guys are getting personally upset over things that Arenanet and the Community have chosen to do for the class. He is not saying you cant play ranger, but he is correct in saying there is minimal to no use for ranger in organized zerg busting (Facing 1.5-2+ times your numbers) and GvGs.

He explains what supply is and what towers are. It’s the most basic intro to WvW, not an elite GvG guide. The whole GvG thing is being used as an excuse to cover the horrible bias/personal opinion of the ‘guide’.

I’ve commanded for a successful zergbusting guild before on a ranger, this was before all of the buffs, and it was still effective. Its been a while, but the guild was Victorious Secretz [VS] if anyone remembers.

Give me the gold and resources I need to buy the gear and I can prove rangers do have a role in zergbusting. While it may not be part of the meta currently, that can always change.

Fluffball.8307:

Banzie.5248:

You guys are getting personally upset over things that Arenanet and the Community have chosen to do for the class. He is not saying you cant play ranger, but he is correct in saying there is minimal to no use for ranger in organized zerg busting (Facing 1.5-2+ times your numbers) and GvGs.

He explains what supply is and what towers are. It’s the most basic intro to WvW, not an elite GvG guide. The whole GvG thing is being used as an excuse to cover the horrible bias/personal opinion of the ‘guide’.

If you read the title “Commander Compendium”. Its meant to teach players the commanders thought process as well as teach people the meaning and thoughy process of zerg busting and by extension gvgs and why guilds and your driver may be doing x and y.

Again, Get over yourselves. Ranger isnt in the META for a reason.

shadowpass.4236:

I’ve commanded for a successful zergbusting guild before on a ranger, this was before all of the buffs, and it was still effective. Its been a while, but the guild was Victorious Secretz [VS] if anyone remembers.

Give me the gold and resources I need to buy the gear and I can prove rangers do have a role in zergbusting. While it may not be part of the meta currently, that can always change.

I dont remember, and probably for good reason. You werent an impact on the game or meta.

I know rangers are fine for pugging, they are fine for PLENTY of thinking.

kittening christ, Natronix above commanded on ranger for a year or more, but im sure he can explain to you why he switched and the pros and cons more then I and why he switched off.

Again rangers arent BAD, but they do NOTHING better then any of the other classes.

Banzie.5248:

Rangers arent apart of the META and will not be until either Arena Fixes the class or rangers enmasse can prove they do things better then any of the other classes CONSISTENTLY.

You guys are getting personally upset over things that Arenanet and the Community have chosen to do for the class. He is not saying you cant play ranger, but he is correct in saying there is minimal to no use for ranger in organized zerg busting (Facing 1.5-2+ times your numbers) and GvGs.

If you want to attack someone, Attack the entire community and “Subset” gvg community. Or prove your worth and prove you can do things better then the other classes consistently. (Hint: Yet to happen, Hence they are out of the META)

Tl;dr: Get over yourselves, dont blame the writer.

“Not meta” does not excuse calling them (and the players that find them dear to their hearts from having a great deal of fun playing them) the derogatory terms that were original used to describe them. Nor does it justify making a conscience effort not to list the best possible manner to utilize them to……………………

“play effectively in the WvW environment. This is intended to be an educational resource for everyone, the entire forum community contributed to it’s creation, whether you knew it or not.”

Banzie.5248:

If you read the title “Commander Compendium”. Its meant to teach players the commanders thought process as well as teach people the meaning and thoughy process of zerg busting and by extension gvgs and why guilds and your driver may be doing x and y.

Again, Get over yourselves. Ranger isnt in the META for a reason.

As a commander, I do not condone any guide that intentionally insulted (which I admit he suggest he removed) then goes on to ignore entirely, while attempting to justify it. Nor do I personally, know a single commander who would not have useful purposes for players who chose to play a ranger. Such as long range sniping of professions, whose death in a fight, would greatly assist the side of the battle that takes out those professions. Not to mention a useful water field.

When you post a guide, it is reasonable to expect feedback that disagree, or points out what the poster feels are negative aspect of the guide. In my opinion, the only folks that really “need to get over themselves”, are those who imply anything outside the meta, is justified in being insulted, or to a lesser extent, declared or implied as useless.

Banzie.5248:

shadowpass.4236:

I’ve commanded for a successful zergbusting guild before on a ranger, this was before all of the buffs, and it was still effective. Its been a while, but the guild was Victorious Secretz [VS] if anyone remembers.

Give me the gold and resources I need to buy the gear and I can prove rangers do have a role in zergbusting. While it may not be part of the meta currently, that can always change.

I dont remember, and probably for good reason. You werent an impact on the game or meta.

I know rangers are fine for pugging, they are fine for PLENTY of thinking.

kittening christ, Natronix above commanded on ranger for a year or more, but im sure he can explain to you why he switched and the pros and cons more then I and why he switched off.

Again rangers arent BAD, but they do NOTHING better then any of the other classes.

I said we were successful. There are/were many guilds that have been successful and effective that haven’t changed the meta, so I don’t see your point in that statement.

And I do not need anyone to explain the pros and cons of why each class is good at their specific roles.

You just haven’t seen many good rangers with all of the bandwagons about. In my personal experience, rangers can bring similar damage to a thief’s from range, as well as survive in the frontline. 2 power longbow rangers can snipe an enemy commander down as well as cripple and slow enemies in an aoe, allowing easier pushes and bombs.

I’m just trying to say that while we aren’t part of the current meta, that doesn’t mean that there isn’t a role for us in coordinated zerg fighting. It also doesn’t mean that you should compare us to uplevels and easy kills.

The ranger population is made up of the same players that play all of the other classes in the game. The difference is that other classes are easier to play at a higher skill level than rangers. In my opinion, there is no difference between the SA thief in WvW and a bearbow in terms of player skill. Both do not require much skill. What makes a difference, is that the SA thief is easy AND effective. While the bearbow is easy and useless.

Rangers just have no place in a organized zerg, sad, but true, that is just a fault of ANET, not the community for noticing this.

ANyway! Bookmarked! Thansk!

Novuake.2691:

Rangers just have no place in a organized zerg, sad, but true, that is just a fault of ANET, not the community for noticing this.

ANyway! Bookmarked! Thansk!

^A big ditto. For rangers, regardless of skill, the key number is 5. If the groups are larger than 5, in a fight where the ranger cannot simply hide and pewpew from far away, rangers are a liablility. And don’t start with the “really skilled rangers” bs. Really skilled rangers could be really skilled necros or eles, they just practiced a profession uniquely unsuited for openfield wvw combat. This is not because rangers or their players are bad. This is because of the fundamental mathematics that govern the game. PERIOD. This guide is not a roaming guide, this guide is not a GvG guide. This talks about WvW as a whole gametype, of which roamers and GvGers are but parts of the whole. And in terms of PPT, raiding guilds who GvG impact PPT FAR more than any roamers capping camps, unless the roamers are organized.

benjenx.6427:

This guide is not a roaming guide, this guide is not a GvG guide. This talks about WvW as a whole gametype, of which roamers and GvGers are but parts of the whole.

So one of, if not the best, roaming profession should not be mentioned at all? In a “guide”? Makes sense.

benjenx.6427:

And in terms of PPT, raiding guilds who GvG impact PPT FAR more than any roamers capping camps, unless the roamers are organized.

So why can’t the roamers be organized and why can’t roaming groups — even PUGs — take objectives?

You’re making a LOT of excuses as to why you personally feel rangers should not be acknowledged to exist, and none of them are any good.

Also this guide is just pointless. Who exactly is gaining anything from it and why would anyone bookmark it? In case you forget what supply is?

Fluffball.8307:

Also this guide is just pointless. Who exactly is gaining anything from it and why would anyone bookmark it? In case you forget what supply is?

Now you are just getting petty, mate.

Take it down a notch. Its not personal.

Thank you Hamster for doing something for the community/players.

Regarding the ranger issue what is imo main reason ranger is not used in WvW is the same as why there are no minionmaster necromancers – you cannot control the AI pets and therefore in any bigger-scale zerg/blob fight your pet/pets will die instantly. That is fine for necro who can always go condi or power, but for a class that is basically built on the premise you will have pet active and fighting for you it creates a major disadvantage…

Ranger as a class puts some of its potential and strength into pet and when he cannot use pet efficiently then some of his potential is also taken away logically leading to the fact that any other class will contribute more to the team than ranger, in this particular zerg/blob scenario at least…

I am aware of the fact that this might appear a bit anti-ranger but those are the facts

Fluffball.8307:

Also this guide is just pointless. Who exactly is gaining anything from it and why would anyone bookmark it? In case you forget what supply is?

Considering how much WvW is struggling as a game mode outside of tier 1, I think this is a great idea for inducting new players. So yeah, it is kinda in case you forget what supply is, lol. Having ktrained a lot in EotM lately I can see this guide being invaluable to players making the transition from quasi-PvE to actual WvW.

That was my point. This is only good for new players that don’t know the basics, however it leaves out one of the biggest basics of all: what a ranger is. I’m not trying to disrespect the guide via that sarcasm but rather call attention to the fact it is in fact a terrible guide for that reason.

Reaven.3958:

Fluffball.8307:

Also this guide is just pointless. Who exactly is gaining anything from it and why would anyone bookmark it? In case you forget what supply is?

Considering how much WvW is struggling as a game mode outside of tier 1, I think this is a great idea for inducting new players. So yeah, it is kinda in case you forget what supply is, lol. Having ktrained a lot in EotM lately I can see this guide being invaluable to players making the transition from quasi-PvE to actual WvW.

I made the guide to help indoctrinate people into WvW, and to create a cross-server training document that would stress the richest part of this game – it’s spectacular combat system. We’re almost three years into the game, and every day we still see players who don’t know how to roll through an enemy bomb. A lot of people don’t understand how party composition, and guild/zerg composition affects playstyle. 30 players CAN defeat a map queue, almost all of the guilds listed in the special thanks have done it.

I’m not trying to suggest that any group of 30 can kill a map queue. Guilds who have good synergy – the players know what the drivers expect, what they’re likely to do and when and why; when communication is clear, you can make the simple fields and finishers combat system of Gw2 sing, and be left standing over a mountain of your slain enemies.