Guild Wars 2

i just want someone from kodash or eiona reach just to verify if you guys are communicating and double teaming us ofcourse all servers get double teamed at some point but so far i dont see you hardly fight each other your both german servers and i just watched kodash zerg go for are keep watergate and ER go to the back gate and earlyer i saw both you guys in SM not even fight each other there neither. are you cheating? or im i just seeing things? and does everyone think its fair that servers in wvw have the same nationality in the same match up?

It’s WvWvW. You are either double teaming or getting double teamed at any given time.

i know that but i think theres something that happens in your brain when you are seeing tghe other two servers and the one is the same nationality has you iv allready seen in the past 8hours both the germans pretty much leaving each other alone bar the odd camp and they have double teamed are keep and sm and on both times came the same time and not fought each other anyway its all good we upgrade sm t3 with wayypoint for 14hours gg

if ur also the strongest server wich it sounds like u R expect to be double teamed

Double teaming maybe morally wrong, but it is not considered cheating.

I think Arenanet’s original idea was that the two weaker servers would team up against the strongest one to balance the match ups. Unfortunately I have never seen this happen, but it is always 2 strongest vs 1 weaker. In some rare cases it is really a 1vs1vs1, which is nice. Desolation is not weak, but we have players to fill max 2 maps, thus we are often outmanned and that attracts enemies when they see that they have the number advantage.

I am known in these forums as the worst complainer from Desolation, but here I must say:
I have witnessed Kodash fighting vs Elona Reach. I don’t think they have a treaty, or at least some of their players are not playing by it. They maybe concentrating their attacks more at Deso, and certainly they do that on Deso BL, but nevertheless they are also fighting each other.

Let’s hope for the best and that next week Desolation will not face any TOP6 ranked EU servers.

No.

Moving on.

well in times of the numbers being small on us it would help alot if the outnumberd buff gave us something usefull instead of magic find what do they think we will do with mf against more players magic find them to death?

Go read the IoJ/DH/NSP matchup thread from last week and tell me how well double teaming/alliance works out. When it happens to us we just fight harder.

Danzo.9341:

i just want someone from kodash or eiona reach just to verify if you guys are communicating and double teaming us ofcourse all servers get double teamed at some point but so far i dont see you hardly fight each other your both german servers and i just watched kodash zerg go for are keep watergate and ER go to the back gate and earlyer i saw both you guys in SM not even fight each other there neither. are you cheating? or im i just seeing things? and does everyone think its fair that servers in wvw have the same nationality in the same match up?

The always was a rivalry between German servers. Of course Elona and Kodash know each other well, 13 matches against each other, and some ex-Elona on Kodash and vice versa, but I do not believe on a longer than one opportunity cooperation and especially never communication about cooperation.

Concerning your SM scene: If both side do not like your WP (or both do not like your trebs), both want it to be reseted as the first goal, who controls the wood-SM afterwards is more than secondary, and for Elona SM (whole EB ) is quite useless at moment with the blue dolyak bug we will never get resources to SM, Durios, Quentin.

I personally participated in burning down Ogerwacht in the morning and the Kodash BL doesn’t look peaceful as well.

Danzo.9341:

i just want someone from kodash or eiona reach just to verify if you guys are communicating and double teaming us ofcourse all servers get double teamed at some point but so far i dont see you hardly fight each other your both german servers and i just watched kodash zerg go for are keep watergate and ER go to the back gate and earlyer i saw both you guys in SM not even fight each other there neither. are you cheating? or im i just seeing things? and does everyone think its fair that servers in wvw have the same nationality in the same match up?

Politics and strategy is what it is. The frustration runs through my body, but that’s war.

Deniara Devious.3948:

Double teaming maybe morally wrong

How on earth did you come to that conclusion?

I personally think intentional Double-teaming (Colluding by commanders in RL to collaborate in WvW) is dishonorable and that it ruins the fun of WvW. When NSP was Double-Teamed I made a thread about it here.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/wuv/wuv/Double-Teaming-ruins-WvW/first

As you can see, this is a very controversial topic and there are many passionate opinions on both sides.

if the double teaming is going against the winning server then the 3 way match up is working as intended. If not then you just gave teh people doing this exactly what they wanted.

Dedlaw.9130:

Deniara Devious.3948:

Double teaming maybe morally wrong

How on earth did you come to that conclusion?

Indeed, taken from the air :P There are as many versions of morality as there are people, so :P Pretty sure we have invented a few religions that say that killing the weaker is the greatest thing ever, in the past :P That’s the cool thing about morality, if you like doing something, just find some like minded people and invent a god that says its moral ^^ Anyways back to the subject..

WvW is designed for double teaming. It is what you are meant to do, otherwise you are playing the game wrong (yeah). Alliances are the core of wars. Just look at the history of Europe. Of course ideally the two weaker servers should team up, but if the servers have no clue about strategy, that may not happen, and usually doesn’t.

double teaming is not wrong in any way tho its anoing to fight with or agienst but thats something different. so in no way a cheat or anything close to, if some servers wanted and could mange it thoes servers could divide the maps between them and just stay on the last server and it would still not be cheating tho it would proberly be borring

Dedlaw.9130:

Deniara Devious.3948:

Double teaming maybe morally wrong

How on earth did you come to that conclusion?

OP was talking about 2 winning servers ganging up together against the outnumbered one. In other words 2 bigger vs 1 smaller. The classic school yard bullies vs victim scenario.

It seems that nowadays words like honor, loyalty, morale, ethics and truth are some alien words to many people. But to me they are more than words. If a situation like I described above feels morally fine to you, that’s your opinion and I am not gonna chage it. That your commander raises up your troop’s morale by concentrating the attacks on the easiest opponent, then fine by me, but do pause for a second to think how it feels on the losing side. To me morale means the spirit when fighting together against a common goal in the time of hardship. Note the emphasis on the word hardship, instead of selecting the easiest route.

Deniara Devious.3948:

Dedlaw.9130:

Deniara Devious.3948:

Double teaming maybe morally wrong

How on earth did you come to that conclusion?

OP was talking about 2 winning servers ganging up together against the outnumbered one. In other words 2 bigger vs 1 smaller. The classic school yard bullies vs victim scenario.

It seems that nowadays words like honor, loyalty, morale, ethics and truth are some alien words to many people. But to me they are more than words. If a situation like I described above feels morally fine to you, that’s your opinion and I am not gonna chage it. That your commander raises up your troop’s morale by concentrating the attacks on the easiest opponent, then fine by me, but do pause for a second to think how it feels on the losing side. To me morale means the spirit when fighting together against a common goal in the time of hardship. Note the emphasis on the word hardship, instead of selecting the easiest route.

Oh please don’t bring morals into this. It’s a waste of time.

Or do your morals prevent you from killing an enemy player because they are outnumbered? Do your morals only allow for 1v1 fights because you want your opponent to have a fighting chance? Do your morals compel you to leave a tower be instead of attacking because you have a superior force to theirs? Or do your morals only apply when it suits you?

No, they aren’t just words to me, they do have meaning, but everyone on the WvW battlefield stepped in their knowing what the score was. It’s still a competition to see who comes out on top. If eliminating one of the threats improves my chances, so be it. Just because a player isn’t very skilled at chess it does not mean I should hesitate to use a fool’s mate on him to knock him out of the tournament.

Dedlaw.9130:

Deniara Devious.3948:

Dedlaw.9130:

Deniara Devious.3948:

Double teaming maybe morally wrong

How on earth did you come to that conclusion?

OP was talking about 2 winning servers ganging up together against the outnumbered one. In other words 2 bigger vs 1 smaller. The classic school yard bullies vs victim scenario.

It seems that nowadays words like honor, loyalty, morale, ethics and truth are some alien words to many people. But to me they are more than words. If a situation like I described above feels morally fine to you, that’s your opinion and I am not gonna chage it. That your commander raises up your troop’s morale by concentrating the attacks on the easiest opponent, then fine by me, but do pause for a second to think how it feels on the losing side. To me morale means the spirit when fighting together against a common goal in the time of hardship. Note the emphasis on the word hardship, instead of selecting the easiest route.

Oh please don’t bring morals into this. It’s a waste of time.

Or do your morals prevent you from killing an enemy player because they are outnumbered? Do your morals only allow for 1v1 fights because you want your opponent to have a fighting chance? Do your morals compel you to leave a tower be instead of attacking because you have a superior force to theirs? Or do your morals only apply when it suits you?

No, they aren’t just words to me, they do have meaning, but everyone on the WvW battlefield stepped in their knowing what the score was. It’s still a competition to see who comes out on top. If eliminating one of the threats improves my chances, so be it. Just because a player isn’t very skilled at chess it does not mean I should hesitate to use a fool’s mate on him to knock him out of the tournament.

True, but that said, I’d argue double teaming has no effect in the long term. Particularly so in the new matchmaking system.

nirvana.8245:

Dedlaw.9130:

Deniara Devious.3948:

Dedlaw.9130:

Deniara Devious.3948:

Double teaming maybe morally wrong

How on earth did you come to that conclusion?

OP was talking about 2 winning servers ganging up together against the outnumbered one. In other words 2 bigger vs 1 smaller. The classic school yard bullies vs victim scenario.

It seems that nowadays words like honor, loyalty, morale, ethics and truth are some alien words to many people. But to me they are more than words. If a situation like I described above feels morally fine to you, that’s your opinion and I am not gonna chage it. That your commander raises up your troop’s morale by concentrating the attacks on the easiest opponent, then fine by me, but do pause for a second to think how it feels on the losing side. To me morale means the spirit when fighting together against a common goal in the time of hardship. Note the emphasis on the word hardship, instead of selecting the easiest route.

Oh please don’t bring morals into this. It’s a waste of time.

Or do your morals prevent you from killing an enemy player because they are outnumbered? Do your morals only allow for 1v1 fights because you want your opponent to have a fighting chance? Do your morals compel you to leave a tower be instead of attacking because you have a superior force to theirs? Or do your morals only apply when it suits you?

No, they aren’t just words to me, they do have meaning, but everyone on the WvW battlefield stepped in their knowing what the score was. It’s still a competition to see who comes out on top. If eliminating one of the threats improves my chances, so be it. Just because a player isn’t very skilled at chess it does not mean I should hesitate to use a fool’s mate on him to knock him out of the tournament.

True, but that said, I’d argue double teaming has no effect in the long term. Particularly so in the new matchmaking system.

True it might not be a big deal in the long run, but if you eliminate one of the teams from a map, that means it’s that much easier to take it over completely

P
a
r
a
g
r
a
p
h
s

Dedlaw.9130:

Deniara Devious.3948:

Dedlaw.9130:

Deniara Devious.3948:

Double teaming maybe morally wrong

How on earth did you come to that conclusion?

OP was talking about 2 winning servers ganging up together against the outnumbered one. In other words 2 bigger vs 1 smaller. The classic school yard bullies vs victim scenario.

It seems that nowadays words like honor, loyalty, morale, ethics and truth are some alien words to many people. But to me they are more than words. If a situation like I described above feels morally fine to you, that’s your opinion and I am not gonna chage it. That your commander raises up your troop’s morale by concentrating the attacks on the easiest opponent, then fine by me, but do pause for a second to think how it feels on the losing side. To me morale means the spirit when fighting together against a common goal in the time of hardship. Note the emphasis on the word hardship, instead of selecting the easiest route.

Oh please don’t bring morals into this. It’s a waste of time.

Or do your morals prevent you from killing an enemy player because they are outnumbered? Do your morals only allow for 1v1 fights because you want your opponent to have a fighting chance? Do your morals compel you to leave a tower be instead of attacking because you have a superior force to theirs? Or do your morals only apply when it suits you?

No, they aren’t just words to me, they do have meaning, but everyone on the WvW battlefield stepped in their knowing what the score was. It’s still a competition to see who comes out on top. If eliminating one of the threats improves my chances, so be it. Just because a player isn’t very skilled at chess it does not mean I should hesitate to use a fool’s mate on him to knock him out of the tournament.

I think people don’t really understand what double-teaming is and why we are against it. NO ONE is talking about the natural, random occurrences of two servers attacking the same server simultaneously. We’re not even talking about a Red commander noticing in game that Blue is attacking Green and deciding to attack Green also while they are distracted with Blue. I’m not even talking about Green and Blue coincidentally attacking Red simultaneously. All of that will happen in WvW and is normal.

We are talking about Commanders from two separate servers exchanging emails with each other in real life, talking on voice chat, and deciding to team up to eliminate and crush another server completely until they chase them to their spawn camp and they can’t play. We’re talking about Green Commanders sending texts to Blue commanders with specific instructions like “We are hitting Red’s Keep, please turtle Speldon and Pang so they won’t have supply. Let us have the keep and we’ll give you Veloka”.

In my mind, THAT is double-teaming. And yes, it is immoral and dishonorable. And more importantly, it ruins the FUN of the game. And it also doesn’t accurately reflect who is the better server. Which is the point of WvW. My last match up we got double-teamed in the way I described and sunk to 3rd with very low points. We complained about it, there was a ton of fighting on our match up thread. Then we got paired with the same servers the following week and they were too ashamed to double team. We fought the game with no alliances. Guess what happened? We won the whole thing in first place by 12,000 points.

Victory feels better when it’s honest.

this is a real problem and anet should do something about it

No it’s just life. The severs aren’t communicating its just all a matter of strategy and opportunity.

I rage so hard about it but in the long run, I’ve benefited greatly off of not pushing one server so the weaker sever can cap the tower that we could easily take back later.

Two servers working together is a sound tactic and on some level should be encouraged. Two less populated and/or skilled servers should team up on a greater enemy. Currently it is better for 1 to play 2 and 3 against each other.

IMO I think their should be an incentive for capturing nodes from the leading server in a tier such as more WxP, karma, gold, etc.

yea there doing it for sure im done with WVW this week just watched kodash treb SM two walls while we was watching the downed walls ER came in the door near kodash keep with golems and rushed us ER took sm then kodash flipped it right after then ER took two of are tower while ER hasnt touched OW (OW is T3 atm).(kodashs)

its not hard to sum this up and start to realise when you play 10hours on sat and sunday sure kodash will take an ER camp. dont see much more action in EB going on between them two at all. and its not because deso is strong far from it.

And this is what happens when arenanet lets a 3way happen with two of the servers being the same nationality heck ER and kodash prob share the same TS lol .

Entropy.4732:

I think people don’t really understand what double-teaming is and why we are against it. NO ONE is talking about the natural, random occurrences of two servers attacking the same server simultaneously. We’re not even talking about a Red commander noticing in game that Blue is attacking Green and deciding to attack Green also while they are distracted with Blue. I’m not even talking about Green and Blue coincidentally attacking Red simultaneously. All of that will happen in WvW and is normal.

We are talking about Commanders from two separate servers exchanging emails with each other in real life, talking on voice chat, and deciding to team up to eliminate and crush another server completely until they chase them to their spawn camp and they can’t play. We’re talking about Green Commanders sending texts to Blue commanders with specific instructions like “We are hitting Red’s Keep, please turtle Speldon and Pang so they won’t have supply. Let us have the keep and we’ll give you Veloka”.

In my mind, THAT is double-teaming. And yes, it is immoral and dishonorable. And more importantly, it ruins the FUN of the game. And it also doesn’t accurately reflect who is the better server. Which is the point of WvW. My last match up we got double-teamed in the way I described and sunk to 3rd with very low points. We complained about it, there was a ton of fighting on our match up thread. Then we got paired with the same servers the following week and they were too ashamed to double team. We fought the game with no alliances. Guess what happened? We won the whole thing in first place by 12,000 points.

Victory feels better when it’s honest.

Alright fair enough, I didn’t think people took it to THAT extreme to actually be communicating with each other in order to synchronize an attack. I know SoR and JQ have doubled-up against BG a number of times but then again we return the “favor” whenever possible.

But that does make me wonder, how exactly do you know what other people are communicating with each other? Are they boasting or are you just speculating? Taking the SoR/JQ example, I have no idea whether they planned it or if it was just spur of the moment. I know most of the one’s I took part in were the latter.

I think the reason there are three servers playing against each other rather than two is so that two of them can potentially work together to defeat an overwhelming enemy.

From many forum posts in other games I think this is one of the reason RvR or WvW failed in other games because there were only two sides and not three.

Entropy.4732:

Then we got paired with the same servers the following week and they were too ashamed to double team. We fought the game with no alliances. Guess what happened? We won the whole thing in first place by 12,000 points.

Victory feels better when it’s honest.

Yeah…

I do encourage everyone to go read the last match thread mentioned. You will see a much different story. It wasnt even remotely hidden that NSP and IoJ double teamed DH. I mean, the involved people were completely open about it!

And no one on DH really minded that much, it ended up being a great match. Its a bit disrespectful, imo, to not give credit where credit is due (and that is you achieved your victory with organized help from IoJ, to the benefit of everyone involved in the match).

edit: Link and link and to correct myself, it was not an “alliance,” it was a “mutually organized focus of one server by the other two servers with pre-determined ground rules.” Hell, even at the end of the match there are numerous NSP giving credit to IoJ for helping them attain victory!

And again, it ended up being a great match! This also goes to show it can and DOES happen when the two weaker servers focus on the stronger. But, they have to agree to it and lay down some ground rules, instead of just letting things take their course, imo. When its done effectively, like in the last match, it really creates a great time for everyone!

Not only is it not cheating, IMO when the new match up system rolls up a highly uneven match the game should implicitly support 2v1. Everything would work the same except the teamed side would be a single color & could use all the waypoints either of the teams controls.

I’ve always thought it would be interesting to see if the top 4-5 servers could handle such a setup :P

Campalishous.9076:

Not only is it not cheating, IMO when the new match up system rolls up a highly uneven match the game should implicitly support 2v1. Everything would work the same except the teamed side would be a single color & could use all the waypoints either of the teams controls.

Yeah, I think encourage it would be a good thing too actually.

In the last match with IoJ and NSP, it was one of the best matches that DH has had in quite a while. The issue, as others have stated, is that without actual organization and ground rules, it doesnt tend to be the two weaker servers against the stronger. I think actively encouraging it in that direction would be a good thing.

DH ended up losing, but the overall match was really exciting and fun. I think if they added some type of mechanic to encourage it, it might help with the server imbalances and wipe outs that happen, creating better matches for everyone. It could also be heavily exploited though, just like everything, so it would have to be implemented correctly.

@Tuluum- That wasn’t a server wide “ground rule” thing and it had nothing to do with the NSP victory. I led many, many attacks on IOJ during that week, and made it a mission of mine to flip IOJ camps in their BL whenever I could because I was kitten ed that DH had double teamed NSP with IOJ the previous week. You guys had a true DT going with IOJ where commanders were communicating directly. In fact, NSP won last week because we marshaled superior numbers and crushed both servers. To the above posters who questioned how I knew DH and IOJ commanders were communicating to DT NSP there were two things. First, it was obvious. IOJ would camp out camps so DH could take the keep. Then, an IOJ commander graciously confirmed everything by posting this:

“I will try to give insight on what happened last night(8 PM EST) and will take full responsibility for this supposedly “Double Team” fight on Northern Shiver Peaks.
When I logged in last night to TS Logan from CORE was talking about the forum war here and how it devolved into a shouting match between our three major commanders and NSP. Then supposedly Logan was contacted by a DH commander that they where going to apply pressure on NSP and if IoJ would like to join in. Logan communicated this info to the rest of the commanders to IoJ on EB. It did not have to take much to motivate the commander to focus a bit on NSP and so we left a few scouts (Including me) at Kloven and Wildcreek and see if DH will try to pull a ninja as we hit NSP. After awhile DH started to put pressure on NSP and only came to our end of EB for Rogues and dredge. Logan then felt that it was safe to leave EB and take all the CORE members and take hills in NSP BL and upgrade it and see if he can take all of NSP BL.
After Logan left EB, Debilitator tagged up and took control of the IoJ Zerg. Since we assumed that NSP was still bitter about the forum war, I convinced him to continue to hit NSP and not focus on DH. Since DH was not hitting us except for the odd rush in capping Rogues, I figured it would be a wise move to not give them a reason to hit IoJ. If we hit DH or Stone Mist DH would of pulled out from NSP corner and focus on IoJ, which in turn would of been a “Double Team” on IoJ since NSP would re-cap all there towers and camps and focus on IoJ as well.
So blame me for orchestrating this “Double Team” on NSP because I was the one telling the commander to hit NSP and told the IoJ EB Pugs to not hit DH. If I felt confident enough that NSP would push DH after IoJ took the brunt of the DH zerg. Then I would of taken the opportunity of DH opening to take SM or there towers or keep.
But from what I observed here on the forums and the fact that NSP have repeatedly shown much more focus on IoJ (Took our EB keep 5 times before I got on), Logan and I called the plan on bringing the hammer down on NSP to prevent the hammer on coming down on IoJ. So yes, we did “Double Team” you but it was to prevent Us from getting double teamed in return. Say what you will about the “Double Teaming” as a cheat, but I saw it as a way to prevent a crushing blow to IoJ. If you took the offer to put pressure on DH awhile back, things would of turned out differently last night.

Proud Commander for Isle of Janthar
Laspo Yorick – Mesmer
Samson Longshanks – Warrior"

A “mutually organized focus of one server by the other two servers with pre-determined ground rules” will never include everyone on the server, ever. However, its success is determined by how many are participating. If you say guilds like [Os] are not important to any outcome.. I am not sure what to say!

I can equally say that I never participated in the supposed double team between IoJ and DH, as afaik, one never existed except to troll the thread. See how that works?

All anyone needs to do is go read that thread. You posted in it, you know whats there.

Basically, DH is flat out the stronger server amongst the three, and because of this, they were a focus for the two other servers. This is exactly how the WvW system is supposed to work, and a shining example of how the 1v1v1 system can work as a balance. But, I think the only time it does is when the two weaker servers actually communicate out some ground rules during the match (which is exactly what happened in that thread).

And really, in the end, the double team arrangement made my NSP and IoJ made for one of the best matchs in a long, long time. Anyone who questions what happened can just read that thread. Like I said, its an excellent example of how the system is supposed to work. It goes to show that just being the stronger server isnt always enough, the other two, even if weaker, can pull off a win for one of the servers if they have large segments of the population that play in accordance to some ground rules.

Entropy.4732:

@Tuluum- That wasn’t a server wide “ground rule” thing and it had nothing to do with the NSP victory. I led many, many attacks on IOJ during that week, and made it a mission of mine to flip IOJ camps in their BL whenever I could because I was kitten ed that DH had double teamed NSP with IOJ the previous week. You guys had a true DT going with IOJ where commanders were communicating directly. In fact, NSP won last week because we marshaled superior numbers and crushed both servers. To the above posters who questioned how I knew DH and IOJ commanders were communicating to DT NSP there were two things. First, it was obvious. IOJ would camp out camps so DH could take the keep. Then, an IOJ commander graciously confirmed everything by posting this: -Snip-

As far as I know this was not a two communication between commanders. I did not message the commander to coordinate attacks with them or try to reach out to any DH. I decided to take advantage of information passed to me and took the risk of pouring my resources into an assault based off of second hand info. If it was up to me I would have declared a 30 min truce and have a round table discussion with all three servers and have a discussion on what can make the match “Fun” for the week.

The tactics in war with two other sides are much more diverse then a war with one side. If one side can convince one side in a war that both have common goals and that it would be folly to fight each other, then why should that be frowned upon? Just because both side manage to successfully negotiate a deal and heaven forbid that they honer such deal for more then a few moments that if be called “cheating”.

From what I can tell by some of the opponents to the “Double Team” style, they hate having there skills be attributed to having help from an outside server. Does double teaming diminish the value of the servers skill? Depends on if it was successful or a failure or the attitudes of the recipient of said double teaming. There are ways to combat “Double Teaming”, much of which is outside of PvP combat.

My specialty as a commander is information and communication, the info I have the better I can communicate to others and move resources as needed. I make a horrible commander in the front(Brawn/Might), but an excellent commander from the rear(Tactics/Intel).

Tuluum.9638:

A “mutually organized focus of one server by the other two servers with pre-determined ground rules” will never include everyone on the server, ever. However, its success is determined by how many are participating. If you say guilds like [Os] are not important to any outcome.. I am not sure what to say!

I can equally say that I never participated in the supposed double team between IoJ and DH, as afaik, one never existed except to troll the thread. See how that works?

All anyone needs to do is go read that thread. You posted in it, you know whats there.

Basically, DH is flat out the stronger server amongst the three, and because of this, they were a focus for the two other servers. This is exactly how the WvW system is supposed to work, and a shining example of how the 1v1v1 system can work as a balance. But, I think the only time it does is when the two weaker servers actually communicate out some ground rules during the match (which is exactly what happened in that thread).

And really, in the end, the double team arrangement made my NSP and IoJ made for one of the best matchs in a long, long time. Anyone who questions what happened can just read that thread. Like I said, its an excellent example of how the system is supposed to work. It goes to show that just being the stronger server isnt always enough, the other two, even if weaker, can pull off a win for one of the servers if they have large segments of the population that play in accordance to some ground rules.

Oh the absurdity! Where to begin… Let’s start with your claim that DH & IOJ never teamed up. I guess everything NSP witnessed in game was all a forum troll. And I guess Laspo Yorick wrote that long, detailed, painfully honest explanation simply to troll the thread. Sorry. That’s fish three days old. I ain’t buyin’ it. Regardless of this particular match up, let’s get back to your other argument. That Double Teaming is the same as a “mutually organized focus of one server by the other two servers with pre-determined ground rules”. Personally, I’m against both. But they are not the same. Commanders from different servers colluding on tactics and specific attacks to crush another server is what we are against in this post. Not a general guide line arrangement between two servers. Regardless, I’m even against that and consider it borderline DT. And let’s use another server match up as an example. I recall fighting GOM and HoD. Nothing was more annoying then getting DT’d to our spawn and looking out on a sea of mixed GOM and HoD names, standing together not attacking each other. That was the moment I knew I was against DT. It’s wrong, it’s a game killer, and it’s just not fun. Finally, let’s get into your assertion that the 3 way match up is designed to encourage DT against the stronger server and the last match up was an example of the system working. Hogwash I say! MOST of the time the stronger server and the second place server Double-Team the weakest. This happens because the second place server wants to stay second, so it sides with the victor. Second, Anet may have intended some natural balancing between three servers and even some smart playing in game by commanders who will take advantage of Blue hitting Red to attack Blue. But I guarantee they didn’t intend commanders to communicate outside of the game to arrange specific attacks like Danzo described above.

The only way to stop DT is for commanders from every server to take a stand on moral grounds and discourage it among their troops. OR we have some function where as a server you can vote on whether or not you are “Closed or Open to Alliances”. Then those servers would be paired respectively.

Not cheating but definitely unfair and un-sportsman like. Take T1 NA for example 2v1s happen at opportune times to all servers, but when SoR and JQ far far more frequently do it, have had known reports of communication to 2v1 BG, have had players and guild leaders move to each others server, on the last few reset nights the cooperation between the 2 is just rediculous, NA prime time can go for hours without the 2 taking more then a supply camp from each other. Its less playing for your server or for battles and more; lets gang up on the name we dont like.
A-net really needs to just do 1 up 1 down matches, atleast then we may get a 4th server who can compete and will get rid of these long standing server “alliances” and grudges. I’ve had great battles with both servers, but those fights are not the ones where we are constantly outmanned 2 to 1 and its a lagfest with 2 servers holding hands.

MegaManExpert.8413:

Entropy.4732:

@Tuluum- That wasn’t a server wide “ground rule” thing and it had nothing to do with the NSP victory. I led many, many attacks on IOJ during that week, and made it a mission of mine to flip IOJ camps in their BL whenever I could because I was kitten ed that DH had double teamed NSP with IOJ the previous week. You guys had a true DT going with IOJ where commanders were communicating directly. In fact, NSP won last week because we marshaled superior numbers and crushed both servers. To the above posters who questioned how I knew DH and IOJ commanders were communicating to DT NSP there were two things. First, it was obvious. IOJ would camp out camps so DH could take the keep. Then, an IOJ commander graciously confirmed everything by posting this: -Snip-

As far as I know this was not a two communication between commanders. I did not message the commander to coordinate attacks with them or try to reach out to any DH. I decided to take advantage of information passed to me and took the risk of pouring my resources into an assault based off of second hand info. If it was up to me I would have declared a 30 min truce and have a round table discussion with all three servers and have a discussion on what can make the match “Fun” for the week.

The tactics in war with two other sides are much more diverse then a war with one side. If one side can convince one side in a war that both have common goals and that it would be folly to fight each other, then why should that be frowned upon? Just because both side manage to successfully negotiate a deal and heaven forbid that they honer such deal for more then a few moments that if be called “cheating”.

From what I can tell by some of the opponents to the “Double Team” style, they hate having there skills be attributed to having help from an outside server. Does double teaming diminish the value of the servers skill? Depends on if it was successful or a failure or the attitudes of the recipient of said double teaming. There are ways to combat “Double Teaming”, much of which is outside of PvP combat.

My specialty as a commander is information and communication, the info I have the better I can communicate to others and move resources as needed. I make a horrible commander in the front(Brawn/Might), but an excellent commander from the rear(Tactics/Intel).

Thank you for your honestly and clarity. Much appreciated. I’m sure you didn’t have direct communication with the DH commanders, but it was this line in your post that I was going off of:

“…Logan was contacted by a DH commander that they where going to apply pressure on NSP and if IoJ would like to join in. Logan communicated this info to the rest of the commanders to IoJ on EB.”

So my assumption was that Logan was the one contacted and then passed the info along.

Look, I respect you as a commander but we disagree in this regard. I would never have used the info from DH to my advantage on the field and I would be upset at my commander if they did because it would make me feel like we were in the pocket of, or being manipulated by another server. Maybe that makes me weak, but it’s where I stand ethically. You chose to use it, and that was your choice. I don’t judge you for it, but I am against it. I think it’s good to have this discussion though so each server can figure out where they stand on DT.

Entropy.4732:

Oh the absurdity! Where to begin… Let’s start with your claim that DH & IOJ never teamed up.

Please point out where I said no one teamed up! You seem to be having a separate conversation in your head than what is going on right here.. You also missed how it relates to exactly what you said, which was my point.

It’s wrong, it’s a game killer, and it’s just not fun.

I thought it made the last match more fun than it would have ever been otherwise. Subjective though, as not everyone on DH agrees.

MOST of the time the stronger server and the second place server Double-Team the weakest.

Yup, never said any differently. Thats why I went to so much length to describe what happened last match as how it is “supposed” to work. I even went into how anet could implement mechanics to encourage this since it doesnt usually happen (where the two weaker servers focus the strongest).

Anywho, you just carry on in your crusade. Good luck!

I will accept that each server has there own ethical outlook on “Double Teaming”, since each server is a community shaped by events that that directly impacted there game play in WvW. If a server has been on the receiving end of a “Double Team” many times and the community felt that it has contributed to there direct losses. This in turn would make the community despise any form of “Double Teaming” even if there where given the opportunity to be part of an effort to double team some one in return. For IoJ commander we view “Double Teaming” as a natural occurrence and have to have strategies to adapt to such tactics. When we get “Double Teamed” we pull in and weather the storm and try make us a vary unappetizing target. If we can get both sides to get close enough together we might be able to cause friendly fire and see if the two sides start fighting each other. If we can make both side upset with each other then they will hopefully back off and try to attack an exposed former ally in an attempt to score points.

Some servers find that having an account on an opponent server to gather chatter a valid and legal tactic, as for IoJ commanders it’s viewed as a form of cheating and illegal tactic.

So all in all, I can understand why people will view “Double Teaming” as a form of cheating and unintended game play. But if you have two out of the three communities in WvW find it acceptable and “Fun”, you will be hard pressed to stop such behavior. Ethics and morals is set by what the community finds as acceptable and unacceptable. When you are paired up with three communities with different views on what is ethical in battle you will have conflict (on the forums) which in turn affects the flow of battle.

I will stand by that “Double Teaming” is not cheating and part of the intended game play, until proven otherwise by argument or by authority (Developer).

Heck – we double-teamed the Germans in ’45. In fact we mega-teamed ’em.

All’s fair in love and war.

Guys we are the nr 1 world server from GuildWars 2 ( in Arena Net’s eyes ) We are fighting months in a row the TOP tier servers.. They keep putting us up vs 2x FR servers.. now 2x DE servers!!

Anet Dev Mind :" Desolation need stronger opponents, lets give them 2! "

Be proud guys, Desolation is the best server in GuildWars 2 on ALL fronts PVE, SPVP and WVW.

We are the best! Hurraay

Contiguous.1345:

Heck – we double-teamed the Germans in ’45. In fact we mega-teamed ’em.

All’s fair in love and war.

Well they DID try to team-kill Russia, so their fault they didn’t have teammates

A three-way, but not the cool kind.