Guild Wars 2

We are a booming part of GW2. In only one month we went from 59 EU-guilds and 39 US-guilds to 99 EU-guilds and 79-US guilds, only on the unofficial website (GW2GvG).

Someone said there were about 3500 players, I say in each GvG-guild we have an average of 30 players. This means +5000 players. If we all unite we can send a message to GW2, so I started a petition today to create an official GvG-setup.

If we can have +5000 signatures we can prove Anet there is a large enough demand. Please sign with your ingame name.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/official-gvg-setup-in-gw2/

And for the pessimists under our ranks, if we don’t try, we’ll never know if this might work.

Elder Sang.2058:

If we can have +5000 signatures we can prove Anet there is a large enough demand. Please sign with your ingame name.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/official-gvg-setup-in-gw2/.

Nothing personal man, but I would have signed it if it wasn’t tacked onto the back of your own personal suggestions for the format, some of which I just don’t agree with.

I don’t think a petition is the best way to go about this really. Anet knows the GvG scene is here, the best thing we can do is try to be a positive force in the GW2 community, and just keep enjoying ourselves.
Anet will never agree to something over a petition, can you imagine the snowball if they did? Suddenly there would be 300 threads of “petition to have x/y/z”

GvG as it is now in GW2 works the way we want it to work. Guilds agree on a ruleset and go from there. A dedicated arena could potentially harm the scene just as much as it could help it.

Disclaimer: Yes I said GvG and GW2 in the same paragraph. Can we please not bring up the same discussion again. Achilles pls

Me, i’ll sign anything that furthers our cause, even if its only a small shout for attention… imo GvG mode is going to be implemented… the question is when, not if. Ofc the specifics will be up to Anet and only to them… dont expect to be consulted, its not their style.

But honestly, it would be foolish to overlook the potential of a community driven activity that fits perfectly in the game theme. Looks like an easy implementation too.

Signed, the GvG scene needs more attention. I agree with ogre that the specifics are up to Anet so I think the petition is just for getting the gvg mode created.

If you want I can put the petition up on gw2gvg for some more attention, just let me know.

I really hope Anet gets official GvGs implemented, we would love to fight the best guilds to test our limits but we are unwilling to pay 60 Gold to switch in higher tier servers,
Maybe we meet per Random Reset =)
Great Videos Ogre, very passionate- keep it coming!

Hipster.1264:

I really hope Anet gets official GvGs implemented, we would love to fight the best guilds to test our limits but we are unwilling to pay 60 Gold to switch in higher tier servers,
Maybe we meet per Random Reset =)
Great Videos Ogre, very passionate- keep it coming!

Well VoTF is on Augury Rock, we’ve met before. Don’t be scared to contact anyone from our guild in case that happens again.

I hope it happens again, I was on Vacation that week- next time for sure!

Wompage.4586:

Nothing personal man, but I would have signed it if it wasn’t tacked onto the back of your own personal suggestions for the format, some of which I just don’t agree with.

None taken, everyone has a right to his/her opinion. I even deleted the link in the post so it’s an open sheet.

Ogre.1750:

imo GvG mode is going to be implemented… the question is when, not if. Ofc the specifics will be up to Anet and only to them… dont expect to be consulted, its not their style.

But honestly, it would be foolish to overlook the potential of a community driven activity that fits perfectly in the game theme. Looks like an easy implementation too.

I think if they stall even longer (up to 6 months because we haven’t had any signals in that direction) they will lose a lot of players who like WvW and GvG. In our guild we have several people who drop out because of that reason. I am not complaining, just stating facts. I wonder if RG would have left if there was an official GvG-scene. That’s ofcourse a question that will remain open, but I have the feeling we are losing a lot of potential. If Anet wants to implement it their way, I’m fine with that. The only mistake they can’t make is that is becomes a version of sPvP, only with more people. That’s why we have WvW, with the capping, sieging, etc.

As to everyone, don’t hesitate to spread out this petition, I’m not the owner of this idea, I’m just the conductor

I would really like to see more guilds branch out in their group comp. 90% of what people run is the exact same and it’s getting kind of old. [DERP] pretty much refuses to follow the standard meta and the more we deviate from it the better our results are starting to get.

Watching matches in the tube, considering features… saw opt vs sprt, in one round you can count 10 warbanners they didnt matter tho, sprt still lost. Warrior can bring so much more to the table than just that :/

Upload your matches fast if you want them featured this week… eagerly awating a good resolution pov of votf vs scnd :P

Hey Ogre, should we pm you links to gvgs for our guild, or do you want them in this thread?

like your work ogre gj, keep it up.

You guys should set your sight a bit higher than 5k of 5mill. let’s say for some crazy reason anet did bite. It would kill the game not because there should not be GvG, but because only one of their current game modes… wvw works and holding 5k players above there large communities would ruin players already wavering faith.

I know you guys want to be able to get married but your ruining the Sanctity of WvW.
Next thing you know you guys are going to try to marry a dolyak.

Did you just call 5000 people …?.. no more like 1,500 and a bunch of people that got to drunk one night and ended up on the wrong end of a game of pitch and catch.

Joking aside look at the leader boards in NA everyone above rank 20 has 100% losses and above 52 for eu. So looking at win/losses you guys have 72 competitive teams that comes out to 1440 players the rest are pvers and rpers you guys have prayed apon lol. Not only can you gain rating by killing pvers you can even kill the same pvers over and over.
http://gw2gvg.com/leaderboard.php?r=na

You guys just did a really poor job with the ratings ?.?.? …………..do you guys work for anet? GJ who ever did the site though It’s clean and the depth it goes into is amazing.

Thesilentflute.8761:

You guys should set your sight a bit higher than 5k of 5mill. let’s say for some crazy reason anet did bite. It would kill the game not because there should not be GvG, but because only one of their current game modes… wvw works and holding 5k players above there large communities would ruin players already wavering faith.

I know you guys want to be able to get married but your ruining the Sanctity of WvW.
Next thing you know you guys are going to try to marry a dolyak.

Did you just call 5000 people …?.. no more like 1,500 and a bunch of people that got to drunk one night and ended up on the wrong end of a game of pitch and catch.

Joking aside look at the leader boards in NA everyone above rank 20 has 100% losses and above 52 for eu. So looking at win/losses you guys have 72 competitive teams that comes out to 1440 players the rest are pvers and rpers you guys have prayed apon lol. Not only can you gain rating by killing pvers you can even kill the same pvers over and over.
http://gw2gvg.com/leaderboard.php?r=na

You guys just did a really poor job with the ratings ?.?.? …………..do you guys work for anet? GJ who ever did the site though It’s clean and the depth it goes into is amazing.

Your assumption that every guild listed on the gvg website only consists of 20 players just because 20v20 is the preferred size of the competition, is false.

Our guild has at least 50 people that play wvw more than 5 times a week.
The “spectators” that you are complaining about are mostly players from each competing guild that are on standby, if the commander wants to do adjustments to his group composition after a round.

Stop poking around, hesitating aimlessly flute, just do it man. Its high time.

Make a team. Lead it. Compete. 15 man is easy to assemble. Crush em man, crush em all. I’ll put you in the spotlight. Lets see if the rp’ers and pvers can take you out or not. Let’s see you rise in Glicko 2 by killing the same rookie crew repeteadly.

Show us what u got flute. In all honesty we’re eager to watch.

It’s showtime, flute. Talk now or go silent forever.

I find it very odd that GvG in this game has ended up as zerg vs. zerg. It’s nice that something at least is evolving in this game, but still seems strange to me.

dreztina.4820:

I find it very odd that GvG in this game has ended up as zerg vs. zerg. It’s nice that something at least is evolving in this game, but still seems strange to me.

I think you mean de-evolving its like all the zerg without any of the strategy.

@Wanze just because a guild has 20/50 or 20/500 that “gvg” you don’t count the total number of players the guild has. I am sure we both agree the avg team size is 20 players so using 20 players is the most accurate way to find the proper estimation right…. right.

Leave the thread Thesilentflute. You will never join the GvG community. No one wants to hear your opinion.

20 is high imho

10 I think is legit

15 is cool too

5 is not enough

Thats like a revolutionary train of thought Jinks, but yeah, im leaning that way, maybe not so deep… id say 15 legit, 10 cool which is a huge leap. Id watch more 10vs tho, to form a better opinion.

I can see Anet mainstreaming 10v, makes sense. Id go 5/10/15v tho, 3 leagues. 3 weight divisions, literally.

5 is the arena… weird stuff and individuals shining. Weird teams.. A bridge to the sPvP community.
10 mainstream point most people can resonably get to without beign a huge WvW guild.
15v as the heavyweight, where you see big block movements and book strat.

just brainstorming here, might have spouted nonsense :P

Where’s the love for 20v gone?

I’ve always thought that 25 is a bit high, 15 is okay, and 20 is the nice middle-ground. Imo the lower numbers you go the less it starts becoming about team-builds and teamplay overall, and more leans towards ganker setups and the like. I suppose it depends on people’s preferences, though; whether they prefer “Look at this 1v2 I won!” or “Look at this spike my team pulled off!”

A team of solo builds working in cohesion is just as interesting as a full team-build setup, it’s just that I’ve always looked towards tpvp for that – if you want to go lower numbers for the reason of individual skill coming in to shine, then 5v is where it’s at I think, no need for 10v. In a 10v there’ll still be too much going on at once for every player to get the spotlight they want/deserve. Unless of course you have specific builds using the “pve” rules (as we all use in wvw) that you want to run for the low numbers which is why it’s done in wvw, then all the power to you.

Contrary to the seemingly popular belief, tpvp and wvw can live alongside one another in harmony. I enjoy both.

I consider 15v15 the most fun size, 20v20 is good too.

25v25 feels way more zergy than 20’s for some reason, 10v10 is acceptable but not preferred personally, leaving 5v5 to be considered a roamer’s death match.

It’s guild vs guild. Slap together a team and go for it.

I prefer 20’s personally. To me, the lower you go, the more focus fire and burst comes into play. In a game without a dedicated healer/support class this tactic can be pretty much uncounterable in 15 or lower.
This can obviously come into play in 20’s too. Keep an eye on Warforgis for a guild that loves to pick a player to die right. kittening. now. and doesn’t let up until they either die or become useless.

Granted I haven’t done a lot of 15’s personally, so this is just my observation

25’s can create some very broken compositions. You have a balanced 20man set up. You can either balance the other 5 people, or just add 5 of something to create and imbalanced monster.
7 necro teams? possible in 25’s
A massive melee ball of death? 10 guardians 5 warriors? possible in 25’s
6 thieves for impossible single target burst? possible in 25’s

Does 25’s create a more “varied meta” in terms of comps than 20v20? Probably, but no more than 10v10 would do too.

Just my 2c

Calling a GvG zerg fighting is incorrect. There is most definitely strategy, coordination, and micro level adjustments that greatly affect out come of fights. There are reasons why some guilds always lose and some guilds always win…

With that said, the meta for 5v5 compared to a 20v20 is greatly different. Personally I find 10v10 easier for me than 20v20 because of how my class plays… but yeah, to each their own.

Healthy debate is healthy. So for now the more common ground is 15-20… cool beans.

I rly think there is tons of room to innovation and single player shine, even in this template. Beign a triple A worker, periphery, destroyer, counter… all take skill and experience. A lot. You can see it in the rooks; the combat sense, the peels, the retalitation manage, the positioning, the cd management… it takes time to get to gold standards… its clear as day for me whos there and whos not, tbh.

As for the setups etc, I get the feeling we will soon start seeing more wild teams as more ppl join our little community. Or maybe im just hoping rly hard. Time will tell.

So, who runs the Gw2GvG site? I have an idea to accomodate older guilds like Red Guard that have since become inactive taking up spots on the leaderboards: seasons.

My idea is that we could separate GvGs into 2 month long seasons, where at the end of these, a champion from each region is decided, and all old games are scrapped from the ratings system. Then, placement would decide the initial rating points for each guild, however, the rating points would be closer (50-100 between each rank), and lower (top starts at 1500 instead of 2000ish). This way, if a guild did not GvG for a full season, they would be removed from their position, and other guilds could take their place. As long as there is a history section for older seasons, I can’t see how this could hurt old guilds’ reputations.

Example, if a new season was created now, the NA guilds for the start of that season would be rated as follows:

1.) Aggression – 1500
2.) Tempest Wolves – 1450
3.) Deathclock – 1400
4.) Os – 1350
5.) Night Shift – 1300
6-10.) 1200
10-15.) 1100
15-20.) 1000
20-30.) 900
30-40.) 800
Guilds who didn’t gvg in the previous season.) N/A
etc.

I suggest that season 1 should be treated as have already happened, and we take the rankings up until July 1st, 2013 to decide the placements. Then, we continue this season, season 2, until the first of September, where a new champion will be crowned. From there on, guilds like Red Guard would be removed from their positions, allowing other guilds to take their place. It would also encourage guilds to GvG more often than once every two months.

Thoughts?

MartyPartys.9187 runs gw2gvg.com

ParaldaWind.4523:

…
It would also encourage guilds to GvG more often than once every two months.

Thoughts?

The only issue I could see is the possibility of a guild being blacked-out of matches in order to drop them from the ranking. Say Guild ABC is a top performing GvG guild and for whatever reason, everyone they try to match against decides to either duck the match or not show up. This would result in ABC being artificially dropped from the rankings whether they deserve to be dropped or not. Without a way to force matches to happen, it might not be the best idea to arbitrarily remove a guild’s position due to having no matches played. Rating decay would likely be the better choice, but by how much I couldn’t say.

LordKael.7260:

ParaldaWind.4523:

…
It would also encourage guilds to GvG more often than once every two months.

Thoughts?

The only issue I could see is the possibility of a guild being blacked-out of matches in order to drop them from the ranking. Say Guild ABC is a top performing GvG guild and for whatever reason, everyone they try to match against decides to either duck the match or not show up. This would result in ABC being artificially dropped from the rankings whether they deserve to be dropped or not. Without a way to force matches to happen, it might not be the best idea to arbitrarily remove a guild’s position due to having no matches played. Rating decay would likely be the better choice, but by how much I couldn’t say.

I hope that we as a community are mature enough to not “blacklist” any one guild from playing.

IMO it would be better to move away from “rankings” and “champions”. It would be better if GW2GvG.com was simply a record of matches so we can see what’s going on in the community.

Guilds change over time, they rise and fall, rise again, and sometimes just disappear. They’re also constrained by the WvW matchups in who they can face. Some guilds only do 10v10, others won’t do less than 20v20. Without a standardised format, and without the ability for guilds from any server to play each other, the whole “rankings” system is pretty meaningless.

Just play for the fights.

I think inactive/disbanded teams should be removed from the ‘ladder’ like on esl.eu, and whenever you’re active again just sign up and you keep the points you have earned.

My thoughts on numbers
I think the main problem with 25v25 is the area that gvg’s take place is so thin, just not enough room for manoeuvre with them numbers. It still feels a bit cramped to me at 20v20 really. Maybe if we booted the spectators out of the area it’d be better though im not sure they’d agree, i guess the warthogs would become an issue then anyway.

I think 5v5 is better suited to spvp tbh, stats in wvw are just a bit too high. Its a bit too quick and easy to burn someone down pretty much instantly.
10v10 is fun but doesn’t leave much room for playing with the set up imo. It is a lot of fun though, maybe the most fun of the ones i’ve played actually. I think its a bit of a pity more dont play or try it personally.

Still think 15v15 is prob the best though. Gives room for experimenting without the cramped area you fight becoming much of an issue and it gets large enough so that the better team wins as oppossed to the better players (not necessarily the same thing).

I know it’ll never happen but i’d love to see matches take place at the ruins just north of the usual area. Way more interesting in terms of los and different levels. The flat area just south near the bridge to supply is a better field for the more traditional fights imo too, more square, more room to flank and bait. Be impossible to avoid disruptions though which is a pity.

Im loving all the activity on this thread still expecting a comment from our friends over the A-net, we wait and see. In the meanwhile Ogro, made this from the GvG Second vs VoTF.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_Lu6HJvcVI
Enjoy

P.s. Did my first 15v15 today and I must admit it was fun. Still 100% convinced 20v20 is the way to go. <3 all

This scene is starting to catch on. I know a lot of people on our server are starting to get the bug and as much as some people think its ruining WvW in its present form… that’s probably not a bad thing.

The unofficial GvG scene finally puts to rest the junk that gets tossed around on the forums about who are the best. Now we can actually see it. This strengthens good guilds, and forces weaker guilds to improve. Overall the quality of wvw player will go up because of the people that participate in these events.

It’s an evolution. It’s a revolution.

Tonight my guild had 2 gvg fights (one unofficial) and after it was all said and done, top guilds from all three servers gathered at south camp to hang out and watch Agg open field fight RAM. I have never seen all three servers stop what they are doing and hang out like this. EVER. Shoulder to shoulder without trolling on the sidelines. There was over 60 people there guaranteed. These events are bringing servers together, rather than pushing them to hate eachother and creating a lot of mutual respect. The guilds that win these challenges get to make amazing videos promoting themselves and you never see any kind of disrespect to the loser afterwards on the forums.

Respect is being earned out there, and its good.

The new Gw2 GvG is currently in development and there will be changes to the leaderboard, much like suggested above.

- Leaderboards will show per month, with navigation to previous months.
- Your guild will only show up on the list if you have done a gvg that month.
- Scores won’t reset, with the glicko2 system it would make it impossible for the rating to stabilize.

Thats just one minor change, the entire site is being rebuilt and alot of stuff is going to change or functionalities that lacked are being added.

It will take a couple of weeks more till it’s finished due to my limited time ( this is also why registering your guild can take a bit longer than usual at the moment ).

Anyway I’ll try to keep you guys updated and if you have some idea/feedback just throw me a PM

MartyPartys.9187:

The new Gw2 GvG is currently in development and there will be changes to the leaderboard, much like suggested above.

- Leaderboards will show per month, with navigation to previous months.
- Your guild will only show up on the list if you have done a gvg that month.
- Scores won’t reset, with the glicko2 system it would make it impossible for the rating to stabilize.

Thats just one minor change, the entire site is being rebuilt and alot of stuff is going to change or functionalities that lacked are being added.

It will take a couple of weeks more till it’s finished due to my limited time ( this is also why registering your guild can take a bit longer than usual at the moment ).

Anyway I’ll try to keep you guys updated and if you have some idea/feedback just throw me a PM

This is an amazing solution! I look forward to seeing your implementation of it!

Imho, 20v20 is a little too many people for that tight spot where we have to play atm. 15 is a decent fight, but favorite size for me and a couple of guildies is 10v10s, it seems to allow more individual contributions to the fights (doing immobilize chains on the enemy caster, focusing the staff ele down, stomping, etc).
It’s pretty fun, but it’s hard finding guilds to do it though
@ Ogro: since you mentioned wanting to watch more 10v10s, there’s a couple on this channel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N57gbzkbRAU&feature=c4-overview&list=UUvVLh7KhcYKeDh76dDSqXkg

Every Dragonbrand and TC guild and Agg last week has refused our challenges to 5v5 or 10v10. DA was the only guild that had the guts to accept (a 5v5); which I applaud to. I suppose everyone wants to nullify any kind of meaningful group play and rather call the most random direction calls (left! right!) rather than anything involving real skill (focus this, pulling that, poison this).

As expected from the “top” guilds of WvW; I guess even in GvG, to compete, we must have a zerg.

I would say 3 modes: 10v10, 15v15, 20v20, anything less is too “individual-skill-dependent” and there is spvp for that, anything more is too random (definitely never more than 25v25). GvG should be a game mode about guild-skill, not about individual players or randomness.

Just my 2 cents.

Prime Radese

The thing with numbers is, we didn’t come up with them specifically for GvG. 20-25 is probably a minimum number of players WvW raid should have to represent a force to be reckoned with map-wide. Anything less can be easily overwhelmed by bigger opponent raids and hence limited to local tasks and “careful” roaming.

As long as we are trying to stay relevant on WvW, and as long as GvG is inseparable from WvW, I don’t think smaller setups should become mainstream in GvG.

For me 20vs20 is the best format.

We did some 15v15 scrims last night. Personally, the only difference I could feel between 20’s and 15’s was the amount of people sat on the sidelines.
/shrug
Maybe we were playing it wrong.

In my opinion 20 is the ideal number here, with 15 being the minimum and 25 the maximum.

ParaldaWind.4523:

LordKael.7260:

ParaldaWind.4523:

…
It would also encourage guilds to GvG more often than once every two months.

Thoughts?

The only issue I could see is the possibility of a guild being blacked-out of matches in order to drop them from the ranking. Say Guild ABC is a top performing GvG guild and for whatever reason, everyone they try to match against decides to either duck the match or not show up. This would result in ABC being artificially dropped from the rankings whether they deserve to be dropped or not. Without a way to force matches to happen, it might not be the best idea to arbitrarily remove a guild’s position due to having no matches played. Rating decay would likely be the better choice, but by how much I couldn’t say.

I hope that we as a community are mature enough to not “blacklist” any one guild from playing.

Maybe not blacklisting, but there are refusals of registered guilds to fight people they stand a chance of losing against. Then there are fights that get cancelled due to disagreements about conditions. Of course we also have fights that are finished and never make it on to the site for one reason or another.

We need to be able to challenge guilds in the current weekly matchup with repercussions to rating if they refuse to fight. We need to have a common rule set that can only be deviated from if both parties are in agreement.

In other words, we need an actual framework in place for this even if Anet never provides one.

covenn.7165:

In other words, we need an actual framework in place for this even if Anet never provides one.

We could start a discussion about this, and after say like two weeks, we end the discussion at which point we put some minds together to create the framework. I’ll make a post later this evening or tomorrow in the WvW-discussion forum to start this (with some more background scraped from all the GvG-related topics).

Of course, we can’t completely shut down everything thats goes wrong, but it can help that every guild uses this set of rules, so we have a more fair and honest competition.

I feel like 20s are a little cluttered in the windmill fight club area, honestly. The north-south/left-right maneuverability is less than 1200 range, and I feel like that leads to a lot of just straight up bombing, tanking it all, backing off to regroup, and bombing again. There’s not a lot of room for movement, flanks, re-positioning, or using terrain at all.

For 20+, I think the areas between garrison and west keep/bay, between garrison and east keep/hills, near the ruins by south camp, or straight east of garrison are much better choices. I’ve even had some good 25 and 30vs in those areas.

I like 5 to 10s, too, though, because they are a lot of fun and a very different playstyle. However, 15+ seems to translate best to actual WvW open field, which is what GvGs are meant to simulate anyways. I just feel like anything over 15 in the south camp/windmill area kind of invalidates a lot of positioning and maneuvering strategies, and tends to favor heavy stacking, or necro stacking because of it.

covenn.7165:

We need to be able to challenge guilds in the current weekly matchup with repercussions to rating if they refuse to fight.

I am somewhat against this idea. There are many legitimate reasons why a guild may not be able to GvG during the week and any one of those reasons can be invented as an excuse for people who simply don’t want to fight you. The ratings will never be perfect because of it, and I don’t see why we’re not okay with it—everyone will be aware if #1 and #2 haven’t fought each other and it will call their statuses into question automatically.

Find a new name for GvG. Call it Zerg v Zerg. You can’t call a guild number one just because they were better button mashers than the latter. Try making a custom arena in tPvP. At least there you will have a controlled environment with an actual objective in the midst. Maybe then we GW1 GvG players will stop pointing out the flaws in your gameplay mechanics. You’re trying to incorporate something into a new game, but you’re just making it worse. You’re “ranking” system is flawed as all get out. You should take a few pointers from GW1, yanno? The birth game to GW2. Hence the same name, right? AT least GW1 GvG took real skill/strategy/know how/positioning. Quit trying to remake something that was already invented, and not to mention perfected. Stick to the basics. Maybe then Anet will see what potential adding GvG to PvP will have. Try actually molding the GW2 GvG after GW1. You will actually have a starting place then. All I see are a bunch of tryhards whom missed out on their gold trim in gw1, so now they think they can just remake the concept of it all. Try again, please. At the most, all I see is maybe a really bad copy of GW1 HA. 321 spike. Not to mention, you’re causing terrible upset to actual WvW players waiting in queue to WvW. Since yanno, that’s where you are trying to do this.

Arya.9021:

Find a new name for GvG. Call it Zerg v Zerg. You can’t call a guild number one just because they were better button mashers than the latter. Try making a custom arena in tPvP. At least there you will have a controlled environment with an actual objective in the midst. Maybe then we GW1 GvG players will stop pointing out the flaws in your gameplay mechanics. You’re trying to incorporate something into a new game, but you’re just making it worse. You’re “ranking” system is flawed as all get out. You should take a few pointers from GW1, yanno? The birth game to GW2. Hence the same name, right? AT least GW1 GvG took real skill/strategy/know how/positioning. Quit trying to remake something that was already invented, and not to mention perfected. Stick to the basics. Maybe then Anet will see what potential adding GvG to PvP will have. Try actually molding the GW2 GvG after GW1. You will actually have a starting place then. All I see are a bunch of tryhards whom missed out on their gold trim in gw1, so now they think they can just remake the concept of it all. Try again, please. At the most, all I see is maybe a really bad copy of GW1 HA. 321 spike.

Does it make you bmad when we call it GvG? Cuz no.

It’s not making me mad. Just that you’re hating on actual game mechanics to what GvG is supposed to be. I’d agree with you, but then we would both be wrong.

Arya.9021:

Find a new name for GvG. Call it Zerg v Zerg. You can’t call a guild number one just because they were better button mashers than the latter. Try making a custom arena in tPvP. At least there you will have a controlled environment with an actual objective in the midst. Maybe then we GW1 GvG players will stop pointing out the flaws in your gameplay mechanics. You’re trying to incorporate something into a new game, but you’re just making it worse. You’re “ranking” system is flawed as all get out. You should take a few pointers from GW1, yanno? The birth game to GW2. Hence the same name, right? AT least GW1 GvG took real skill/strategy/know how/positioning. Quit trying to remake something that was already invented, and not to mention perfected. Stick to the basics. Maybe then Anet will see what potential adding GvG to PvP will have. Try actually molding the GW2 GvG after GW1. You will actually have a starting place then. All I see are a bunch of tryhards whom missed out on their gold trim in gw1, so now they think they can just remake the concept of it all. Try again, please. At the most, all I see is maybe a really bad copy of GW1 HA. 321 spike. Not to mention, you’re causing terrible upset to actual WvW players waiting in queue to WvW. Since yanno, that’s where you are trying to do this.

I think I love you.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++1