Guild Wars 2

Just out of curiosity, what is the difference in tiers from top to bottom, or NA vs. Europe.

Presumably the top is better organized, massive zergs, all on some sort of voice comm.
As you go down the tiers less organization, less guilds, more PUGs, less people, etc.

Is there any difference in playstyles between NA and Europe.

Besides the devs, does anyone know?

Since I have spent almost all of WVW in NA tier 3-4 I am curious what lies on the other side.

I don’t know for myself because I have played in EU all the time but it is said that EU ladder is a bit more PvP like than NA. EU servers like to fight open field more and are a bit more competitive in general. There may be few exceptions ofc but that’s the line by average. NA instead has better coverage, Asian, Oceanic, America. EU is only few timezones and some servers have russians.

I believe this was said by someone from VotF. Sure there are a lot more guilds and players experienced both ladders with their opinions.

o.O i sense some words to be spoken on this thread. Yes theres differences, EU plays as guilds most of the time, and more into open field and GvGs are more common over here! We have less coverage but our average skill is higher than US ervers

Yup you euros play too much haha
anyway the higher the the tier in NA, the more organized guilds. Not necessarily more skill or less pugs, but often because there’s more competition to fight in upper tiers the higher skilled guilds are usually up there as well. In terms of small mans, on average lower tiers are more skilled. since there’s much less players though, the actual number of good players comparing low and high is about the same (BG and NSP for example)

I think that tiers are based on a combination of organisation and numbers, but that’s just my opinion..

I’m in T9, we have some nice organised guild runs at times, but lacking sheer numbers to be able to split up our organised runs and roam on multiple maps at the same time..
While other low tier servers might have the sheer numbers, but lacking organisation, hence all running around like chickens in a coup..

So the perfect balance between these two aspects and you’ll be high-tiering..

Cradorell.3941:

o.O i sense some words to be spoken on this thread. Yes theres differences, EU plays as guilds most of the time, and more into open field and GvGs are more common over here! We have less coverage but our average skill is higher than US ervers

I like posts like this because it flat out says, “We don’t WvW to WvW. We WvW to GvG. In addition to this we typically have less people as a whole who and the ones we do have are packed into guilds. As such we’re more skilled because we have less ‘crappy’ people to drag down our average.”

As someone who plays on a US server I can attest to how ridiculously stupid a lot of people are but I always find it funny how every time Europe talks about the difference it’s “We have skill, NA doesn’t. But then again we don’t really WvW. We’re just in it for the GvGs.” Europe very well may be “more skilled” because they spend their time just trying to kill each other but that’s like playing CoD Domination and saying you’re the best because you’re spending your time kill farming other people.

Much love to Europe and it sounds like a rather cool place to WvW in all honesty but the play styles and goals of the players are obviously vastly different from NA. Judging from the conversations I’ve had with some EU players they are also very stubborn, assume they’re all god’s gift to GW2, and can do no wrong. I’ll stick to my NA server.

Castaliea.3156:

I like posts like this because it flat out says, “We don’t WvW to WvW. We WvW to GvG.”

It’s more a “We WvW to play as guild”, but whatever…

Core point is:

WvW as Anet designed it is boring.

WvW as open field fight box is cool.

“Screw the towers, keeps, PPT, nightcapping, sieging and all this cr*p, i’m here to smack some heads!”

You might find this fun to read as well:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Differences-between-EU-vs-NA-WvW

That said, what I have noticed EU vs NA (having played both) …. Lower tiers in EU still have highly skilled players, just less population. You can still get a good fight out of low pop EU servers who typically don’t sit out the week if the match is lopsided because EU tends to be more about the fights and less about the meta anyhow.

AndrewSX.3794:

Castaliea.3156:

I like posts like this because it flat out says, “We don’t WvW to WvW. We WvW to GvG.”

It’s more a “We WvW to play as guild”, but whatever…

Core point is:

WvW as Anet designed it is boring.

WvW as open field fight box is cool.

“Screw the towers, keeps, PPT, nightcapping, sieging and all this cr*p, i’m here to smack some heads!”

I rest my case as this person made it for me.

as for your other question… the difference from top to bottom is mostly population. go higher tier, find more people.

the skill level of specific guilds may be a bit higher, but its mostly because larger guilds get bored and transfer when they think theyre the best thing to happen to a server since the transistor and they want to be winning because of that.

AndrewSX.3794:

WvW as Anet designed it is boring.

I have a good time.

I have played on both EU and NA, and quite frankly i enjoyed my time on the euro servers much more, the level of play and organization from every level of player is just a tad higher.

I can’t speak to EU other than that it looks like tiers don’t matter as much as the rankings are very close.

In NA, tiers are all about coverage and how many people you have on during which hours.
The large difference even within the tiers themselves can be crushing. #1 BG is stomping #2 SoR this week while #3 JQ (which is supposedly near collapse if you judge by the complaining) still beat #4 TC
#4 TC is much more powerful than #5 DB that DB is openly complaining about facing them despite gaining transfers all the time, and #6 FA hasn’t won a match since they faced #8 and another lower server.

The pattern continues with the only aberration being #7 (SoS, the unofficial Oceanic Server that has modest NA). Strong NA followed by 1-2 guilds in off hours for T3, while T4 is marked by massive NA with almost no off hours.
There is reportedly some variation near the bottom and maybe a stray off hours guild or two (GoM supposedly has this) that skews ratings.

TL;DR With the exception of a newly created gray area in the T4-T5 shuffle, the NA rankings are solid indicators of where they stand.

Shademehr.1397:

AndrewSX.3794:

WvW as Anet designed it is boring.

I have a good time.

That’s not the point, it’s matter of a flawed system based around population, coverage and holding points, plus all the blobbing, lag and associated issues (that just get encouraged by game’s rules) which makes it getting boring after a while.

AndrewSX.3794:

Shademehr.1397:

AndrewSX.3794:

WvW as Anet designed it is boring.

I have a good time.

That’s not the point, it’s matter of a flawed system based around population, coverage and holding points, plus all the blobbing, lag and associated issues (that just get encouraged by game’s rules) which makes it getting boring after a while.

What do you mean it’s not the point? I purchased a game that I enjoy playing. If I’m not having a good time, then I move on to another game that I find enjoyable.

AndrewSX.3794:

Castaliea.3156:

I like posts like this because it flat out says, “We don’t WvW to WvW. We WvW to GvG.”

It’s more a “We WvW to play as guild”, but whatever…

Core point is:

WvW as Anet designed it is boring.

WvW as open field fight box is cool.

“Screw the towers, keeps, PPT, nightcapping, sieging and all this cr*p, i’m here to smack some heads!”

I disagree. Plain open field fight box is boring.

You gotta have additional dimensions to add nuance, strategy, etc.