Guild Wars 2

Okay this has been getting old Anet but at the same time as by GoM and DR that even when they double team us they cannot take our garrison, but the factor being, that these kind of double teams during seasons should not be allowed, and should be pentalized, that these servers have been teaming us and neglecting to fight each other since the beginning of week.

Nothing wrong with that.

I wish Yaks and SBI would help us double team HoD more…

Why?..given there situation sounds good strategy.

Its 3 teams directly or indirectly one server will be picked on.

That they have possibly formalised this is not a reason to penalise.

the fact is its a low tactic, one of the lowest in fact, especially when one server does everything the other server says, thats not a WvW thats a Server taking commands, From someone that they could obviously kick to the curb, DR has the people yet their cowardice to take on GoM is unbelievable. If DR wants to prove themselves they need to start fighting those who are giving them orders.

Middzz.1490:

Why?..given there situation sounds good strategy.

Its 3 teams directly or indirectly one server will be picked on.

That they have possibly formalised this is not a reason to penalise.

Given their situation? you mean out numbering darkhaven at least half the time? At the time this was posted darkhaven had recently papered GoMs stuff. Right before this darkhavens keeps where the only ones with waypoints. Now when it is Blackgate with far and away the largest coverage it’s fair to get organized against them, but darkhaven is rank 3 in bronze. It’s absurd that the rank 3 team is getting double teamed because one server is clearly more focused on staying at 2 then at beating one.

You must be new. WvW is always your server vs them. Even when map polotics put you on the same side. It nevet last and is still likely to get you hit hard by a 2v1. That said match up threads are not allowed. I expect this to be locked soon.

Not really more or less its a cheap tactic that needs addressed and penalized otherwise it ruins the WvW content.

The other a fact is that this is a topic that is allowed because if not addressed I will start a petition to iron out this situation to secure that WvW content is a place where people can go and enjoy themselves.

Middzz.1490:

Why?..given there situation sounds good strategy.

Its 3 teams directly or indirectly one server will be picked on.

That they have possibly formalised this is not a reason to penalise.

Well while picking on one server is a common tactic, much like a starving dog setting on a bleeding steak, the following well coordinated tactic is as far removed from ‘picking on the little guy’ as me being able to sprout wings and fly. (If I could do that, I’d smack these coordinating louts upside their collective noggins.)

Here is something I witnessed: GoM goes to attack Bay, they pull off when a few die. DR then surges down from waiting on the cliff and attacks, when a few die, THEY pull off. Then GoM surges forward again after stacking and recovering.

This is not picking on the little guy, this is well coordinated maneuvers between teams. Much like rifle line tactics of old, front line fires, kneels and reloads, then the back line advances, fires, kneels and reloads. This is NOT a legitimate tactic between two warring servers.

This is war and anything goes. Stop crying and keep fighting.

Its a game where the developers want to insure that the Content is Fun, the fact that you look at it as an aspect of war is a poor viewing by you, as any good developer would know is that they would want to insure quality content instead of in-balance.

Gizmo.9178:

This is war and anything goes. Stop crying and keep fighting.

Easy to say that when you’re the one employing desperate tactics. You want to have a war? Follow the server guidelines: NO COMMUNICATIONS WITH THE OTHER TEAM.

I like it the way it is, but I think they could easily make things more interesting by adding a completely different point system based on objectives (not PPT).

Give war score based on say a list of 5-8 objectives given to you each hour. Each server has different objectives and the objectives vary on each map. Draw from a list of say 100 objectives, and you never know what objectives your enemy has unless of course you have a spy on their map.

Of course you could still 2vs1 under this system, but it could be completely futile if your enemies objectives involve either defending or killing other players and they rack up the war score. Then would a server even bother 2vs1 while they ignore their own objectives?

I think it’d make things interesting.

DeadlySynz.3471:

I like it the way it is, but I think they could easily make things more interesting by adding a completely different point system based on objectives (not PPT).

Give war score based on say a list of 5-8 objectives given to you each hour. Each server has different objectives and the objectives vary on each map. Draw from a list of say 100 objectives, and you never know what objectives your enemy has unless of course you have a spy on their map.

Of course you could still 2vs1 under this system, but it could be completely futile if your enemies objectives involve either defending or killing other players and they rack up the war score. Then would a server even bother 2vs1 while they ignore their own objectives?

I think it’d make things interesting.

I actually like that idea it would make WvW more interesting and make it feel like a real war with more logic to it, because the only ideal right is cap keeps, hold keeps for ppt, but with objective based missions to up the warscore or overall score is a very well thought out idea and would be a fun way to participate in WvW.

Feral Drifter.6804:

Middzz.1490:

Why?..given there situation sounds good strategy.

Its 3 teams directly or indirectly one server will be picked on.

That they have possibly formalised this is not a reason to penalise.

Well while picking on one server is a common tactic, much like a starving dog setting on a bleeding steak, the following well coordinated tactic is as far removed from ‘picking on the little guy’ as me being able to sprout wings and fly. (If I could do that, I’d smack these coordinating louts upside their collective noggins.)

Here is something I witnessed: GoM goes to attack Bay, they pull off when a few die. DR then surges down from waiting on the cliff and attacks, when a few die, THEY pull off. Then GoM surges forward again after stacking and recovering.

This is not picking on the little guy, this is well coordinated maneuvers between teams. Much like rifle line tactics of old, front line fires, kneels and reloads, then the back line advances, fires, kneels and reloads. This is NOT a legitimate tactic between two warring servers.

Its a stategy not a tactic …volley fire as you said is a tactic ..and equally sure many africans thought volley fire was unfair ruining the fight etc etc.

The question is though why is it not legitimate ?….one side clearly wil not enjoy the other 2 must or it would soon breakdown .

To quote Churchill “If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil”…

or even keep your friends close your enemies closer .Its not invalid because 1 side doesnt like it .

The nature of WvW is inherently unfair thats the fun of it when you are up or down ..these attempts to care bear WvW rebalancing PPT dezerging ideas etc etc etc are taking the fun out of it ..and this is just another care bear approach .

Again why is “This is NOT a legitimate tactic between THREE warring servers…..”????

(dd change your 2 to 3 )

sniperman.1738:

DeadlySynz.3471:

I like it the way it is, but I think they could easily make things more interesting by adding a completely different point system based on objectives (not PPT).

Give war score based on say a list of 5-8 objectives given to you each hour. Each server has different objectives and the objectives vary on each map. Draw from a list of say 100 objectives, and you never know what objectives your enemy has unless of course you have a spy on their map.

Of course you could still 2vs1 under this system, but it could be completely futile if your enemies objectives involve either defending or killing other players and they rack up the war score. Then would a server even bother 2vs1 while they ignore their own objectives?

I think it’d make things interesting.

I actually like that idea it would make WvW more interesting and make it feel like a real war with more logic to it, because the only ideal right is cap keeps, hold keeps for ppt, but with objective based missions to up the warscore or overall score is a very well thought out idea and would be a fun way to participate in WvW.

I don’t mind if we keep the current PPT system as long as the PPT ticks drop by at least half to 75%. I’d like to see war score be more heavily weighted towards things that wouldn’t be based on coverage or blobbing for that matter.

I think under an objective based system, in some (if not many) cases it might actually be beneficial to bust a zerg up to complete all the objectives. Then perhaps give a bonus if you complete all the objectives within the hour. Maybe this bonus could be seeing the other servers objectives (so you can try to stop them).

As far as off hours coverage, I think it could throw a giant wrench into stacking off hours coverage. If the objectives contain either capturing, defending, or killing other players, how will they gain score if they own everything and the maps are absent of enemies? They could be forced to jump maps instead of camping one map in hopes of finding possible objectives.

In the end, I think an objective based system would fit more into WvW’s style anyway. It’s a mix of PvE and PvE is heavily objective based with all the quests and events going on. I think it also would give birth to more strategy and smaller objective based roamer groups.

Middzz.1490:

Feral Drifter.6804:

Middzz.1490:

Why?..given there situation sounds good strategy.

Its 3 teams directly or indirectly one server will be picked on.

That they have possibly formalised this is not a reason to penalise.

Well while picking on one server is a common tactic, much like a starving dog setting on a bleeding steak, the following well coordinated tactic is as far removed from ‘picking on the little guy’ as me being able to sprout wings and fly. (If I could do that, I’d smack these coordinating louts upside their collective noggins.)

Here is something I witnessed: GoM goes to attack Bay, they pull off when a few die. DR then surges down from waiting on the cliff and attacks, when a few die, THEY pull off. Then GoM surges forward again after stacking and recovering.

This is not picking on the little guy, this is well coordinated maneuvers between teams. Much like rifle line tactics of old, front line fires, kneels and reloads, then the back line advances, fires, kneels and reloads. This is NOT a legitimate tactic between two warring servers.

Its a stategy not a tactic …volley fire as you said is a tactic ..and equally sure many africans thought volley fire was unfair ruining the fight etc etc.

The question is though why is it not legitimate ?….one side clearly wil not enjoy the other 2 must or it would soon breakdown .

To quote Churchill “If Hitler invaded hell I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil”…

or even keep your friends close your enemies closer .Its not invalid because 1 side doesnt like it .

The nature of WvW is inherently unfair thats the fun of it when you are up or down ..these attempts to care bear WvW rebalancing PPT dezerging ideas etc etc etc are taking the fun out of it ..and this is just another care bear approach .

Again why is “This is NOT a legitimate tactic between THREE warring servers…..”????

(dd change your 2 to 3 )

Simple, no one likes to be double teamed, and I get that it can come across as ‘care bearing’ when they really can’t do anything about server spies. However, it really isn’t valid, and regrettably you have provided no evidence that anet is ‘care bearing’ by trying to balance the game.

The point of the game is that there would be no communications between teams. This leads to distrust and often iron handed control of one’s perceived ‘property’, with others lashing out at whoever dares trespass on their land.

This is the way it should be, but when one team goes after two split sides of a map, and only picks on the one server rather than the other, tell me where the balance is in that?
This is NOT a REAL WAR. This is a game, this is a game that Anet is working hard to keep balanced for all ages. They did not design it for desperate people to cheat just to pump their egos.

I’m not sure what side you’re on, DR, GoM, or neither, but you speak like someone who is confidently on the giving end rather than the receiving end of a beating, naturally that can alter ones perspective on a subject. “I don’t care because it’s not happening to me”.

To quote a friend: “Get on my level.”

Why did you decide to create a thread knowing full well the responses you would get and that it is 100% working as anet intended?

It’s just smart strategy. You have an upgraded keep, both server’s want to paper it… why fight each other and not downgrade it when they can temporarily side with each other and then fight over it later when it’s paper?

Deli.1302:

Why did you decide to create a thread knowing full well the responses you would get and that it is 100% working as anet intended?

I haven’t seen a Dev get on here and tell us that getting 2v1’d using cross server communication is legitimate, fine, and a healthy expression of what they wish to convey with their WvWvW system.

Feral Drifter.6804:

Deli.1302:

Why did you decide to create a thread knowing full well the responses you would get and that it is 100% working as anet intended?

I haven’t seen a Dev get on here and tell us that getting 2v1’d using cross server communication is legitimate, fine, and a healthy expression of what they wish to convey with their WvWvW system.

They never said it wasn’t either.

Deli.1302:

Feral Drifter.6804:

Deli.1302:

Why did you decide to create a thread knowing full well the responses you would get and that it is 100% working as anet intended?

I haven’t seen a Dev get on here and tell us that getting 2v1’d using cross server communication is legitimate, fine, and a healthy expression of what they wish to convey with their WvWvW system.

They never said it wasn’t either.

Exactly, not all of the responses have been people defending such events that are against what Anet intended.

There have been suggestions, and agreements to the original poster.

Feral Drifter.6804:

I haven’t seen a Dev get on here and tell us that getting 2v1’d using cross server communication is legitimate

No point to put themselves in the crossfire.

Hopefully someone can find them and repost it here but most people who read these forums are familiar with two dev quotes. One of them can be simplified to “Two weaker servers joining up to face a stronger one is one of the intent behind a 3 way server battle.” The other can be simplified as “WvW is not meant to be fair.”

Anet is not going to intervene in a 2v1 when they have implied in the past that it is logical move. Instead of crying about it on the forums how about you start working on counter measures to either oppose it or break it up.

The most disturbing part about this is that s/he is commander, you’d think a commander would see the tactical justification for being 2v1’d.

Taking advantage of one server attacking the other is a legit 2v1, yes, but what we are talking about are servers communicating when they are not supposed to. Coordinated strikes, and defending each others property.

I really don’t know where you are getting your info but it’s just plan wrong. My tower has been attacked repeatedly this week by DR (and taken a few time when I wasn’t on ) I have seen DH groups hitting us ( matter of a fact DH just took my tower again while I am at work )but DR has put 30-40 man groups on our map all week long. Sorry your losing but you are way off base thinking we are teaming up with DR. If we are they didn’t get the memo to stay out of my tower. Yes it’s mine I have been watching it for almost 2 years now lol. I know gom homeland D . I know who hits us. Trust me DR is not afraid to hit us hard and does so over and over. Get your facts before you talk.

Surprised this hasn’t come up yet, but:

ArenaNet doesn’t care about WvW. Nothing you suggest will ever be incorporated or changed. How long has the playerbase been waiting for something as simple as colored commander tags? Or any sort of commander UI? WvW is just not something they give two kittens about, and unless they gut their current managerial staff, it won’t ever be.

Kigera.9584:

Hopefully someone can find them and repost it here but most people who read these forums are familiar with two dev quotes. One of them can be simplified to “Two weaker servers joining up to face a stronger one is one of the intent behind a 3 way server battle.” The other can be simplified as “WvW is not meant to be fair.”

Anet is not going to intervene in a 2v1 when they have implied in the past that it is logical move. Instead of crying about it on the forums how about you start working on counter measures to either oppose it or break it up.

But what happens when the lowest and the highest server gang up on the middle server? Is that working as intended? Is that cool, does it promote fun play for all involved? Let me give background.

Today, we spent our entire day taking glorious revenge on GoM for many uncalled for golem rushes. They rushed us again, and again, throughout the day/night, trying to paper our stuff. They eventually succeeded (on dr as well). They continued to golem rush our paper stuff.

Recently, our top commander returned (the ever glorious Grampa of Dh). He’s intent on winning first and not giving up because the situation looks dim. We’re about 25k behind GoM. He heads straight for GoM’s BL, papered it completely. Then he goes to EB, papered their EB keep and then their waypointed SM. We then karma train GoM and DR bl a couple of times. Eventually, Grampa decides to split our zerg, one in eb, one in GoM BL and leave DR COMPLETELY ALONE. We have waypoints in ALL of our keeps, our BL is defended by dozens of people (unlike dr/gom bl), and we have zergs ready to maphop at a moments notice and defend our keeps.

What happens next? Instead of DR, say, taking GoM’s papered bl, or focusing on EB, they rush our heavily defended/upgraded BL. Weird choice amirite? What does GoM do? Instead of defending/retaking their own bl (which Dh owns most of), instead of hitting the paper DR bl, they hit our heavily guarded/upgraded BL. Instead of EVER FIGHTING EACH OTHER in our bl, they rush our keeps/towers simultanousely, stretching our forces to their absolute limits, and eventually forcing us to lose two of our waypoints.

All the time, they’re barely fighting each other. I don’t know if it’s intentional, and I don’t care to whine. But you will forgive us if we find this situation incredibly stupid and annoying.

As to people commenting about war not being fair. This is a game about war, not war. If something is unfair it can detract from the fun of the situation. That doesn’t mean fairness should necessarily be enforced, but perhaps encouraged. It’s not cool for the server that’s not winning to be ganged up on, it just isn’t. So try to understand where Dh people here are coming from, even if you don’t agree with them.

Arius.7031:

But what happens when the lowest and the highest server gang up on the middle server? Is that working as intended? Is that cool, does it promote fun play for all involved? Let me give background.

Yes, it is working as intended. WvW is a 3 player game. 2v1 happens. Anet has said that this is intended, they said it last season when SBI got hit with a gnarly doubleteam. Nothing has changed now.

Pyroathiest.4168:

Arius.7031:

But what happens when the lowest and the highest server gang up on the middle server? Is that working as intended? Is that cool, does it promote fun play for all involved? Let me give background.

Yes, it is working as intended. WvW is a 3 player game. 2v1 happens. Anet has said that this is intended, they said it last season when SBI got hit with a gnarly doubleteam. Nothing has changed now.

Saying something works as expected is not the same as saying it works as intended. If I build a machine and expect people to abuse it, that does not mean I intended it to be abused. They may have expected 2v1’s to take place, even two stronger servers to gang up on the weakest server, that doesn’t mean it’s INTENDED to be that way, or that it’s a good thing.

Try to get the point next time please. I never said I thought it was illegal or anything like that. Just that it wasn’t good.

Are you kidding me?!

Let me get this straight: This is all conjecture based on loose ASSUMPTIONS that any attacks on you are more than coincidence, but coordinated?
Yet you are demanding action based upon no evidence of this at all?

I am not going to even entertain this accusation for very long; I’m only going to say a few choice things:

-We (DR) are going for the win. We are not collaborating or coordinating with GOM in ANY way. Why would we, they are our MAIN COMPETITION. This is the 3rd time we are matched up against them in a row, and each time they have kept 1st away from us. We want to take them down, and we are working towards that end, I assure you.

-I find it interesting that this was posted at a time that YOU ARE AHEAD OF US in this week’s match. Seriously, why are you coming on here to whine? We aren’t even in 2nd at the moment, YOU are. We are currently behind you by about 4,000 points, why wouldn’t we attack your stuff to try and close that gap?

-I find it completely misleading that you are posting this on here, with full-blazed accusations, saying “2nd place is picking on 3rd” when our servers are currently TIED FOR 2ND and YOU are the ones ahead of us in overall points in this week’s bracket, at the time that you posted this. Very misleading to the others on this forum indeed!

-As far as I understand WvW, it’s a 3-way free-for-all. This is just a guess here (as I try not to make assumptions, see?) but if you feel like both servers are attacking you too often, maybe it’s because you are leaving yourself open to attack to often? Enemies go after weak spots when they see them, that’s kinda how this works.

You can’t expect action to be taken, and threaten to sign a petition, when you are basing this on ASSUMPTIONS. That doesn’t go very far. There is no evidence of this happening, and the Devs are smart enough not to humor you unless you were presenting them with something (like facts?) more concrete than your own bitterness. But you aren’t, particularly because THERE IS NO CONSPIRACY.

Bottom line: It honestly just sounds like whining, and I’m not even sure why, because it seems like you guys are holding your own fine to me.

I’m sorry if I am coming off rude here, but honestly it’s pretty offensive that you are not only assuming, but then posting it here as if your assumption is fact, making accusations and demanding action without anything concrete to back up your insulting accusation.
As I know my commanders are working hard day and night to pull out a win for us, you are insulting our integrity as a server, and I really don’t appreciate it.

Can’t we just all enjoy the game and play it? Seriously.

Last thought: has it occurred to anyone commenting on here that, if DH is in 2nd as things currently stand, whoever is below you is probably going to try attacking you to close the gap and surpass you, and whoever is above you is probably going to attack you because they don’t want you to close the gap on them and surpass them? That is kind of basic logic, and the natural results of a 3-way battle. This is what comes to mind when reading what you are talking about above.
It doesn’t mean that there is any sort of conspiracy plot or communications across servers. It means we are all playing the game.

Regardless, I haven’t seen it that cut and dry any time I’m on. In fact, we are going after GOM equally, if not MORE often, than we are going after DH, from what I have seen.

Suika.4567:

-We (DR) are going for the win. We are not collaborating or coordinating with GOM in ANY way.

We are currently behind you by about 4,000 points, why wouldn’t we attack your stuff to try and close that gap?

If you’re trying to beat server 1 as server 3, focusing server 2 to close the gap is a super bad strategy. I’m either left to conclude DR is utterly idiotic when it comes to strategy, or your claims don’t line up. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

Consistently, every day during prime, Dh has more waypoints than either of the other two servers. Yet, consistently, DR has focused our BL and taken our stuff more often than they have GoM. This is extremely odd since Dh tends to “bunker down” instead of going on the offensive, and thus will have WAY more defenders in our BL than are in GoM BL.

Evidence: http://www.gw2score.com/server/Devona's-Rest

Devona’s overall score: 7% comes from GoM’s BL, 9% from Dh. This means, from taking stuff from our UPGRADED and DEFENDED bl, you’ve somehow gotten around 20% more points from us than from GoM.

On a side note, we actually HAVE been focusing GoM (I refer you to the same site). Today we camped their entire BL during prime, only to have you (unintentional I believe) double team force us to lose 2 of our WPs. That’s why, I’m sure you can understand, many Dh players are upset. We could both be fighting for first, but DR seems to have given up and instead is fighting for 2nd.

sniperman.1738:

If DR wants to prove themselves they need to start fighting those who are giving them orders.

As far as I’m aware… DR hits us (GoM) as much as DH. As for them taking orders, I’m sure they follow their own…

sniperman.1738:

Not really more or less its a cheap tactic that needs addressed and penalized otherwise it ruins the WvW content.

Actually, it should be rewarded, as maintaining communication inter-servers is a lot more difficult than just K-Training their BL.

sniperman.1738:

The other a fact is that this is a topic that is allowed because if not addressed I will start a petition to iron out this situation to secure that WvW content is a place where people can go and enjoy themselves.

Petition’s are a breach of the Forum Code of Conduct, so good luck with that…

sniperman.1738:

Its a game where the developers want to insure that the Content is Fun, the fact that you look at it as an aspect of war is a poor viewing by you, as any good developer would know is that they would want to insure quality content instead of in-balance.

It sounds more like you’re not having fun because you’re loosing, rather than enjoying the actual game-mode. Thing is, not EVERYONE can win. It’s a fact-of-life, and WvW is currently in a tournament styled game mode where only one server can come in first place.

Arius.7031:

What happens next? Instead of DR, say, taking GoM’s papered bl, or focusing on EB, they rush our heavily defended/upgraded BL. Weird choice amirite? What does GoM do? Instead of defending/retaking their own bl (which Dh owns most of), instead of hitting the paper DR bl, they hit our heavily guarded/upgraded BL. Instead of EVER FIGHTING EACH OTHER in our bl, they rush our keeps/towers simultanousely, stretching our forces to their absolute limits, and eventually forcing us to lose two of our waypoints.

All the time, they’re barely fighting each other. I don’t know if it’s intentional, and I don’t care to whine. But you will forgive us if we find this situation incredibly stupid and annoying.

As to people commenting about war not being fair. This is a game about war, not war. If something is unfair it can detract from the fun of the situation. That doesn’t mean fairness should necessarily be enforced, but perhaps encouraged. It’s not cool for the server that’s not winning to be ganged up on, it just isn’t. So try to understand where Dh people here are coming from, even if you don’t agree with them.

It sounds like GoM acted in retaliation for papering their keeps rather than “double-teaming”. Personally, I judge the servers strength at that moment based on the upgrades (mainly WPs) it possesses. If you weaken a server by papering (which ultimately becomes a K-Train until upgrades start going), why would the opposing server, the one you just papered, want you to have the strength in your upgrades and guaranteed PPT in your upgraded keeps.

I totally get that loosing, and being K-Trained is NOT fun. I understand a lot of the gripe in this forum post. But, to be completely, when you notice a server is focusing your own, why would you not act in retaliation to it and hit those opposing and focusing you. “Get them before they get you” comes into mind. So, I wouldn’t shout “double team” before you think about tactics, because that’s all it is.

Arius.7031:

That’s why, I’m sure you can understand, many Dh players are upset. We could both be fighting for first, but DR seems to have given up and instead is fighting for 2nd.

So you fight to NOT be double-teamed and then propose a double-team on the top server?

Also, it sounds like your more upset that your keeps and upgraded towers were papered, and gold was lost, rather than the fact that your player base couldn’t defend it.

Arius.7031:

Suika.4567:

-We (DR) are going for the win. We are not collaborating or coordinating with GOM in ANY way.

We are currently behind you by about 4,000 points, why wouldn’t we attack your stuff to try and close that gap?

If you’re trying to beat server 1 as server 3, focusing server 2 to close the gap is a super bad strategy. I’m either left to conclude DR is utterly idiotic when it comes to strategy, or your claims don’t line up. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

On a side note, we actually HAVE been focusing GoM (I refer you to the same site). Today we camped their entire BL during prime, only to have you (unintentional I believe) double team force us to lose 2 of our WPs. That’s why, I’m sure you can understand, many Dh players are upset. We could both be fighting for first, but DR seems to have given up and instead is fighting for 2nd.

First, read what I said (what you quoted) again. I said “why wouldn’t we attack you.” I didn’t say we were FOCUSING you; two very different things. We’ve been attacking BOTH of you, for goodness sake.

On the other note: TBH, I can understand being upset and frustrated, and reading into it thinking something sinister is going on. I can understand because we were in THE SAME POSITION in a previous weekly match against GOM and another team. That’s because it is just something that happens in a 3-way match. It does not mean that anyone is collaborating.

But, when we were in that position, we didn’t take to the forums making wild accusations and pointing fingers. We accepted that in a 3-way battle, sometimes we are going to be on the receiving end of both teams, by mere mechanics of the system and tactics.
It does not mean anything beyond that is going on.

I appreciate that you clarified that you are not accusing us of that. The reason I commented (which is the first time I have on a forum) is because I really did not appreciate the way the OP decided to take out their frustration, by pointing fingers and making accusations against my server’s integrity. That is all. I am not a commander, so I can’t speak to strategy, nor would I; I’m just a player, I can’t speak for my whole server.

But what I can say, indisputably, is that we are not working with GOM, we are FIGHTING them, and that these accusations are unfounded and insulting, and the way the OP is deciding to go about expressing their frustration is honestly immature. That is all.

Do remember we have a thread at http://www.gw2wvw.net/topic/gom-vs-dh-vs-dr-week-4 for when this eventually is closed.

Final thought:
If you really want to hear from the Devs, OP, maybe you should check this out:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Upcoming-Forum-Changes-to-WvW-Match-ups-Sub-forum/first#post3393146

Listed under the reasons why the match-ups sub-forum is no more, (reasons that broke the Forum Code of Conduct) is “Accusations of hacking, exploiting, & griefing”

This post would fall under that category, FYI. Accusations do not belong on the forums. Goodnight.

I have to say that i hate seeing these posts, So GoM and DR have been doing this from the start of the season to us on Sorrow’s Furnace and you don’t hear any of us complaining on the forums. That’s because we don’t see it as organised in the last match it happened a lot but hey that’s the breaks.

Just a little last thing IF and i do mean if GoM and DR are teaming up to win matches they both can’t win so it won’t last and it would show that both of the servers are unsure of there ability to win.

Sube Dai.8496:

Nothing wrong with that.

I wish Yaks and SBI would help us double team HoD more…

I’m all for double teaming HoD

Erm I’m from GoM…

GoM has been hitting both servers hard, DR and DH have the closest PPT in the match up and DR and DH have been bumping heads like crazy letting GoM free most of the week.

ALSO, DR has an amazing defense and zerg during the prime time, even in EB it’s nearly impossible to take a tower from them due to over usage of siege and scouts in towers, resulting in commanders keeping the momentum going else where (DH)..

It’s not double teaming, it’s just unfortunate that DR have a great defense pushing GoM onto DH to get anywhere until the oceanics log on and make all of EB green.

At times it would feel like double teaming on purpose, but as most commanders know, if they don’t feed their zerg towers, karma, loot and champ bags then they lose alot of the fair weathers and AP hunters, and DH has been allowing this where as DR have been very defensive about just about everything they own.

Andrew Clear.1750:

Sube Dai.8496:

Nothing wrong with that.

I wish Yaks and SBI would help us double team HoD more…

I’m all for double teaming HoD

Let’s do eeeeeeeeeeet.

sniperman.1738:

Okay this has been getting old

Almost as old as NA QQ threads….. Feels like EU 18 months ago

It really doesn’t take much coordinated communication to “2v1” a server. As a comm if I see OJs on Hills, I’m going to head for garri or bay. If I have a large enough group I may split it and send a smaller force to bay and take the larger to garri while the other 2 servers are busy fighting over hills. This happens quite often not sure why people are up in arms over it. Does it suck when you are the one on the receiving end? Yep, but as was mentioned a few posts up, Anet says is working as intended and they hoped that more servers would do this. The biggest issue I see with 2v1 is that it usually happens to the mid server and not the highest threat/populated.

sniperman.1738:

the fact is its a low tactic, one of the lowest in fact, especially when one server does everything the other server says, thats not a WvW thats a Server taking commands,

Nope, it’s working as intended, for once. Hopefully you will have to get used to it – a long time ago some of us were advising Arenanet to work on ways to incentivise it, and hopefully they will do so.

Just do what HOD do. Gather you men,wiped one server , gather again, Wipe another.
I assume you do have bigger number , right?

PS:No matter how coordinate they are, they can’t stack together.

As a GoM soldier, I can say without a doubt this is not happening. We have consistently been taking first place, there’s no reason to team up with other servers. GoM plans to take first this tournament, by ourselves. We wouldn’t put up with subversive tactics, and we’re not worried about losing, DH isn’t a big enough threat.

GoM is fast moving, aggressive, and a little blood thirsty. Our own commanders have a tough time keeping us in check. We lack the self control to not attack a allied server. Like Sephiroth said, DR is big on defense, so we move to the path of least resistance. It’s strategy.

I do get that DR seems to be going for second place, but I doubt it’s intentional, it’s just strategy. They really hit SF hard at the end of last week, but that strategy got them second. They’re a solid server, I like fighting them.

Mostly, DR seems like a defensive server. That makes them a tough target. Last weekend me and my brother were capping bl camps and killing dolyaks, there were prolly other GoM roamers doing the same. Eventually we found DR camping their supply camps and escorting their dolyaks. We still killed the dolyaks but got killed in the process. Then we went to DH and found much less resistance, so we donkey punched your supply instead.

TL;DR: GoM isn’t worried about DH and would never team up with another server, and DR can be a pain to take on.

Greetings,

Please note that we do not allow Match-up threads on the Guild Wars 2 forum. You can read about our forum changes here:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Guild-Wars-2-Forum-Moderation-Updates
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Upcoming-Forum-Changes-to-WvW-Match-ups-Sub-forum

The WvW Community has created a new space for Match-Ups and other off-topic discussion. You can find the Player Community-run site here:
http://www.GW2WvW.net