Guild Wars 2

Lanimal.6541:

Awesome reset I only got to play 3 hours before getting dc-ed. Didn’t feel like sitting in queue at 8 am so went to bed.

You guys still get multimap queues?

With free xfers ending it was inevitable that wvw guilds would be shifting around. In the end we will prolly end up with essentially 2 tiers…..servers with pop/coverage…..and those that don’t. If you enjoy WvW, you prolly don’t want to end up in the latter grouping, so likely want to be t4 or higher…..and then likely t3 or higher to give your self some cushion for additional shifts. Otherwise your server will always be exposed to population/coverage deltas that will dictate a match, and impact server morale/participation and long term population health.

Dynnen.6405:

Also can we stop with the ‘higher tier = higher skill’ idea? Higher tier = higher coverage.

True.

…Best way to get large numbers?….win…best way to win…outnumber your opponent….best way to ensure that…take a large organized guild to a low tier….ensuring weeks of easy wins——>swelling the ranks of fairweather players internally and also becoming a magnet for xfers…..when you stall out, rinse and repeat…or quit game. /shrug

Post free xfers closing there will prolly be 3-4 tiers of “populated” servers all somewhat comparable….with the rest being a dogs breakfast of populations and coverage susceptable to small pop/coverage changes/deltas.

ykyk.2740:

azizul.8469:

taken just now. still think CD leading because of the number ?

Just to point out from your ss, GoM and DH are also full and they are T6. SoR is “very high” and leading T2. Server population has little to do with WvW representation.

It is one factor. You need to see the pops over the day though (off peak often more damaging). A server that has more access to raw numbers is at advantage. Whether those numbers show up in wvw or not is another matter…..often easier to get them to show up when winning (and they are not needed) then when losing though.

^multi map queues?……what is a queue?…..never heard of it. (<—concerned FA player)

I wonder if the listing of servers is literally done with populations sizes. I.e. even within the same full/very-high categories they are listed smallest to largest…..its not alphabetical. Anyone know? I’ve just noticed over several weeks of these screen shots that TC is almost always near the bottom of the list (even within its category) and consensus is that it is one of the larger overall pops (lots of pve’ers) and the other servers seem to “feel” they fit in that rank order….I have no idea though.

Sunspots.9861:

You guys talk about rating too much. While the idea of “conquering” T2 and moving to T1 may drive alot of people, I know that TC is certainly not ready for that now, and if we ever get there, we will be a far different TC than we are today. This isn’t a bad thing, but what it means is that winning at this level this week is not up to me staying up extra late and giving a crap who I attack for fear TC’s rating may go down.

I’ve said it time and again, all I care about is winning the map I’m on. If that means holding redvale for 3 hours against SoR and BG then that’s my goal, and dernit , you aren’t going to get that camp without a fight. I like to think when PINK is on the field, you feel our presence and that’s all any one guild can possibly hope for in a 24/7 match up. Rating be kitten , because second place would be as huge a win as first in my book.

But that’s just me. I certainly don’t speak for the whole of TC or even the whole of PINK.

I think most play this way (i.e. personal short term gain> intangible longer term server gains)….and thus, as I stated, higher level server strats/alliances rarely if ever are doable. People like “winning”. Best way to obtain a personal “win” is to attack the weaker target. The downside(?) to this is that weekly matches essentially boil down to numbers/coverage then. “Alliances” (or at minimum smartly picking targets) can overcome numbers/coverage discrepancies to make closer scoring/interesting matches…..but w/o buy in from a large portion of the servers populations they aren’t sustainable and thus will unlikely ever get the inertia to work.

tldr: green always* wins…just have fun (*xfers/tier jumps may alter experience)

Kerithlan.1659:

Tallis.5607:

Mikitten058:

So are you saying you would like SoR to not attack TC while TC attacks SoR?
Or saying you want SoR and TC to only fight BG?

I want to have fun
And happen to think that it would be more fun if both TC and SoR attacked BG. Your opinion may be dofferent, ofcourse, but I prefer winning against BG then loosing against BG.

Kerithlan.1659

Red still mostly helps Blue rather than Red when Red and Blue gang up on Green. Blue still wants to make sure Red doesn’t have an opportunity to take points from Blue but rather Green.

That’s not true.

Instead of having two enemies, you only have one.

You got, basically, two options:

<b>Option 1 is what we are doing now.</b>
Red versus Blue & Green
Blue versus Red & Green
Green versus Red & Blue

<b>Option 2</b>
Red versus Green
Blue versus Green
Green versus Red & Blue

In option 2, both Red and Blue will be able to capture more points AND both Red and Blue will be able to better defend.

I find it hard understand why anyone can disagree with that.

.

Ofcourse, <b>Option 3</b> would be the best for Blue…
Red versus Green
Blue versus Red
Green versus Red

And let’s face it, that is what you are hoping for: that SoR attacks TC, BG only attacks TC and leaves SoR alone.

But… how can you still hope that this will happen, after been in the same tier with BG for three months? Do you still believe that BG will leave you alone when you attack TC?

So, once you understand that option 3 is off the table, you should see that option 2 is better for you.

Saying it a thousand times doesn’t change how it works. TC pairing up with SoR to double team BG helps TC the least, as it only strengthens SoR and gives TC a bigger struggle long-term. There’s no need to continually drag people through this pointless alliance nonsense.

If you want TC to win, then TC needs to not take points, but deny points from SoR and BG. By keeping the score between TC and SoR close, we gain points. By preventing BG from defeating us by as large of a margin as they did the previous week, we gain points. We want TC to become stronger and both of our opponents to become weaker. Anything else is harming us long-term.

Once people start to realize that, then we can move on. Unless of course you just want to flip around between second and third place forever, which is cool if that’s the goal.

Tallis is correct though…..TC gains more rating from taking points from BG then they do from taking points from SoR. And that benefits you in the long run if your ultimate goal is improving rating….as TC has the lowest rating TC actually benefits the most out of the 3 servers if all the scores are close (regardless of placing 1,2 or 3). Now you could argue its in TC interest to attack SoR over BG, to get BG out of the tier asap, and get a smaller (easier?) opponent (Stormbluff?)…but that is a different argument then you’ve been making

All that being said “alliances” will never work in practice. People are self motivated and generally have a poor grasp on server strategy (and rating math).

The challenge with “rewards” for the winner – is that that winner is often dictated solely by population/coverage discrepancies. You’d just reward people more for xfering to the winning servers.

I wonder if they should lower the map caps (i.e. less people per map)…..it would seem to address a lot of the issues people have…..

Would bring more servers into similar WvW population bands, increasing the competition within tiers, but also making it more feasible for tier boundary servers to compete. May also have the added bonus of helping culling and reducing the almighty zerg, and reducing the static nature of some tiers as more servers could realistically compete with each other. Atm I don’t think any server is coming close to filling all the maps, even during prime time. Less people forced to spread over more maps, may bring more strat/tactics into play versus raw numbers having such a dramatic effect (as the numbers advantage would be capped to a lower amount)

Atm a lot of the issues that people seem to talk about wrt WvW (outside culling, exploits) seem to revolve around scoring, and static tiers etc…..these are driven by populations (few servers with similar pops = few servers that can compete with each other = static tiers -and many autowin matchups) Lowered caps would bring more servers into line with each other. Anet could further incentivise guilds to spread out. As the tiers become more competitive (ie anyone could win w/o relying on xfers) rewards could be added, along with a tweaked glicko to allow quicker reshuffling.

barring that…

fix culling and increase $ rewards in wvw.

Considering 2 million copies were sold at launch, its tough not to acknowledge a drastic reduction in active populations. Leveling several alts recently, the starting areas are pretty devoid of other players, sPvP action has dropped dramatically and encountering a queu on 1/4 WvW maps for even a fraction of the day, let alone filling 4 maps is non existent for the vast majority (prolly all) of the servers wrt wvw action.

RE:Thiefs -this has been covered in far too many threads, but I think their risk/reward needs some adjustment. The mmo playerbase is widely known to favor playng balanced or even UP classes and thus why thiefs are so popular in wvw…actually anti-fotm! /sarcasm off. Any successful game needs to attract and maintain new players – a new player trying out the game today, hitting WvW on a sub 80 toon, is bound to get extremely frustrated with thiefs (more so then any other class, as they will often feel they had little opportunity to react), more then anything I think that is an issue if you want to build a stable and growing community.

as an aside…..People point to culling…how long do we give them to fix that before people admit, it wont be fixed?….how about design the game mechanics around what we are playing today (and its limitations) versus what may or may not exist in some undefined future date? /shrug

I’m still playing and enjoying pvp, though I wouldn’t be if the game had a sub, and w/o changes/improvements going fwd I doubt I would purchase any expansion to continue playing when that time arises.

Kerithlan.1659:

Waking.6052:

IOJ is in second place in T3, and TC is in second place in T2.

Interesting.

What’s actually interesting is that Tarnished Coast was ranked 7th for seven weeks. Seems like an omen, considering the week started on December 21 lol.

TC has underestimated its population size for a long time. TC has been too large for T3 for a long time (ie shouldnt have been 7th), and is easily a T2 ( or even T1) sized server. We’re finding CD is larger then IoJ in the current T3 match….and TC outnumbered CD and FA combined the week before.

(holidays will likely mess up typical weekend/weekday dynamics for those pointing to that in outcome dynamics)

Sounds like a good matchup atm.

Sunspots.9861:

Anet needs to fix the issue, and I for one am really dissapointed that WvW is such a low priority to them. I never played Guild Wars but I never once heard from anyone how great the PVE was, it was always the WvW. Why is the best part of that game such an after thought in this one?

Yeah the WvW attention is disappointing. I bought the game for WvW and the advertised lack of “progression” (no treadmill). I’m having some fun today, but w/o changes I’m not sure I would fork out more $ for an xpac if its just more of the same (and I would not still be playing at all if this game had a sub). I suspect their focus is where the $ are though. This game launched with something like 2 million copies sold…..the wvw population today is a tiny, tiny fraction of this….so either there has been a giant exodus overall from the entire game (likely) and/or there is a ton of PvE only players who are dumping a ton of RL $ in the store for PvE fluff that Anet is catering too first. Who knows.

With respect to WvW environment: I find there are a few classes/builds that afford risk/reward profiles that are superior to other professions. Especially when you factor in easy of play, and the wvw environment/mechanic limitations. Thieves are on that list. ….more often then not I find it’s win/run versus win/lose.

I would prolly assume that the “rendering issue” will not be fixed in wvw. As an aside it seems ridiculous to me that it is accepted as an excuse for class balance issues…i.e. its ok, because IF/when rendering is fixed, in an undefined future update, that may or may not ever come to pass……they may be fine? huh? How about we balance classes/mechanics to function within the game environment we currently have?…crazy talk I know.

mooty.4560:

I’m pretty sure both FA and CD players fail to realize that attacking each other just makes things worse. It’s a very casual format and you’re always going to get some folks who either don’t understand or just don’t care. So ignorance works in favor of TC for that reason and also because probably of number of TC players just think they’re awesome instead of acknowledging population disparity.

That in turn creates a bandwagon effect where consistently higher scores draw in more folks than usual to WvW play. I witnessed this problem during the orb days when FA was matched up with similar opponents but clearly winning due to orb domination. The next week rolls along and lower scores will keep the fairweather players away. This is happening for TC right now because they’re just winning by leaps and bounds with superior numbers, during certain hours they can pretty much take whatever they want and it creates a prime environment for leveling scaled characters and karma training. The opposite is occurring for FA and probably CD as well.

I realize there’s the looming specter of playing IoJ(another TC-like world) but I would like to see a match-up with similar numbers for once… would be interesting.

To your first point (re:~alliance) agree….this is an mmo….you can virtually guarantee some people will not understand or care – which often snowballs to wreck havoc (see infamous dolyak incident by a handful of people). The “breakout” events are all the more draw for randoms to hit the strategically wrong BLs.

It will be interesting to see what IoJ’s numbers will be like, based on the comments in the pre t2 match, it sounds like TC has a big population (ie they have map q’s) for even tier 2…IoJ may actually be a smaller server pop wise (prime time). Though the prospect for IoJ to get a win, after a streak of losses may bring out more IoJ’s from the woodwork.

Granted the holidays will likely make a mess of things, so next week prolly wont be representative of server “norms”.

Ardon.4105

I’d actually love to see where all these people are since we never have any queues except for EBG, even at reset, and during a good portion of the day we don’t have a single point on two of the four maps.

Interesting. If the above is true, and TC gets the numbers out to play in t2 matches that they do in t3 matches they may actually be the server with the largest pop (during primetimes at least), or at a minimum at least comparable.

Diashame.6328:

the better off we (T3) will be for chance of promo to t2 in the future.

Welcome to t3! I think you will soon discover that FA and CD have nowhere near the populations to be remotely competitive in tier2, without significant xfers occurring.

Martin.1906:

I believe that TC will do ok in T2. We won’t win the tier, but I don’t think we are going to end up with 0 ppt at any point like what happened when SoR and BG were on their way up the tiers. There are a couple of reasons for this, first being that there are no orb bonuses any longer. Second is that we have learned a lot since then.

We faced BG on its way up as well…..at that time (when they crushed us) they were “Beastgate” and the fotm band wagon server that was going to make it to #1, when they stalled out getting there they lost some numbers…..so I agree I don’t think the delta between you and them will be as large as it was in the past (they’ve gone down, you’ve gone up – population wise that is)

Raincrow.1840:

Wasabi Kitty.8247:

It’s incredibly frustrating to lose week after week after week to TC simply because we cannot match their numbers.

FA and CD should have been working with each other all along to focus against TC, which would have givin us a chance to nulify their numbers.

Instead we spend more time attacking each other’s borders than we do in TC’s. That’s why we’re both doing so poorly.

^Agree……but will never happen unfortunately.

DivineBeing.2086:

Yea, I agree with Coral. I am starting to get a bit nervous lol.

But, I am completely off all next week so I will be fighting my hardest for TC!

Didn’t you kick FA off its own borderlands, while fighting off CD attacking you as well during that time period? I logged in briefly during that time (morning PST) and we had outmanned buff in our own (FA) BL and most of the map was green. I don’t normally play at that time so don’t know if that was typical, but I saw large groups of [PINK] out there then. If today was typical I’m not sure it would be considered “horrid”.

ykyk.2740:

TC never has 4 map queues except on reset night. And even that is a 5-10 minute queue other than for EBG.

Never…. except I just stated you have gotten 4 map q’s…..which is true. I hope the prospect of tier2 fights and more competitive matches can at least be 1/2 as motivating as a handful of players trolling some RP to get your numbers out. You yourself posted in our match thread that you felt that TC’s primetime pop was prolly equal to FA and CD’s combined. I’m too lazy to multi-quote but I think someone suggested on average you get 1-3 map q’s a night (suggesting you are full/near full on many maps in prime time -ie flirting with cap – barring pve events ). EB i particular seems to be a favourite stomping ground for TC and you have a large constant force there.

Anyways – as we’re heading into the holidays, I suspect populations may be a bit eratic regardless of the “norms”. Should be a good match.

As one of the more populated servers in GW2, TC has been able to achieve 4 map q’s during weeknight prime time in t3…..they should be competitive. 5 or 6 weeks of consecutive wins tends to help the population grow organically and via the xfer inertia. They might be weaker in some off peak periods, but its not non existent (at least relative to FA (where we had the outmanned buff this morning while they took our garrison and the majority of our BL) Some strategic commanders on TC as well. Good luck to TC….and look forward to IoJ in T3.

Rpgtabbycat.5869:

Greyskies.2815:

Ok TC 30,000 points ahead…lets keep this up so we can finally leave this Tier. Just need SoR and BG to put the hammer on IoJ.

Not entirely sure TC is ready to move into Tier 2. We need 24/7 coverage for that and I don’t think we have it yet.

What does that matter….for the majority of the day (in particular primetime) you’d be fighting servers that are more competitive….in other words; for the majority of your player base you would have more competitive fights…would think you’d want that.

Based on another post looks like TC is getting another guild xfering over…from JQ….shocker a guild on a losing server xfers to a winning server :P.

Sharpclaw.7510:

I think part of it certainly is that, as I sort of expounded on before, it’s not only hard to trust another realm to honor some type of agreement (not to mention actually enforcing it on both sides) but the knowledge that it is temporary encourages people to plan ahead against their allies or discourages them to even enter into an arrangement.

As for the ranking system: For me, at least, I don’t really care what tier the Coast is in. I really enjoy my server and all I really want are fights I enjoy. CD and FA generally deliver in this regard although there is a disparity that’s apparent because the same patterns repeat themselves. T2 would be fun, I think, and I’d like to push for it but at the same time if there was some type of major change and we started to drop down in tiers, I don’t know if I’d mind, again, so long as the opponents are fun.

In terms of the ranking system, it’s not really broken but it doesn’t really offer anything dynamic either. There’s ways to push against it but really I do think that there’s got to be some general shuffling at times. Not something like placing Kaineng against SoS or something like that but there has to be some way to have a system that, at times, gives different opponents.

I have no clue what that would be though.

warning incoming sweeping generalizations…..(ie obviously there are exceptions – but wvw is about large populations and general dynamics)

People like winning, people like advantages (greater chance of winning), people are generally selfish (personal rewards/fun> others)

All of this is evidenced by fotm classes/builds, “fair weather” player behavior, xfers tending to move from “losing” servers to “winning” servers, zerging etc etc…. As you said, this matchup is unbalanced, but you are having fun…..as I’m sure most of TC is….I suspect you didn’t have 4 map Q’s and 40 golem rushes when fighting SoS (? – sorry don’t recall server where TC was spawn camped)…..I’m guessing lots of your pop found excuses to PvE that week. (this isn’t TC specific, its all servers – back to original sweeping generalizations: winning is “fun”)

TC needs to work to get to t2 if you want it by your own design, but that prolly means getting a bit out of peoples comfort zones. You’ll need to play a bit more aggressive, you need to spread over the map a bit more (ie not have 90% of pop at one location – push multiple targerts), you’ll need to have people/commanders move maps when needed (that’s part of meta if you don’t fill maps), and you’ll need to keep FA and CD down (CD has higher rating actually, so you benefit more by keep them lower). All this comes with more risk though, which is counter to self interests…and requires more effort….translation: w/o commanders and large TC guilds pushing for this collectively ……its not going to happen.

So the reality is TC is likely in holding pattern until IoJ drops themselves -which seems to be happening – back to top comments..losing servers tend to lose numbers -YB is another example of that) TC could certainly make it happen quicker if you wanted to though.

jayderyu.3751:

sigh yeah. 5th, 6th…. and on and on. As another pointed out unless one of the top 6 collapses as the current server strengths are. TC will never go up or down. Glicko SUCKS.

Its not Glicko per se. GW2 WvW is all about numbers/coverage. There are 7 servers with large populations and acceptable coverage. The odd one out currently (TC) or IoJ if they drop will always dominate the other t3/t4 servers as no other server (barring xfers changing populations) can compete atm.

If FA, CD or YB(now) drop down to t4 they have a numbers advantage and become the “TC” of that tier and appear to easily win the tier there. One of those three servers will keep keep bouncing between t3/t4 and jump from guaranteed losses to guaranteed wins week to week.

Now TC’s fate is in TC’s hands. We’ve seen you easily outnumber all other servers in this tier. With numbers comes easier defense and more $ on the map = more siege golems etc. TC’s choice seems to be push hard for t2, or be complacent in t3 and essentially sit in auto-win comfort for the forseeable future. When you want to, you definitely seem to mobilize some very large map presences (4 map q’s on weeknight). All of this doesn’t really impact FA/CD/YBs fates other then a change of faces on the maps as I suspect IoJ (or whatever current t2 server that drops) will have a comparable or larger pop advantage than TC does.

Outside of the above to make this tier more competitive scoring wise FA/CD/YB need to recruit heavily or actually work together (in some form of loose “alliance” /gasp!) veruses TC (or whoever the “green” server is). Both these options are unlikely too happen though w/o some encouragement from Anet via incentives for a variety of reasons. (example incentives: encourage xfers to tiers where there is a pop imbalance, reward more points/xp for flipping leading servers objectives, perhaps lower number cap on maps etc) But these are likely a long way off if ever …..so it is what it is, for a long time i’m afraid.

Sharpclaw.7510:

Phantom, I’d give it a rest. It reflects just as poorly on us to throw fits and it might on individuals from other servers. At this point, we should sort of turn it in, stop fanning flames, and just hunker down for the next round. No one’s going anywhere, anyway.

I agree. ^The reaction by some TC has been as immature as the party crasher’s actions. In light of the news events of the day in the US, this all seems really, really petty at this stage.

Jayne.9251:

As for any issue about moral terpitude ….. Those were my observations. I don’t speak for my server as a whole. Nobody does.

…..But apparently the actions of a few FA speak for our whole server though.

BladeBraverBureba.1052:

rhonyn.6810:

Wow…thread explosion.

So let me catch up…….people are upset that an event held in an open world pvp zone was disturbed? That’s like complaining about being killed in the JP – pvp happens. Is it unfortunate? sure..would I have done it…no…..but I dont think I would be at all surprised….this is an mmo after all. People paid for the game and as long as they are behaving in accordance with the CoC, they can do whatever they want. /shrug.

….and then the resulting action of the apparently “morally superior” TC/CD participants is to hold an entire population (FA) responsable for the actions of small minority of the server…….definitely taking the mature high road there (again outcome doesn’t surprise me…people often hold large groups responsible for the actions of a few – usually people frown on this behavior but whatever….we’re the F4 server apparently so I defer to your maturity)

On the bright side if nothing else, this week has just shown that its just TC themselves holding you back from getting to T2/T1….you have a very large population when motivated, get em all out more consistently, and get em effective and you’re there.

As to all the wvw chest thumping…..take it up in tPvP match…..and settle it like dolyaks! :P

PS….its a video game.

Pretty sure CD is beating FA as well. It’s not just their inability to beat TC that’s holding them back. If they were clearly T2 material, they would at least be second. Instead, they’re dead last and holding all of one tower as I type, across ALL maps, and earning a grand total of 10 points each tally.

reread: I was refering to TC moving up.

Wow…thread explosion.

So let me catch up…….people are upset that an event held in an open world pvp zone was disturbed? That’s like complaining about being killed in the JP – pvp happens. Is it unfortunate? sure..would I have done it…no…..but I dont think I would be at all surprised….this is an mmo after all. People paid for the game and as long as they are behaving in accordance with the CoC, they can do whatever they want. /shrug.

….and then the resulting action of the apparently “morally superior” TC/CD participants is to hold an entire population (FA) responsible for the actions of small minority of the server…….definitely taking the mature high road there (again outcome doesn’t surprise me…people often hold large groups responsible for the actions of a few – usually people frown on this behavior but whatever….we’re the F4 server apparently so I defer to your maturity)

On the bright side if nothing else, this week has just shown that its just TC themselves holding you back from getting to T2/T1….you have a very large population when motivated, get em all out more consistently, and get em effective and you’re there.

As to all the wvw chest thumping…..take it up in tPvP match…..and settle it like dolyaks! :P

PS….its a video game.

- tiers/scoring is primarily driven by population dynamics
- actual tiers/scoring are pretty meaningless (and should be)
- tiers/groupings are such just to ensures that you are not facing an opponent that out numbers you to a degree that you are spawn camped 24/7
-**** There are a limited number of servers and very few “like” servers from a pop perspective. We’re all going to fall into a small grouping and be pretty stagnant +/-.
- Xfers are accounted for poorly in the current system, and really are the only way for most servers to dramatically impact their performance, with lower pop servers/tiers impacted the most (re: pop>all)
-matches are as fun as you make em.

Usagi.4835:

When I said that we want to go to Tier 2 and get spanked, I mean that we will get there, get thoroughly stomped, hopefully learn something and improve! THAT is the sole reason why people want to move up to Tier 2 atm. We KNOW we will get stomped, almost certainly. But we also know that we’re not ready. But even so, what’s important is learning from the experience.

I think you are under estimating TC. Numbers have changed a lot over the last 2 months, many people have left/playing less, including many of the “hardcore” wvw guilds. You may suffer score wise in t2 due to some off-peak gaps (relative to other t1/2 servers), but if you are fielding 4 full/nearly full maps its hard to see how you could not be competitive during those periods (in fact prolly more competitive then FA/CD are with TC during peak, as we seemingly field ~1/2? your numbers globally). Issues with off-peak coverage gaps won’t be corrected with practice/communication unfortunately, but your prime time group would have more to do at least.

Despite all the chest thumping GW2 wvw scoring/tiers is primarily driven by numbers….you got em. Changing tiers now is harder though as we’ve had weeks of servers being put in some rough buckets, so blow outs (leading to large rating gains/losses) are rarer in the upper tiers (minus xfer wild cards) so there is less dramatic movements.

Usagi.4835:

rhonyn.6810:

Usagi.4835:

JakobGW.5730:

Cogbyrn.7283:

Who said anything about wanting to be in T2?

Urrid.4593:

As far as t2 goes, were never going to get there without intense teamwork

That’s who.

But Jakob, did Urrid actually SAY “We want to be in T2”? Try reading what was posted again.

Why wouldn’t you want to be in T2?…..your numbers certainly justify it.

Because people are painfully aware that, though TC has the numbers required for T2, there is still a lot of work to be done with regards to teamwork and organisation?

…best way to gain that though is with adversity…not growing complacent in a tier you can seemingly coast through imo……there are no other t3 servers that come close to your prime time population.

I find when ever we (FA) dropped down and were in matches where we had numbers advantages it tended to have the opposite effect you are looking for….people get lazy, stop caring, stop showing up, just mess around etc…..adversity and pressure force you to play better. For instance the specter of CD/FA “alliance” (in brackets to avoid that debate again) seemingly resulted in 4 map Q’s for you….you’d get that pressure/incentive every night in t1/t2 to learn/improve and increase participation.

Usagi.4835:

JakobGW.5730:

Cogbyrn.7283:

Who said anything about wanting to be in T2?

Urrid.4593:

As far as t2 goes, were never going to get there without intense teamwork

That’s who.

But Jakob, did Urrid actually SAY “We want to be in T2”? Try reading what was posted again.

Why wouldn’t you want to be in T2?…..your numbers certainly justify it.

Sunspots.9861:

Wow, TC came out in force tonight! I’m really impressed. Every Map on Q!

Yeah, you guys have a lot of bodies. I don’t even think t1 has 4 map q’s anymore (especially week days). FA certainly can’t come anywhere close to matching those numbers.

Shadow Gathering.5649:

Sunspots.9861:

Raincrow.1840:

Sunspots.9861:

What’s the point of an alliance where you still get last place lol

If you watch the score you’ll see that during the times when FA and CD work together that all three scores are much closer, with FA many times getting the most points per tick. It’s helping you guys have a better chance at 1st and 2nd.

Has it occured to you that while defending our own lands as best we can, TC could simply choose not to attack CD and only destroy FA on their own homeland? I’m pretty sure if we couldn’t get first we’d just guarantee ourselves second until Fort Aspenwood got tired of being third and gave up on helping CD get first. An alliance is really on phase 1 of a changing war and we plan on playing smart, not emotionally.

Moreover, while FA can affect who gets first, it is TC who would get to decide who is last. Think about that.

It seems like who gets 1st, 2nd, 3rd is largely a symbolic victory. End-of-the-week scoring is mostly dependent upon (1) how many total points your server has earned and (2) how large or small the difference is between servers.

So if you are going to get 2nd or 3rd, ideally you want to do so while (1) still gathering as many points as possible and (2) keeping 1st place scoring to a minimum.

This is why a 2nd and 3rd place alliance is so mutually beneficial—-it achieves both of those objectives. It is also why TC is expected to get 1st place but lose weekly points while 2nd and 3rd will gain points. http://mos.millenium.org/matchups#NA

Personally i’m not terribly concerned about ranks and scores. But you have to admit, an alliance is good strategy.

I agree a loose “alliance” makes sense for a number of reasons….not least of which is a change of pace from TC autowin on repeat for the last month. Closer matches draw more excitement and participation from ALL servers….leading to more dynamic pvp. I could care less where we finish (1, 2 or 3)

I think it is pretty safe to say though that TC doesn’t really have anything to worry about as any loose “alliance” is unlikely to last….if nothing else these forums have shown that people are dumb (all servers), generally selfishly motivated (^exception is the Dolyak escort above..toot!), and don’t listen…..so it will inevitably break down if it hasn’t already.

Sunspots.9861:

TC is too good to sink to t4 and the only thing this alliance would do is guarantee us staying in t3 forever. Cd is clearly stronger than FA, so FA and yak are the only real variables here. An alliance seals FA’s fate as a tier 4 server because the only guarantee in this matchup is a third place for FA.

I don’t think you know how the rating system works….as this won’t happen. Yaks is losing rating in their current matchup….making a return to t3 even farther away for them. Based on ratings TC should be running away with another win…a close scoring match even that still has TC winning…will drop TCs rating and increase FA and CDs ratings. This 3 party tango will be here for a while (holidays is wildcard for all tiers though)

Sunspots.9861:

Me personally though, I don’t mind. The purpose of having 3 sides is to encourage temporary alliances for sure, I just don’t think they planned on both sides commanders attacking one homeland as a single force, but rather both servers pursuing their own self interests independently. Either way, the system will compensate and things will fall back into place…whether that’s cd soaking up fair weathers from all servers or us.

I’m going to have fun either way, and I take pride that we defended as well as we did and protected our garrison. Maybe next time we won’t be as lucky!

Working together or not….servers tend to move north up their natural spawn sides if they are at all strategic and realize the opposing (3rd) server is on the same map…enemy of my enemy is my friend…..especially when neither FA or CD could advance against a 2v1…..FA moving across to intentionally engage CD on TC borderland would only help TC and hurt FA in the medium term as it would be that much easier for TC to retake any ground gained.

FA & CD should be focusing TC to the exclusion of each other imo….its the only way this tier will ever be interesting from a scoring perspective. Will it be 100%…no….but it doesn’t have to be to have an impact.

phaneo.4597:

If the two servers are going to form an alliance, it IS for the greater good in the case of TC. Here we’re talking about moving up to T2, where we’d be facing servers with wider coverages, better tactics, more population, and hell we would hardly manage to get out of our spawn without numbers advantage OR better tactics combined with numbers.

Things have changed a lot over the last month……populations have gone way down for the majority of the servers (even tier1,2)….see numerous recruit threads, see thread topic on lack of rewards and “boring wvw” etc. I suspect you will find t2 pops lower then you expected and yours higher then expected in comparison.(at least relative to your matches a month or more ago (you’ve been winning for weeks….the other t2 server will have been losing for weeks)…..as you mentioned you have the numbers on the server<FULL>….its just comes down to if you can get folks out to wvw)

DivineBeing.2086:

…random stuff……

Your posts come off like you’re a kitten btw…think about it, I don’t think I should explain this. :P

robert namo.7243:

FA should slow down on CD and go against TC, but hey it’s not up to me.

Agreed. IMO we commit too much to EB as well. EB is nearly always full for TC, and the map is too compact (especially with SMC trebs) to make significant point gains (and hold them) there w/o superior numbers….which we rarely(never?) have…..lock down FA BL (ie have constant forces defending southern entry ways/camps/towers), defend EB “corner”(ie dont need full map numbers), then push on other BL (TC) would be the optimum strat from my view.

DivineBeing.2086:

Either way, it balances itself out naturally. Do not try to control the market :/.

WvW is a numbers and coverage game. There aren’t enough servers with simillar pop profiles, and we don’t neatly fit into 3 bucket groupings. There is always going to be a larger/stronger server and a smaller weaker/server, especially when you add in fairweather players boosting the “winning” servers pop and lowering the “non-winning” servers pop creating even larger deltas. Tier 3 in particular seems to be a boundary tier that will always have a larger pop server from T2 down here (FA/CS/YB would prolly be a better competitive match today from a pop perspective)

So from a overall scoring perspective the only way for a server to overcome the current situation is to recruit players (xfers) or form loose alliance(s) with the other server. Working as intended,

Always enjoy your vids, your attitude and generally balanced view of games you play.

Teabaker.9524:

D/P is counter to any melee atm (They can get killed easily by other thieves though). With number 3 we can get away from melee extremely easy (we even can even leave the hammer’s ring with it).

What counters P/D (any class/build)?

Your tanky enough to survive burst, and any prolonged fight will afford the p/d thief ample opportunity to either reset or disengage from the fight. Your dps is primarily auto spam, so you’ll rarely be initiative starved and retal/reflect isn’t a big concern asd you are not reliant on spike. Your large morale pool, regens, vigor, ports, aoe blinds on stealth, leaches and stealths would seem to afford you plenty of room to reset/flee anything (from a 1v1 perspective).

Static.9841:

Xavi.6591:

Right now, it looks like Yak’s might end up in T4. In any case, it is going to come down to the wire like last week’s very small difference between FA & Yak’s scores.

I’m actually more interested in what’s going on between YB and FA than I am my own server right now becuase it’s just so close! I love those nail-biting finishes!

TC dictates who finishes 2nd….it will be as close as they want to keep it.

There are 7ish NA servers with “FULL” populations the majority of the time. They will take up tier 1/2 with the odd man out always in tier3 (its TC atm). This tier is always going to be somewhat lopsided (points wise) as there currently isn’t any other NA servers with large enough populations(&coverage) independently to pose a serious threat…..

……so we need more consolidation (xfers) to FA/YB (or CD), or blatant alliance between YB and FA to both push TC to the exclusion of each other to make the tier interesting from a scoring (win/lose) perspective. Otherwise might as well just have fun and not worry about points. You can say you are playing for 2nd, but the reality is that TC ‘s decisions of who they are going to push has a greater impact on who finishes 2nd then FA’s or YB action’s do. (i.e. If FA and YB just sat in their BLs defensively, who ever TC decided to push would finish last….TC would start to take parts of the map, and the other server would then also push the “weakened/distracted” opponent. )

Cosmos The Cat.2954:

TC may be a full server. But in WvWvW we are hardly ever full.

Tier1&2 don’t have 24/7, 4 map queus either…..just pointing out as a “FULL” server you have access to more people then either FA or YB…..that tends to result in more players in WvW more often……especially with fairweathers increasing participation. Despite what many of us would like to think….numbers/coverage pretty much trumps everything in WvW.

kanikani.2430:

shagworth.5017:

I take this to mean that server populations are settling and that there is less bandwagonning going on. I was bound to happen, and as someone else stated, these are the most even matches available.

That’s not to say that playing the same people doesn’t get boring. I think a seasonal ladder reset would be nice, resetting everything ever 3 months or so.

Resets don’t work because ranking is basically a function of server populations. This is at the core of all WvW problems at the moment if you ask me (aside from lack of development/rewards).

As far as adapting goes, the hypothesis of this is that skill = win. When that idea is simply not true. Adapting new tactics will not give you a win in WvW against a much larger force, that just is what it is. There are many limitations in WvW as it currently stand so depending on your resources (man power or money) you can only try a set of things. There is also the issue of time slot coverage which new ‘tactics’ or adapting will not help fix. Only when every server has the exact same population at the exact same times (or at least very similar) can we really talk about strategy as if it really mattered.

Agree. WvW is a numbers game….tier 1&2 are “FULL” servers….as is TC in tier 3. The only viable independent strategy for the other servers in tier 3 is to recruit and get more and better coverage as well if the ultimate goal is a more competitive (score wise) match-up.

Cogbyrn.7283:

rhonyn.6810:

^I agree with Vorpal’s posts.

In particular the concern of the current and growing non-competitiveness level in this tier resulting in apathy and lower participation as time goes on.

I’ll never understand why people seem to lose their competitive edge against people they already “know”. The most fun I’ve had in previous years playing various games has been when we do FFAs or in-house DotA matches with only friends. Knowing subtleties can add some spice to the match and give it more flavor than crashing against anonymous faces.

Plus, I’m not sure people would have more fun up against servers with lower pops/coverage (lower tiers), or those with much higher pops/better coverage (higher tiers).

So who do these folks want to play? I guess this always comes back to the incentive problem. People can’t seem to conjure up the desire to just compete en masse. There always has to be some carrot to make sure various folks get their bodies into the maps to give it some semblance of population.

I could rant for days on this, so I’ll stop. As long as the battles against these two servers maintain their rockitude, I’ll be happy as a clam.

You seem to have missread….and not sure of the tangent you are going on….“knowing” has nothing to do with anything.

Server dynamics (barring large population shifts) dictate that TC will continue to win, and arguably TC’s actions have more to do with FA and YBs placing/scoring then FA and YB do themselves….that last point is the potential issue.

^I agree with Vorpal’s posts.

In particular the concern of the current and growing non-competitiveness level in this tier resulting in apathy and lower participation as time goes on.

Spaceman.1063:

Pictured:

FA not especially winning at the moment.

http://ompldr.org/vZ2llMg/gw771.jpg

Map illustrates my point above…..TC dictates this match and how everyone finishes. Over the week they can choose how close, or far apart 2nd and 3rd will be from each other based on where they choose to push.

When server and individuals actions become less and less relevant to overall outcomes, it will be interesting to see if FA/YB retain focus on sound strategies regardless, or just say f’it and do whatever more and more.

Wasabi Kitty.8247:

Tallis.5607:

Wasabi Kitty.8247:

The other day I saw a group of 15 pubs auto attacking the gate to a tower. No siege. I watched to see how long they would go on. After 10 minutes I got bored and threw down a ram. It only got half built, because of 15 people only 2 were carrying supply.

Wasabi Kitty.8247:

We have good guilds, Pro, ULTD, PTX. But our pubs are complete idiots.

So yea, I don’t blame people for wanting to distance themselves from that.

Pffft, we were all newbies once.

It only takes 2 minutes to explain a group of newbies what siege is and how supply works. Then another 5 minutes to lead them to a camp, supply up, run back and build your rams.

Look at it this way…
About 3% of the population plays computer games.
About 1% of that 1% plays GW2.
About 5% of that 1% of 3% plays on your server.
About 20% of that 5% of 1% of 3% plays WWW.

So, these people are veeeeeeeeery much like you, it will be hard for you to ever meet a person in real life that is so much alike.

The only difference is that they don’t have your experience in WWW yet.

And you are here on this forum bashing them, calling them ‘complete idiots’, instead of helping these people.

If you can’t even take 10 minutes to explain things to these new people and show them how to do it, then you are more part of the problem than part of the solution.

Just my 2 cents.

What, you think we haven’t tried?

You don’t think we’ve tried saying “hey, ignore the wurm, we are losing our structures”

You don’t think we’ve tried saying “you need to carry supply at all times, if you don’t have supply your main focus should be getting some”

You don’t think we’ve tried saying “do not waste time trying to auto attack gates, it’s pointless”

You don’t think we’ve told them “don’t take supply from the keep, go to a supply camp”?

These people are idiots not because they don’t know what to do, they’re idiots because they know what to do and then CHOOSE NOT TO DO IT.

……there are pubs/newbs/questionable players etc….on every single server. In fact there are very likely more on servers with higher populations that are winning their matches as you get even more fairweathers, tourists etc checking it out.

Now you can make the argument though that it matters less on those servers as they’ve got the match in the bag anyways…..sure, but its just raw numbers advantage you are seeking then.