Guild Wars 2

I had the idea that 3 server matches were better than 2 because it would enable the 2 weaker servers to focus on the strongest and thus keep matches competative.

what is happening in practise however is the 2 stronger seem to gang on the weakest making matches completelly crap.
what is going on? is this some facet of gamers minds that wasn’t counted on or is it something i’m failing to get?

for me the explanation is linked to the stronget server in the match up being due to it’s nightime capping ability and thus having perpetual fully pimped keeps, making it a hard choice of attack. ( i go into this effect in detail on another thread)

Either way it’s kinda making 3 server battles even more lopsided than 2 server battles…. such a pity , in theory 3 server battles should work.

usally #1 and #3 go for the 2nd on because 1st has to save the lead and 3rd want to claim the 2nd place.

This thread has some good insight:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/wuvwuv/The-Self-Balancing-System/first#post268076

hunTShoo.1247:

usally #1 and #3 go for the 2nd on because 1st has to save the lead and 3rd want to claim the 2nd place.

Only to a certain point once #1 gets so far ahead no one else can win they stop focusing on 2 and just attack anyone (ie both). At this point #2 attacks #3 primarily because they need to keep #3 down to hold onto second because the ladder gives points for second place.

WvW (2 teams) may not have worked well in all games in the past but this is clearly worse. NOw you have an imbalanced system to start just like other games and then actual rewards for two teams teaming up on the last place. Also there haven’t been many games with WvW so stop acting like there is some deep knowledge base that 2 teams doesn’t work.

Funnily I’ve been arguing this point each time somebody have mentioned the coveted 3 faction PvP in every 2 faction PvP game to date, after DAoC.

The theory behind it is nice; the practices and realities are rarely that though as the weaker parts will fight amongst themselves anyway and effectively it will feel like 2 factions anyway because it becomes irrelevant whether it says Green or Red or Blue on top of that enemy tag. It’s still an enemy.

There’s nothing inherently balancing in 3 faction PvP; it always comes down to the PvP model in itself, regardless of factions what people fight for and when they’re willing to fight.

First off,I’m from RoS, we’re fighting Dzagonur and Fissure of Woe. Dzagonur recently got lot’s players they have activity at all times, especially night times. What happens is they take everything during the night and upgrade it all. During the day we have to take everything from our corner back (which has worked everytime except once when a certain commander*cough* didn’t want to play that day because of some reasons) When that is done, we then take anzalias (we’re green, and FoW is red, but we’re second and blue, Dzagonur has a tremendous lead) which is usually blue. Then we try to take other blue upgraded structures and try to destroy their upgrades. We also take Quentin lake, it’s always fun to destroy a fully fortified tower and then we try to keep Blue busy. Meanwhile FoW gets the opportunity to get some of their lands back. It doesn’t matter if we still have anzalias or not. Instead of going for the blues, FoW has every time tried to invade us, or take our supply camps, I have NEVER seen them take a camp or tower in blue corner.
Not counting the Castle, we usually manage to take 2/5,1/2 and once even 2/3 of EB (I say not counting castle).
But because our population is low, our own borderlands then suffer because of it.

Now your “1v1” Idea is equally flawed, what would happen when Dzagonur were to be put against FoW like now ?
They would focus ALL of their forces on FoW, FoW would never be able to retake a tower. Maybe a camp here and there.

Oh and mind you, we’re fighting Dzago who have 3 orbs every time, while we have 0.

I can answer this easily. You wouldn’t, right now the ladder is screwed up one because of a lack of data, two because of server xfers, but three and the largest is because of the wvwvw system skewing the data.

At some point you came in first or second when you shouldn’t have and got higher than you should be. At the same time those dudes probably came in second in matches where they should have beat either team alone.

Bam now you are facing someone outside your capabilities…. primarily thanks to your “balanced” wvwvw

For that same reason it is also premature to be judging WvWvW

This is a total generalization. I’ve seen any number of the possible team ups and just pure bloodbaths all in the same match. It shifts depending on players, times, scores, blood feuds etc etc…

3 world matchups evolve and will get even stranger when WvW rivalries get ingrained.

well for me blood feuds are just a few idiots on forums with inflated eog’s thinking they speak for their server.

for me it’s due to getting points for second place and also the night cap issue means one team begins every morning with complete control of the map and has its upgraded stuff intact . so after the other servers claim back their own stuff the choice is attack the guys who are sitting in full upgraded keeps from the night before or attack the guys who just got their keeps back.
usually this means attack the guys in the weaker keeps. After all they will have less time to react to your attack and so the likelyhood of success is greater.

Yes the dominant team and the 2nd place team always gang up on the 3rd place team. anet wasn’t right where they said the 2 weaker teams would gang up on the dominant 1