Israel.7056

> @Missy.7356 said:

> > @Israel.7056 said:

> > They can't punish people for choosing not to play their game.

>

>

> Whose said anything about punish? I think some people are more waiting to see if they get rewarded. Are they not already punishing themselves and the people around them by going this route. In 2 weeks time its BG turn to boycott if this goes to plan, since have they not been locked a lot longer?

>

How are they punishing themselves?

All they could conceivably do would be to offer some kind of incentive to get people to play.

They can't punish people for choosing not to play their game.

The condi issue is a bit more complicated in my opinion:

1. Frequency and ease of application

2. Low CD, Fire and forget type design of a large number of condition application skills, scourges are terrific example of this

3. Raw damage numbers of condi burst that simply overwhelm a player's ability to respond, aka condi critical mass problem

4. Not enough access to resistance across classes

5. Spellbreakers Winds of Disenchantment elite which make surviving a coordinated CC/Condi bomb almost impossible

6. General lack of cleanse to condi application parity amongst skill kits

7. Trailblazer gear

The disparity between power and condition damage based builds is largely due to the necessity of three damage stats for power builds while condition damage based builds only require two. Condi based builds get to stack both vitality and toughness while power builds get to only stack one defensive stat.

Ofcourse I would like it but I think it would require shutting WvW down during anything outside of NA timezone for NA servers and that's never going to happen. As long as Aussies and Asians can put points on the board coverage is going to continue to be the major determining factor.

If they were really serious about preventing transfers they'd get rid of paid transfers altogether or restructure them in such a way that transferring couldn't be done so easily.

From the scaling nature of gem costs one can infer that the working ANET hypothesis is that transfer behavior can largely be managed by making transfers to a larger server more expensive than a transfer to a smaller server. I believe that this hypothesis is erroneous because I do not think there is any price that some people won't pay to get onto a winning server.

The players in the higher tiers are definitely more practiced at medium to large scale fighting because more of it happens in the higher tiers.

So if player skill and team organization are the only things making things like scourge and spellbreakers strong why are they so common?

Does it have anything to do with their respective toolsets when compared to the enormous number of alternatives and how well suited those toolsets are to accomplishing certain goals in-game?

Do you recognize any difference in effectiveness or "power" between different builds and/or different classes or is everything basically identical in terms of effectiveness and power and class and build mostly an aesthetic choice?

> @XenesisII.1540 said:

> > @Israel.7056 said:

> > How about we, the GW2 community, attempt to bring them down legit instead of appealing to daddy Anet to fix the problem for us??

>

> No one wants to create super servers anymore to face them.

> Anet also locks the servers that have any chance to fight them.

> So the only way for those servers to even build to match them would be through links.

> But then Anet's use of links is not consistent, JQ lost their link and dropped, Mag gained a link after 8 months of being locked and went back up.

> So what else can players do? bandwagon to an open server to go face them?

>

#JustStackMag

On a serious note it probably is gonna take a merger of Mag and JQ. Mag needs someone like Cloudfly who will PPT all day every day. Also we could try paying EU ppt guilds to come over and go ham.

> @Chaba.5410 said:

> > @Israel.7056 said:

> > hey are particularly weak during EU. All they really have during EU is NINE. NINE is ok but not as tough as KNT. This, in my mind, is the first and most easily exploitable weakness given that there are quite a few active EU guilds left playing the game.

>

> I think their EU is weak against Mag's EU and strong against other server teams' EUs.

That's because Mag actually has some EU. For most NA servers it seems EU has become a total deadzone so having even one guild consistently play the timezone can make a big difference. Imagine if someone could consistently queue multiple maps during EU though. No one could compete with that on NA.

> @"Lord Hammer Hand.4815" said:

> its because no matter how many people move to your server or how many servers u get linked to if the players in those servers doesnt play WvW then you all will still lose to BG over and over again. i seriously wish you guys play w/ BG server and see the big difference in mentality and playstyle of any BG pugs. BG pugs BTW not BG guilds runs BG server. BG pugs runs META build, have proper food etc. most servers have players who ran zerker and viper pve builds. having blobs/zerg respond to few aggressor. cmdr or scout dont realize this that if u responded to 6 people trying to claim your tower by moving your zerg across BL instead of sending 6 -10 only players to deal w/ it shows how bad most of your players are.

1.) Yeah BG pugs tend to run something approximating a decent zergball WvW build. This usually involves running very tanky though so the pug fights get easier as the skirmishes get smaller because very few of them can actually do enough damage to kill anything. So there's a tradeoff to having so many people building for giant zergball fights all the time. Still I get what you're saying running high risk builds effectively takes a lot of practice. Even after thousands of hours some days I can't handle running as glassy as I do.

2.) 100 percent almost no one's gonna rotate for a "6-10 at a tower" call because it's usually a complete waste of time. If you go with enough people then 8/10 times BG will just peace out so the odds of getting a decent fight are low. Also if it involves porting out of EBG then forget it because it takes 30 minutes to an hour to get into EBG in the first place.

> @Chaba.5410 said:

> > @Israel.7056 said:

> > How about we, the GW2 community, attempt to bring them down legit instead of appealing to daddy Anet to fix the problem for us??

> > Their two biggest strengths are 1.) They've got one of the last decent OCX guilds left who are willing to run open seemingly every raid and blob everything down and 2.) One of the last decent SEA guilds who are also willing to run open seemingly every raid and blob things down. This doesn't seem to me to be that hard of a riddle to figure out. Given what I've just told you where should one start if one's goal is to legitimately beat BG?

>

> I recall BG being relatively weak during late PST/early OCX. If another server had a sizeable force during that time they could paper everything upgraded and put BG's OCX and SEA on the backfoot. A third server also hitting BG during this time would assist. BG's NA only seems strong because they start out their skirmish with upgraded objectives which are easier to defend than paper stuff.

Late PST/OCX is when KNT usually forms up so this "sizeable force" would need to be good enough to deal with them. They're definitely beatable but they're probably the best fight guild BG has left. But yes if there were any PST/early OCX forces left that could roll over KNT that'd probably be the end of Blackgate because that's usually where they start to generate their momentum. Also if you can paper them before NA even starts they struggle enormously. They are particularly weak during EU. All they really have during EU is NINE. NINE is ok but not as tough as KNT. This, in my mind, is the first and most easily exploitable weakness given that there are quite a few active EU guilds left playing the game.

How about we, the GW2 community, attempt to bring them down legit instead of appealing to daddy Anet to fix the problem for us??

What do you want Anet to do? Start kicking people off Blackgate until someone can actually beat them? Pathetic. This mentality is exactly what's wrong with this community now: too many emotionally frail dimwits who dislike even a moderate challenge. You've all been force fed your easy mode legendary armor and backpacks and you've forgotten how to use logic and determination to solve what is, in my mind, a relatively simple problem. If you actually had the guts to not avoid t1 because it's too scary you would find that Blackgate is absolutely beatable right now. They're tenacious, relatively well organized and utterly ruthless but beatable. Their usual tactics and stratagems are ofcourse quite good but they're predictable nonetheless. They have major coverage gaps and an NA force that can be completely steamrolled under the right conditions. Their two biggest strengths are 1.) They've got one of the last decent OCX guilds left who are willing to run open seemingly every raid and blob everything down and 2.) One of the last decent SEA guilds who are also willing to run open seemingly every raid and blob things down. This doesn't seem to me to be that hard of a riddle to figure out. Given what I've just told you where should one start if one's goal is to legitimately beat BG?

> @Trajan.4953 said:

> Hehe Poor Mag just wants to drop down, they wanted T1 but can't handle the BG PPT endless garbage trains.

Of the people I regularly talk to some want t1 and some are happy to stay in t2 so it's a mixed bag. I personally like t1 but since MGR quit I don't think we have t1 coverage.

> @CrimeMaker.8612 said:

> > @Israel.7056 said:

> > I think tournaments could be a lot of fun.

>

> You arent wrong.. and that is what exactly WvW community needs right now. Fun, casual yet competitive play and there is GvG leaderboards for the hardcore guilds and players..

I think I even know how to get people to play:

1.) New tournament specific achievements with some sort of larger meta achievement reward

2.) Farmable WvW exclusive mount skins, perhaps tied to the achievements or perhaps just farmable with some new tournament currency.

3.) Increased ticket caps (say double or triple the current cap) during tournament weeks which could be say 2 weeks out of every month so people get some time to relax in between tournaments.

I think tournaments could be a lot of fun.

> @Titan.3472 said:

> > @Israel.7056 said:

> > > @cobbah.3102 said:

> > > > @Israel.7056 said:

> > > > > @Titan.3472 said:

> > > > > > @Israel.7056 said:

> > > > > > > @Titan.3472 said:

> > > > > > > Last T1 server that had an elitist wvw guilds behavior excluding any other people was SoR and we all know how they ended back then and what is their place now. Take notes Mag. xD

> > > > > >

> > > > > > And anyone who was around during that time knows that SOR's eventual collapse had nothing to do with elitism. Nice try though.

> > > > >

> > > > > I was there. And I was part of the BG crew former member of [cA] & [WM] (NA/BG) and [RG] (EU/SFR) that nuked [iRON] (SoR) and make them quit over their elitist epic fail behavior. Then SoR felt into abyss. Same is occuring with Mag right now. Praise our Chaos Lord Shiva for granting us the gift of destroying Worlds.

> > > >

> > > > Kinda doubt it, you were the laughing stock of BG for years when I was there, I assume you still are. Gz on pity invites from Jang and Sehoon I guess? IRON was probably the most pug friendly guild on SoR they ran open almost every raid and they were super patient with pugs. They disbanded because their GM quit due to RL problems. You're just making stuff up. If anything what SoR needed was more elitism not less they tended to coddle bad players and try a little too hard to turn trash into something good instead of just buying guilds. BG went another route, we just bought the best guilds from other servers until there wasn't any serious competition left. Season 1 we went and got Za Drots from EU to cover a timezone no one else had any coverage for and we won with ease. The only way Mag falls is if the core players quit the game. Could happen I think a lot of people are playing PUBG now while waiting for the next MMO.

> > > >

> > > > EDIT: SoR collapsed because their core got tired of trying to carry the server all the time and they refused to just buy guilds to stay competitive. End of story.

> > >

> > > So what your saying is BG sucked until you had to buy in talent just to become number one ,now you boast how good you are with your pumped up chest because of the said talent you imported , and even with these guilds you still siege hump and refuse to come out to fight unless you have 50 man blobs full of condi ,throwing that crap everywhere so you dont get hurt , I look forward to the day ANET Fix thier broken game (ahahahaha) oh well ,keep on chest thumping and humping BG will never have the respect of any servers. Your are what your labelled and so full of your selves.

> >

> > Yes BG's approach has always been to buy talent. This goes all the way back to that one guy...Choco something... who totally stacked BG in preparation for s1. They have a server "warchest" which many players contribute to and the funds are used to do things like buy guilds. This has been going on for years now.

>

> And here comes the conspiracy theory...

I was on BG when this stuff happened I knew the guys who were involved, it's not a conspiracy theory.

I'm not saying it was a bad thing to do I'm just saying that SoR didn't crumble because of elitism that's complete nonsense. They crumbled because their NA core got tired of trying to carry the server even though they refused to buy guilds which was obviously stupid in hindsight.

> @cobbah.3102 said:

> > @Israel.7056 said:

> > > @Titan.3472 said:

> > > > @Israel.7056 said:

> > > > > @Titan.3472 said:

> > > > > Last T1 server that had an elitist wvw guilds behavior excluding any other people was SoR and we all know how they ended back then and what is their place now. Take notes Mag. xD

> > > >

> > > > And anyone who was around during that time knows that SOR's eventual collapse had nothing to do with elitism. Nice try though.

> > >

> > > I was there. And I was part of the BG crew former member of [cA] & [WM] (NA/BG) and [RG] (EU/SFR) that nuked [iRON] (SoR) and make them quit over their elitist epic fail behavior. Then SoR felt into abyss. Same is occuring with Mag right now. Praise our Chaos Lord Shiva for granting us the gift of destroying Worlds.

> >

> > Kinda doubt it, you were the laughing stock of BG for years when I was there, I assume you still are. Gz on pity invites from Jang and Sehoon I guess? IRON was probably the most pug friendly guild on SoR they ran open almost every raid and they were super patient with pugs. They disbanded because their GM quit due to RL problems. You're just making stuff up. If anything what SoR needed was more elitism not less they tended to coddle bad players and try a little too hard to turn trash into something good instead of just buying guilds. BG went another route, we just bought the best guilds from other servers until there wasn't any serious competition left. Season 1 we went and got Za Drots from EU to cover a timezone no one else had any coverage for and we won with ease. The only way Mag falls is if the core players quit the game. Could happen I think a lot of people are playing PUBG now while waiting for the next MMO.

> >

> > EDIT: SoR collapsed because their core got tired of trying to carry the server all the time and they refused to just buy guilds to stay competitive. End of story.

>

> So what your saying is BG sucked until you had to buy in talent just to become number one ,now you boast how good you are with your pumped up chest because of the said talent you imported , and even with these guilds you still siege hump and refuse to come out to fight unless you have 50 man blobs full of condi ,throwing that crap everywhere so you dont get hurt , I look forward to the day ANET Fix thier broken game (ahahahaha) oh well ,keep on chest thumping and humping BG will never have the respect of any servers. Your are what your labelled and so full of your selves.

Yes BG's approach has always been to buy talent. This goes all the way back to that one guy...Choco something... who totally stacked BG in preparation for s1. They have a server "warchest" which many players contribute to and the funds are used to do things like buy guilds. This has been going on for years now.

I like this idea.

Great video dude you should make more.

The reason for the linkings is so they can continue to make money on transfers. GW2 is a freemium cash shop model and transfers are just another way for them to sell gems.

What's even better about their model is that they still demand that you buy the game and the xpac to play and then they just make money selling fluff to PvErs and transfers to WvWers. They've clearly had a harder time monetizing PvP so this might explain why so few of their resources are spent on pvp.

God help you if you go to Dragonbrand though I mean legit the worst NA server by far. They should mail all new transfers a giant bottle of aspirin.

> @Sarge.9730 said:

> > @Israel.7056 said:

> > Fighting BG is a great challenge overall due to their numbers and their general ruthlessness but there's no reward if you actually beat them in PPT because they just quit the game until they get more people. So either we lose to them and have fights or we try to organize and if we succeed we kill the game. There's no upside to winning.

> >

>

> Everyone is entitled to their opinion but I don't agree with this for the most part. I will address each of your points with my personal observations

>

> **"Numbers"**

>

> BG rarely has a huge number of people online at any given time. Its rare to see any borderland with a queue unless its reset night or one of the major guilds is running (and even that's only because everyone in WvW is queued for that map in particular). My personal feeling is that it FEELS like we have a ton more people to those on Mag because your whole server instant queues EB and makes little effort to do anything on any map that doesn't have a castle in the middle of it.

>

> **"Ruthlessness"**

>

> 2 Weeks in a row Mag has flipped BGs Garrison in EB and camped with enough siege to rival YB while chest thumping the whole time. By contrast BG flipped Mags Garrison 2 days ago and... left.

>

> **"There's no reward if you actually beat them in PPT because they just quit the game until they get more people"**

>

> The last time Mag was in T1 they tanked on purpose the moment they lost their link and played in the lower tiers until they got linked again. At which point they quickly came back to T1 and are currently tanking to leave again. How is that any different than what you are accusing BG of?

>

> **"So either we lose to them and have fights or we try to organize and if we succeed we kill the game"**

>

> There is no precedent for Mag winning on a regular basis outside of Major Holidays and or Expansion releases so... this remains an untested opinion.

>

>

>

1.) BG runs fat when they do run. I know how BG works, I was there for years.

2.) Yeah I mean I think we try to be more ruthless. Generally speaking though if BG holds an objective you're gonna go through all manner of siege to get into it and they'll flash build acs outside towers and double team objectives to get them flipped and pin snipe hardcore. I don't think ruthlessness is a bad thing btw. It's one of the things I like most about fighting BG. Win at all costs.

3.) I didn't like the idea of tanking to get relinked but it wasn't my call to make.

4.) Make whatever excuse you want the first time we went to t1 Xushin spent all this gold trying to get a decent force together to give BG a run for their money and BG completely caved once we won a few weeks in a row. BG then started trying to do blackouts to get more people but to my understanding that failed so they just waited until all the guilds he'd bought started leaving due to boredom. Then miraculously BG started showing again. Amazing.

This time around we won one week and I immediately started noticing less and less BG. But then I guess BG sea realized MGR had actually quit the game so it was safe to play again.

EDIT: I guess lots of BG players were really busy farming Griffons at xpac release.

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > @Israel.7056 said:

> > DB is easily the worst server in the game I would heavily advise against going there I can't imagine how frustrating it must be to try to play for that server.

>

> Who is' MAG going to blame their problems on after the link changes?

>

> They are losing to BG in KDR and in PPT? Must be all DRs fault.

You want me to speak for the entire Mag server? Or do you want to know what I personally think is going wrong?

DB is easily the worst server in the game I would heavily advise against going there I can't imagine how frustrating it must be to try to play for that server.

They should just remove iron guards completely imo.