Guild Wars 2

Double teamed is the most common situation in WxWxW. Look at the 4 maps, they are all designed for this purpose. Learn how to get advantage from multiple situations that quickly happens all the time in all zones. You can solve the riddle or complain about it.

In resume, getting double teamed is going to happen all the time, because it was sort of designed in case if a server was dominating, the other 2 servers could “team up” for a short period to accomplish whatever goal they are trying to accomplish.

BIG EXAMPLE:
We have servers A (green), B (blue) and C (red) that found themselves in a tier. Server A is in a giant lead, Server B is in the middle just a bit above Server C.

In the best case scenario Server B and Server C would team up against Server A to take it down. Unfortunately since people want to win at all cost without consistent strategy, got “tunnel vision” and don’t see the big picture it and all ends up with Server B fighting against Server C and vice-versa for points and for survive from an eventually “tier down menace”.

On the other hand, Server A wants to target Server B because Server B has a chance to catch up and beat them, so Server A wants Server B to lose many points to keep comfortable distance and also because they put better fights to maintain them in a good shape (in case Server A eventually tier up).

In face of this, Server B starts to beat Server C so they can’t take 2nd place either. Now this trigger that Server C wants to beat Server B so they can reach the 2nd place.

Conclusion 1: Server B complains of been double teamed.

Conclusion 2: Server A control the tier at they own desire, they can decide which server comes in 2nd every week.

Conclusion 3: Server C eventually will become in 2nd place most weeks, as long Server A believes the real threat only comes from Server B.

To break this chain reaction, Server C and server B should realize that they are shooting themselves in the foot by letting Server A to be the unquestionable dominated server. Sometimes commanders of blue and red server don’t even dare to attack green borderland, afraid dominating green server could focus more into their own BL for retaliation.

Server B and server C should also realize that they need each other to defeat Server A, by putting aside strong rivalry and server pride for the time enough to demoralize for few weeks Server A – which would trigger another chain reaction on this tier: WxWxW population from Server A would decrease, because we all know “pug players” wanted easy wins (some called karma + WXP trains) or they spend more time in PVE content instead.

Only if this happens, server B and C would have new arguments to balance the tier. But then again, another double teamed situation happens and Server A is now the targeted by the other 2. Green server has now to fight back in defensive positions they are no used to be, or trying to stop blue and red server from this convenient alliance by all means (complain in official Forum how unfair it is, attack one server world only to make believe this new alliance only benefit one server, et cetera).

Double teamed?
It’s all intend to be in Guild Wars 2 WxWxW , so get up stand up and fight for your server and try to share de FUN …. or share your opinion here please, I would like to read more points of views.

My in game name is Dorindon, from Borlis Pass world. Thank you for reading and regards

What? ,can you repeat that please ,. lol

I think he’s saying something along the lines of “Yo, if you feel like you can’t catch a break, team up with the weaker of your enemies to fell the stronger.”

It’s a nice thought, though I haven’t played enough WvW (currently, every time I sign on to WvW, I get the Outmanned buff and can’t go three feet without tripping on a zerg, partially due to the hours in which I play and partially due to so many people on one of the servers) to really tell if it’s something that could work – or that the interface would allow.

Maybe Commanders can formalize alliances? If they can’t, then they should be able to. It’d offer a way to counter the issue of numbers beyond ‘hole up in a keep and hope the enemy forces don’t just res-rush, while your own forces res-rush to take advantage of the ‘no armor damage’ thing.’

The term “double-teamed” is used for many scenarios. Most think it’s when fighting open field when two teams attack a third. Yea, that’s one example and is correct, but that’s WvWvW.

Others use “double-teamed” but really what’s going on are coordinated attacks, which are a type of double-team. When we are green and WC and Klovan get attacked within seconds of each other by our two opponents, you know there is some communication between them going on, especially when it happens around the same time on multiple days.

Right, wrong, fair, cheating, everyone has an opinion. It is what it is. We just deal with it and keep pushing forward.

No 2 servers should be able to team up and no not form any alliances either.
Would just ruin the fun its World vs World vs World – Not world world vs word.

Your fantasy is not reality.

The majority of players realize that the scoreboard is only a reflection of how big the server is compared to the other two and how much participation they have. The “winner” rewards system is also not much to write home about.

So what happens is the players take the opportunity to score as much wXP and have as much fun as possible, and since your typical player likes to “win” regularly and wXP is granted mostly from taking things….they take things from the weaker player.

This was explored fully in DAOC, but unfortunately people have some rose-colored glasses about the 3-realm system as being somehow “self-fixing”…. as evidenced by how ape they went when Warhammer Online was released with only a 2-realm system.

Facts are facts though, 3-realms rarely leads to the scenario of the two small guys ganging up on the big guy because most players believe it’s about having fun and not worrying about some meta-scoreboard they have little control over.

Well, these player idea of fun is perverted in my perverted opinion – isnt it more fun to hand big and scary server his kitten by teaming up with your unfourtunate partner? i think its the most fun you can ever get (well, killing 40 golems with oil is about as good)

The problem I see is the vast majority of players are not tactically minded in the game. Sure, I come across smart players and smart guilds and these players have a big influence on the game, but theres still that majority.

I completely agree with the op (except the part about demoralizing the dominant server – I don’t want to demoralize anyone, I want full maps to play on). I’ve been saying the same thing for a long time.

It is how WvWvW is designed. However, as correctly pointed out, it goes against human psychology and hind brain.

I simply cannot understand people who say it is unfair. If one server is trouncing the other two, it is completely fair for the two weaker servers to gang up on the third.

Additionally, it makes for more fun. Because it means more actual fighting and less PvDoor. And it leads to more WvW participation because the players in the weaker servers feel like they may have a chance – if not of winning at least they can have some fun and not be completely destroyed when they step on the map.

The only logical argument against teaming up is that of avoiding going down a tier. And hopefully the new matchmaking system Anet said they are working on will make this argument null as well.

Johje Holan.4607:

I completely agree with the op (except the part about demoralizing the dominant server – I don’t want to demoralize anyone, I want full maps to play on). I’ve been saying the same thing for a long time.

It is how WvWvW is designed. However, as correctly pointed out, it goes against human psychology and hind brain.

I simply cannot understand people who say it is unfair. If one server is trouncing the other two, it is completely fair for the two weaker servers to gang up on the third.

Additionally, it makes for more fun. Because it means more actual fighting and less PvDoor. And it leads to more WvW participation because the players in the weaker servers feel like they may have a chance – if not of winning at least they can have some fun and not be completely destroyed when they step on the map.

The only logical argument against teaming up is that of avoiding going down a tier. And hopefully the new matchmaking system Anet said they are working on will make this argument null as well.

I appreciated your contribution, it worth the time I spent on such a long text.

I know for experience, it’s not fun been the focus of the other 2 servers, either in the winning side or the losing ones. Guilds and commanders should inspire players to avoid this situation unless for a short period of time (1 week maximum) as a mean to extend the joy to all worlds involved and turn the tier a litle bit more balanced.

Teaming up also only works if there is something to team up against.

Maybe server A has the most points because they have superior coverage during Oceanic, SEA and EU times and tick at 600ppt for 18 hours, while their NA is non-existent and they get basically 0 there. If Server B and C only have NA presence their team-work won’t do any good, because server A isn’t even on any map. All B and C can do is fight each other, which splits the points some way for the 6 hours server A is not dominating and still results in huge run-away wins for server A.

WvW isn’t even about population primarily, it’s all about coverage. If your server’s coverage has fewer gaps than your opponents you can operate without any significant resistance longer and rack up lots of points in those hours. 2v1 does nothing to address coverage issues.

It’s not double teaming, it’s Prioritizing.

In theory, it sounds like it could work. But it doesn’t.

Look how much Borlis Pass and Anvil Rock getting their kitten kicked from the alliance.

All for alliances during off times when two lower servers are outmanned. During prime time should be fairgame because numbers are even.