WvW Commanders rule: no Ranger, Druid, Dragonhunter, Scrapper, etc

[Strider Pj.2193]

Why is this even in the general discussion section? Is this a veiled attempt to get raids less exclusive? WvW and raids are both considered end game content.

 

As such, they both will have exclusionary requirements.

 

Which only precludes you from certain groups. Not the game.

[dolcolax.1268]

> @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > > @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > > > Then don't play those classes or don't join their squad.

> > > > Why are you acting so self-entitled?

> > >

> > > What are you supposed to do when they monopolize the only maps with enemy zergs in them?

> >

> > Not physically possible.

>

> It happens all the time, enemy server has one zerg, other server has none and ours has one, it's a total monopoly.

 

what? how can players put a monopoly in a map? its not like they are blocking you from joining the map. and man your from blackgate, from early est to mid est we either have no commander or just have one. and he has to shuffle between maps to defend structures most of the time. you can see our scouts calling in team chat which map and structure is being attacked, you dont need a squad to see that message(unless you blocked em). just get your ass in there and defend. you dont need a commander/squad for that. theres the issue of like 40+ enemies with golems and sure you need a big group for that, so be one of those players. a lot of bg pugs are proactive anyway.

[Samnang.1879]

> @"Avelione.6075" said:

 

> 2. Commanding and playing as a "normal" player shouldn't be treated like one is superior and has right to dictate what others do/ Are we going to compare how much money/time one put in the game??

 

Sorry but the meaning of commander is that the person has the right to "command"?... why else would they be called a commander??? If they say you go right, you go right, that's the appeal of commanding.

 

If you dont' want to be dictated by someone, then like others suggested in the thread, buy your own tag and tag up and be the nice soft commander you want to be. How many complainers in this thread are actually willing to command themselves?

 

Commanders get shat on all the times but do ppl not realize this is a tiring role? You do more work than other people and get no rewards for it (Anet's meaning of reward is 1 extra pip)...

[Talindra.4958]

If you want to follow the person to command.. you follow his order. You also hv s choice not to follow. .. ask how you can fit in. Usually Wvw commanders are helpful.

[Vova.2640]

> @"Sreoom.3690" said:

> If a commander wants to reimburse me for what I paid to play the game and for my in game investments, then I'll let him tell me what class to play...other than that, he/she can pound sand, I'm going to play what I want, when I want.

 

Then don't be surprised when you get kicked out of squads...

I honestly cannot believe what I am seeing here lol.

People want everything while offering nothing in return.

[Vova.2640]

> @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

>

> Oh so we should have to compromise and not get the benefits of a squad

 

LOL.

You are offering nothing to the squad. Why should the squad offer ANYTHING to you????

The Hypocrisy is unreal.

 

[ArchonWing.9480]

So people want to play how they want. Cool. Go ahead. But commanders can't decide how to play how they want? They paid for this game too and are not obliged to carry people on random builds/not in comms. You seriously expect people to come off work or school and babysit randoms like it is a job?

 

The best way to not get kicked is to not suck. This isn't hard because people are really bad at this game. If you don't wipe in the first 3 passes, you're probably above average and all but the most antisocial of commanders and don't mind being abandoned in 10 minutes are probably not going to mind having you even if you are not in squad. Now if the commander just threw a hissy fit because they sucked and wiped, looking for someone to blame, let's admit it-- are you going to win with them even on a meta build? You shouldn't follow them anyways.

[IndigoSundown.5419]

> @"Avelione.6075" said:

>

> 1. Some commanders like to win (only) and apparently they're not ok with losing at all (??). This brings me a though that they treat WvW too seriously. I still try to keep a distance to GW2. It is a game, there are things out there! (Unless u wanna be a pro-gamer or a pro-streamer, but it doesn't give you any more right to dictate how other random players need to play - for commanders and non commanders) And as a comm, you have much more choice than a pug player that has to take what they have currently on the map.

 

Meta play in WvW zergs needs to be very precise. Boon sharing happens first with the members of the group the boon provider is in. Each of the group members provides something essential to survival in the massed AoE damage, conditions and CC put down by the other side. Without those boons, the characters die. With them, they have a chance to make the other side's characters die. Sure, they want to win fights. Who doesn't? The issue is that the game is designed so that certain combinations of characters are much more effective than other combinations in WvW zerg play.

 

So, they aren't telling you to play a certain way, they are telling you that you must play a certain way to be in their squad.

 

> 4. I think it's a good idea proposed by IndigoSundown.5419 to introduce Pugmander (with a PUG tag, of course ;)) This is similar to what I suggested at the beginning. Make separate tags for comms that are chill with pugs and for those that have specified squad in mind.

 

Another possibility would be for ANet to put in a toggle for the commander tag which would make the Dorito icon visible only to squad members. That way, commanders who are willing to take anyone don't select it, and those who want a specific experience do.

 

> @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

>

> why should a commander be allowed to command if he dosent include everyone, Why is he entitled to only include those he wants, in an OPEN game mode where the entire server participates? Other then thats the way the game currently runs, which should be changed.

 

Everyone wants to play the game the way they want to play it. Exclusive squads are not denying you the right to play in the game mode. They are not even denying you the right to run alongside their squad. What they are denying you is the protection offered by group membership. They do so because each member of a group of 5 has a role to play.

 

Being a commander is not some status conveyed by ANet which carries with it the obligation to include everyone. It is a perk the player purchased because he wants to organize play in a game mode. All players have the freedom to play the game as they like. This sometimes means that different people cannot play together.

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

> @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > @"Avelione.6075" said:

> >

> > 1. Some commanders like to win (only) and apparently they're not ok with losing at all (??). This brings me a though that they treat WvW too seriously. I still try to keep a distance to GW2. It is a game, there are things out there! (Unless u wanna be a pro-gamer or a pro-streamer, but it doesn't give you any more right to dictate how other random players need to play - for commanders and non commanders) And as a comm, you have much more choice than a pug player that has to take what they have currently on the map.

>

> Meta play in WvW zergs needs to be very precise. Boon sharing happens first with the members of the group the boon provider is in. Each of the group members provides something essential to survival in the massed AoE damage, conditions and CC put down by the other side. Without those boons, the characters die. With them, they have a chance to make the other side's characters die. Sure, they want to win fights. Who doesn't? The issue is that the game is designed so that certain combinations of characters are much more effective than other combinations in WvW zerg play.

>

> So, they aren't telling you to play a certain way, they are telling you that you must play a certain way to be in their squad.

>

> > 4. I think it's a good idea proposed by IndigoSundown.5419 to introduce Pugmander (with a PUG tag, of course ;)) This is similar to what I suggested at the beginning. Make separate tags for comms that are chill with pugs and for those that have specified squad in mind.

>

> Another possibility would be for ANet to put in a toggle for the commander tag which would make the Dorito icon visible only to squad members. That way, commanders who are willing to take anyone don't select it, and those who want a specific experience do.

>

> > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> >

> > why should a commander be allowed to command if he dosent include everyone, Why is he entitled to only include those he wants, in an OPEN game mode where the entire server participates? Other then thats the way the game currently runs, which should be changed.

>

> Everyone wants to play the game the way they want to play it. Exclusive squads are not denying you the right to play in the game mode. They are not even denying you the right to run alongside their squad. What they are denying you is the protection offered by group membership. They do so because each member of a group of 5 has a role to play.

>

> Being a commander is not some status conveyed by ANet which carries with it the obligation to include everyone. It is a perk the player purchased because he wants to organize play in a game mode. All players have the freedom to play the game as they like. This sometimes means that different people cannot play together.

 

I dont think they should be able to exclude people in a public game enviornment like PVE or open world wvw. In raids where its a closed instance, sure but not when its open world.

[seinka.4823]

> @"Avelione.6075" said:

> 2. Commanding and playing as a "normal" player shouldn't be treated like one is superior and has right to dictate what others do/ Are we going to compare how much money/time one put in the game??

Even if we ignore the fact, that having commander tag means exactly that the commander will tell the squad what to do... If a commander can't tell you how to play the game, because neither of you is superior, then this goes the other way too: you can't tell the commander how to play their game, because neither of you is superior.

 

> @"Avelione.6075" said:

> 4. I think it's a good idea proposed by IndigoSundown.5419 to introduce Pugmander (with a PUG tag, of course ;)) This is similar to what I suggested at the beginning. Make separate tags for comms that are chill with pugs and for those that have specified squad in mind.

That doesn't sound bad, actually. It would be a cool experiment to see how many people there are win-oriented and how many switch to the requested builds 'to be accepted'.

 

[Dreamy Lu.3865]

I am almost on a daily basis in WvW. I would like to describe how I see it.

 

About squads:

For me, there are two types of squads: Organized and zerg.

- In zerg, each can come with whatever class and build he/she wants. There is no structure inside the squad. More important is the amount of members. A bit of strategy can apply, but usually, it is more following the tag and rolling over whatever comes on the way. Usually, zergs are running more over the weekends.

- In an organized squad, the members are experienced, from same guild/server, mostly all knowing each others. Each member is geared specifically, according to the role he/she plays in the squad, defined by sites like metabattle, quantify and co, with consequences that certain classes don't fit into the organized structure. Beside, the squad will apply defined strategies, learned during training sessions. In such a squad, players need to have the minimum understanding of what has to be done, otherwise, they spoil the overall strategy and of course, it leads to conflictual situations.

 

Consequence: If you are a casual player, or if you are newby, you will get more fun if you join a zerg, rather than an organized squad.

Problem: As is now, it is difficult to understand at first sight if a squad is one or the other. Commanders should get used to describe the type of squad they lead in the party announcement, or in the squad announcement, so that players can decide if they join or not. It's not happening like this for now and I therefore believe that the best way is to join a squad, and if it does not suit us, leave to join another one. Another alternative is to run behind a squad without joining it.

 

About commanders:

Commander in WvW is a heavy and difficult responsibility. The commander has to manage an incredible amount of things simultaneously, decides on strategy based on information he/she is receiving from all sides, manage the squad, follow all ongoing chats (team, map, say, squad, whisper) and so on... I am a commander in PvE only: This is totally different and by far easier. There is no comparison possible and I keep being amazed at what WvW commanders have to manage! WOW! Respect.

That being said, fact is that there are all sorts of commanders, with different styles, and of course, specifically related to that thread: Some are good communicators, some are not.

 

Personally, I don't care when a commander is rude on the communication side. I have full understanding for what the job is and also they have mostly no time to care about putting nice forms to what they say. I also understand that they get upset when a strategy is ruined by a group of players not following their instructions.

Me, I am just thankful that someone is taking over the job... And I like to learn what I do wrong. Rudeness is of course not so nice, but as said, I am not sensitive to it as long as it was justified and that I learn something out of it. However, I can understand that for players sensitive to communication style, it can be bad when a commander is rude. I believe the solution is simply to change to another squad with a commander who suits them better.

 

Generally: Don't forget that nobody is forced to anything. I agree that things are not perfect, but WvW is like PvE raiding, and also a bit like fractals high levels: To do it properly means to accept certain constraints (class, gear, knowing strategy...). If we don't want those constraints and play casually, fair enough, but it means to accept that not all parties will suit us. :)

[Voltekka.2375]

> @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > > @"Avelione.6075" said:

> > >

> > > 1. Some commanders like to win (only) and apparently they're not ok with losing at all (??). This brings me a though that they treat WvW too seriously. I still try to keep a distance to GW2. It is a game, there are things out there! (Unless u wanna be a pro-gamer or a pro-streamer, but it doesn't give you any more right to dictate how other random players need to play - for commanders and non commanders) And as a comm, you have much more choice than a pug player that has to take what they have currently on the map.

> >

> > Meta play in WvW zergs needs to be very precise. Boon sharing happens first with the members of the group the boon provider is in. Each of the group members provides something essential to survival in the massed AoE damage, conditions and CC put down by the other side. Without those boons, the characters die. With them, they have a chance to make the other side's characters die. Sure, they want to win fights. Who doesn't? The issue is that the game is designed so that certain combinations of characters are much more effective than other combinations in WvW zerg play.

> >

> > So, they aren't telling you to play a certain way, they are telling you that you must play a certain way to be in their squad.

> >

> > > 4. I think it's a good idea proposed by IndigoSundown.5419 to introduce Pugmander (with a PUG tag, of course ;)) This is similar to what I suggested at the beginning. Make separate tags for comms that are chill with pugs and for those that have specified squad in mind.

> >

> > Another possibility would be for ANet to put in a toggle for the commander tag which would make the Dorito icon visible only to squad members. That way, commanders who are willing to take anyone don't select it, and those who want a specific experience do.

> >

> > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > >

> > > why should a commander be allowed to command if he dosent include everyone, Why is he entitled to only include those he wants, in an OPEN game mode where the entire server participates? Other then thats the way the game currently runs, which should be changed.

> >

> > Everyone wants to play the game the way they want to play it. Exclusive squads are not denying you the right to play in the game mode. They are not even denying you the right to run alongside their squad. What they are denying you is the protection offered by group membership. They do so because each member of a group of 5 has a role to play.

> >

> > Being a commander is not some status conveyed by ANet which carries with it the obligation to include everyone. It is a perk the player purchased because he wants to organize play in a game mode. All players have the freedom to play the game as they like. This sometimes means that different people cannot play together.

>

> I dont think they should be able to exclude people in a public game enviornment like PVE or open world wvw. In raids where its a closed instance, sure but not when its open world.

 

You are not self-entitled to anything, buddy. The commander has to ensure the maximum chances of fun (which, in wvw, means win fights) for 50+ people, instead of YOUR personal fun. Furthermore, a commander can run a closed squad, accepting only those he deems fit to join. If anything, YOU should learn how to play and be a benefit for the whole squad, instead of asking for "shared boons and protections" while playing a class/spec which does the opposite. The commander does not owe you a living. Noone does.

[Crossaber.8934]

> @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > > @"Shagaliscious.6281" said:

> > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > > > > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > > > > > > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > > > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > > > > > > > > @"Asltok.4327" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @"RoseofGilead.8907" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > If a Commander is running a squad, they do have the right to tell people to switch to a different class; it's their tag and their squad, so they get to make the rules, as long as they're not verbally harassing anyone. However, the other players also have a right to not play in that Commander's squad and either join a new squad or just run along with the squad, without actually being IN the squad. No "technical solution" is needed here.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > But where do you draw the line, your saying they have the right to not let certain classes in, can also exclude people they don't like? Can also exclude people of certain religions or ethnicity too? Oh now it's against tos. Hard to know how or why people are excluded. I think that in wvw if your tagged up, anyone from your server can join,unless it's a guild group comprised 100% of guild members.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > @"RoseofGilead.8907" said:

> > > > > > > > > > > > > If a Commander is running a squad, they do have the right to tell people to switch to a different class; it's their tag and their squad, so they get to make the rules, as long as they're not verbally harassing anyone. However, the other players also have a right to not play in that Commander's squad and either join a new squad or just run along with the squad, without actually being IN the squad. No "technical solution" is needed here.

> > > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > > But where do you draw the line, your saying they have the right to not let certain classes in, can also exclude people they don't like? Can also exclude people of certain religions or ethnicity too? Oh now it's against tos. Hard to know how or why people are excluded. I think that in wvw if your tagged up, anyone from your server can join,unless it's a guild group comprised 100% of guild members.

> > > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > > Why are people attempting to join a squad in wvw bringing up their ethnicity and religion?

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > They aren't, he just had to use an outrageous and extreme example to make his point look better.

> > > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > > Here's what it is. If I don't want to play a video game with you, I won't. If I'm a leader of a group, I will reserve my right to pick who I want in my group. If I don't want certain classes, then I'm not taking them. This isn't some kindergarten inclusion zone. It's not my problem you chose to play the game in a way I deem ineffective, and I won't hamper my own time and enjoyment just to cater to you. And if it ever comes to extremes like that? It's still a video game that I use my time and money to enjoy, and if I don't want to play with you for whatever reason, I will make my own group with it's own requirements, because my time is mine alone, and I choose how to spend it.

> > > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > > I feel like you should only be able to scrutinize if you have a 100% guild squad, as soon as you take in a pug, I don't feel like you should be able to exclude for any reason.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Player 1 should never be able to force player 2 to play with him.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > If we are going to use outrageous examples here:

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Forcing someone else to play with you, when they do not wish to do so, is slavery.

> > > > > > > >

> > > > > > > > Slavery is bad.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > How is that slavery?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Forcing someone else to work for you when they do not wish to do so is slavery. Commanding in WvW is work (remember that work is a measure of effort and so even play is work).

> > > > >

> > > > > So they can just not tag up if they can't work with others, nothing forced about it. They are supposed to lead for the greater good, and utilize everyone.

> > > > >

> > > >

> > > > There is nothing to utilize for the group if someone is running a selfish build that brings no party support at all.

> > >

> > > That makes no sense. So the person who wants to play a game mode, regardless of how is selfish, but the person who has designated themselves as the leader and wants their squad tailor made and excludes others so everything is there way or the highway is not selfish?

> >

> > No commander can exclude others from playing the game mode. It is not physically possible.

> >

> > What we have here is a demand that others be forced to work for an individual against their will.

> >

> >

>

> Yah but If you want to play wvw in a zerg squad, and that commander doesn't let you in, and that map has the enemy zerg in it, and only one commander can really run in one map (if you try to tag up on a map with a tag already you get yelled at). Then you've effectively blocked that person from playing the game mode of their choice.

 

A commander can stop and kick any class they don’t want, but they cannot stop anyone from staying with the crew to fight, take objectives together.

 

What makes you believe you need to join a squad in order to wvw. I love solo roam in wvw, I tag along with a zerg only if i want to take a keep or tower... otherwise i only just my guild’s squad.

 

What class cannot roam well and also not acceptable in squad by commander? None.

[Jumpin Lumpix.6108]

> @"Voltekka.2375" said:

> > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > > > @"Avelione.6075" said:

> > > >

> > > > 1. Some commanders like to win (only) and apparently they're not ok with losing at all (??). This brings me a though that they treat WvW too seriously. I still try to keep a distance to GW2. It is a game, there are things out there! (Unless u wanna be a pro-gamer or a pro-streamer, but it doesn't give you any more right to dictate how other random players need to play - for commanders and non commanders) And as a comm, you have much more choice than a pug player that has to take what they have currently on the map.

> > >

> > > Meta play in WvW zergs needs to be very precise. Boon sharing happens first with the members of the group the boon provider is in. Each of the group members provides something essential to survival in the massed AoE damage, conditions and CC put down by the other side. Without those boons, the characters die. With them, they have a chance to make the other side's characters die. Sure, they want to win fights. Who doesn't? The issue is that the game is designed so that certain combinations of characters are much more effective than other combinations in WvW zerg play.

> > >

> > > So, they aren't telling you to play a certain way, they are telling you that you must play a certain way to be in their squad.

> > >

> > > > 4. I think it's a good idea proposed by IndigoSundown.5419 to introduce Pugmander (with a PUG tag, of course ;)) This is similar to what I suggested at the beginning. Make separate tags for comms that are chill with pugs and for those that have specified squad in mind.

> > >

> > > Another possibility would be for ANet to put in a toggle for the commander tag which would make the Dorito icon visible only to squad members. That way, commanders who are willing to take anyone don't select it, and those who want a specific experience do.

> > >

> > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > >

> > > > why should a commander be allowed to command if he dosent include everyone, Why is he entitled to only include those he wants, in an OPEN game mode where the entire server participates? Other then thats the way the game currently runs, which should be changed.

> > >

> > > Everyone wants to play the game the way they want to play it. Exclusive squads are not denying you the right to play in the game mode. They are not even denying you the right to run alongside their squad. What they are denying you is the protection offered by group membership. They do so because each member of a group of 5 has a role to play.

> > >

> > > Being a commander is not some status conveyed by ANet which carries with it the obligation to include everyone. It is a perk the player purchased because he wants to organize play in a game mode. All players have the freedom to play the game as they like. This sometimes means that different people cannot play together.

> >

> > I dont think they should be able to exclude people in a public game enviornment like PVE or open world wvw. In raids where its a closed instance, sure but not when its open world.

>

> You are not self-entitled to anything, buddy. The commander has to ensure the maximum chances of fun (which, in wvw, means win fights) for 50+ people, instead of YOUR personal fun. Furthermore, a commander can run a closed squad, accepting only those he deems fit to join. If anything, YOU should learn how to play and be a benefit for the whole squad, instead of asking for "shared boons and protections" while playing a class/spec which does the opposite. The commander does not owe you a living. Noone does.

 

now your just making assumptions, how do you even know what class I play? How do you know I am a not a benefit to the squad? So much for commanders being leaders, for everyone, I guess they just like forming little safe spaces for themselves and not include everyone. I don't own the commander anything either, you would think he would want people to play with him and would encourage leadership among their server. You know whats not FUN is being excluded because they decided to implement a mechanic that allows a person to exclude. Also who are you to decide what is fun in wvw? I didnt know that the only way to have "fun" in wvw was to win fights. I feel like its incredibly self-entitled that commanders believe they can just do whatever they want, which in turn can result in ruining other peoples play time, usually for no good reason that ive seen, other then they dont work well with others or they cant compromise or simply just because they can.

[Rysdude.3824]

I think at this point, this person is just trolling.

[Voltekka.2375]

> @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > @"Voltekka.2375" said:

> > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > > @"IndigoSundown.5419" said:

> > > > > @"Avelione.6075" said:

> > > > >

> > > > > 1. Some commanders like to win (only) and apparently they're not ok with losing at all (??). This brings me a though that they treat WvW too seriously. I still try to keep a distance to GW2. It is a game, there are things out there! (Unless u wanna be a pro-gamer or a pro-streamer, but it doesn't give you any more right to dictate how other random players need to play - for commanders and non commanders) And as a comm, you have much more choice than a pug player that has to take what they have currently on the map.

> > > >

> > > > Meta play in WvW zergs needs to be very precise. Boon sharing happens first with the members of the group the boon provider is in. Each of the group members provides something essential to survival in the massed AoE damage, conditions and CC put down by the other side. Without those boons, the characters die. With them, they have a chance to make the other side's characters die. Sure, they want to win fights. Who doesn't? The issue is that the game is designed so that certain combinations of characters are much more effective than other combinations in WvW zerg play.

> > > >

> > > > So, they aren't telling you to play a certain way, they are telling you that you must play a certain way to be in their squad.

> > > >

> > > > > 4. I think it's a good idea proposed by IndigoSundown.5419 to introduce Pugmander (with a PUG tag, of course ;)) This is similar to what I suggested at the beginning. Make separate tags for comms that are chill with pugs and for those that have specified squad in mind.

> > > >

> > > > Another possibility would be for ANet to put in a toggle for the commander tag which would make the Dorito icon visible only to squad members. That way, commanders who are willing to take anyone don't select it, and those who want a specific experience do.

> > > >

> > > > > @"Jumpin Lumpix.6108" said:

> > > > >

> > > > > why should a commander be allowed to command if he dosent include everyone, Why is he entitled to only include those he wants, in an OPEN game mode where the entire server participates? Other then thats the way the game currently runs, which should be changed.

> > > >

> > > > Everyone wants to play the game the way they want to play it. Exclusive squads are not denying you the right to play in the game mode. They are not even denying you the right to run alongside their squad. What they are denying you is the protection offered by group membership. They do so because each member of a group of 5 has a role to play.

> > > >

> > > > Being a commander is not some status conveyed by ANet which carries with it the obligation to include everyone. It is a perk the player purchased because he wants to organize play in a game mode. All players have the freedom to play the game as they like. This sometimes means that different people cannot play together.

> > >

> > > I dont think they should be able to exclude people in a public game enviornment like PVE or open world wvw. In raids where its a closed instance, sure but not when its open world.

> >

> > You are not self-entitled to anything, buddy. The commander has to ensure the maximum chances of fun (which, in wvw, means win fights) for 50+ people, instead of YOUR personal fun. Furthermore, a commander can run a closed squad, accepting only those he deems fit to join. If anything, YOU should learn how to play and be a benefit for the whole squad, instead of asking for "shared boons and protections" while playing a class/spec which does the opposite. The commander does not owe you a living. Noone does.

>

> now your just making assumptions, how do you even know what class I play? How do you know I am a not a benefit to the squad? So much for commanders being leaders, for everyone, I guess they just like forming little safe spaces for themselves and not include everyone. I don't own the commander anything either, you would think he would want people to play with him and would encourage leadership among their server. You know whats not FUN is being excluded because they decided to implement a mechanic that allows a person to exclude. Also who are you to decide what is fun in wvw? I didnt know that the only way to have "fun" in wvw was to win fights. I feel like its incredibly self-entitled that commanders believe they can just do whatever they want, which in turn can result in ruining other peoples play time, usually for no good reason that ive seen, other then they dont work well with others or they cant compromise or simply just because they can.

 

From the posts you make, it is obvious you play DH. The fact that youre kicked from squads, attests to the fact that you dont play any blobclass. Also, the commander doesnt invite you in his squad. YOU want to join it. You dont like it? Well, make your own squad, accept everyone and lead people.

 

Permadying/getting farmed, is not one of those things you call "fun", it drives people away, people leave the squad, comm ragequits/quits and yay! No squad. It removes any incentive to fight. Killing enemy blobs is the FUN in wvw, when blobbing is the matter. Fun in wvw isnt your average OW pve fun, where you can 1-1-1-1-1 and talk about butterflies, as far as zergs/blobs are concerned.

 

Noone ruins your time. YOU do. As I said before, you are not entitled to anything by anyone when being in WvW. Wanna play with the commander? Abide by his rules (ijn this instance, proper blobclasses) . You dont? Make your OWN squad. Or run alongside the main squad.

[Henry.5713]

The lovely freedom of choice argument again? Why does it only ever go one way with some people here? You have about as much right to tell others to accept you as they have to tell you what to play. They can't force you to join their squad and neither can you force them to let you in.

You are acting as if the commander had the power to exclude you from the map itself. He certainly does not and thus is argument is just silly and not even what this is really about in the end. You simply want the supposed benefits of the squad. Benefits which come with a responsibility on your part. A responsiblity you are not able to or do not wish to handle yourself. Leave that to the other players in the squad.

And of course, the commanders are obviously at fault here. How dare they want to be efficient? How dare the want to win? How dare they realize how quickly open tags fall apart once you stop steamrolling everything? How dare they want to make it fun for those who actually do carry their own weight and more?

[costepj.5120]

I'm a casual WvW player. I don't run any meta build and I know my limitations. I might join a blue tag (open squad on Piken) if there's one on home BL but more often than not I just roam; flipping camps, escorting dollies or joining in when I see some others attacking/defending towers and keeps. I consider squad membership to be a privilege and not a right. If the comm doesn't want me in their squad, that's their right. A big thank you to all the Piken comms that put in hours of effort to organise the rest of us and improve our server's score. After five+ years, I'll be sad to see the end of the current server affiliations in WvW.

[Odinens.5920]

Although it is pretty rare (in my experience) to see a commander exclude people from their squad in team/map chat, it does happen, and you know the reason why. I'm assuming you've played enough WvW to know, and understand WHY this happens, so I'm not going to explain it to you.

 

There are commanders that run comp groups every time they are tagged, commanders that only run pug groups that don't even require voice chat, and commanders that that do both, depending on their guild's raid schedule. Don't tell me you aren't allowed to tag up and form the type of squad you want to form up, because even a straight up ranger squad can be helpful to the main tag's comped group.

 

Either figure out your commanders' style of play and run with the one that will let you play what you want, or tag up and run your own squad. The only time you will ever get flak for running a squad is if it is a decent sized group and you aren't contributing anything to the overall victories on the map.

[jacksmith.6028]

If you've played WvW for any length of time, you'll know that usually blue tag means pug tag...all can follow. I've found this to be true (blue tag = pug) on many servers. The other colors are for more specific functions (guild, havoc, etc.). Therefore, we already have a system to alert people about what's acceptable and what the tag will be doing.

[Continium.3854]

I am just wondering, do you also get upset when you go for a job interview and you don't get the job because your skills and grades don't suit the job, is that unfair or?

^

This example is exactly what it means to be a zergling.

 

The commander tags up, he tags up FOR EVERYONE, not just the few people that want to be accepted on whatever they play. A commander wants to ensure that a vast majority of his squad is having fun. Most people follow commanders they have followed before and know are capable of providing them with the opportunity of fun they're looking for.

In WvW, most commanders enjoy fighting and those tags that do, want to make sure that they can fight and win. The only way to do this is by having the right classes in your squad that benefit each player in your sub-group.

 

If you're running with 10 ranger, 10 scourges, 10 revs, 5 guardians, 2 spellbreakers, 8 holosmiths and Idk 5 dragonhunters vs 20 scourges, 15 revs, 10 firebrands, 5 eles, 5 spellbreakers, the first squad is 9/10 times going to get stomped over and over and over again. The second squad has so much more ranged pressure, bubbles, stability, healing, aoe damage.

 

Why would I want 10 rangers, 8 holosmiths and 5 dragonhunters in my squad when the enemy has a much better composition? I wouldn't. I want to win. I want to play with the classes that will give me and my players the highest chance to win. 2 or 3 Rangers? Sure why not. 1 or 2 holos for some cheeky stomps? Why not.

In reality, every class is useful, if you can play it the way it's needed to be played, but there are classes that just offer MUCH more in respects to the SQUAD.

WvW is about teamplay. It's about playing the most optimal builds and classes to beat the other team.

 

WvW is a COMPETITIVE game mode. It doesn't matter how you look at it. Obtaining points by fighting against another server or other players makes it a competitive game mode. If you're going to go into a competitive mode and say 'Mi is casual' when the enemy server is playing 80% of the correct stuff, I am sorry, but you're letting yourself down and your server down. Unfortunately there is no 'snowflake' friendly way to say it.

 

By all means, enjoy yourself there, but you have to remember, no matter how you look at it, this game mode is COMPETITIVE. Commanders don't get payed for leading people for 2-3 (sometimes 6-12 in more extreme cases) hours of their day. They do it for themselves and the majority that want to follow them, and if you don't want to play what they need to win, that's your own problem in all honesty. You want to play a competitive team mode but don't want to contribute on a class that isn't as optimal as something else, it speaks for itself.

 

Also, Blue tag, means Open tag for most servers, but a commander has every right to lock the squad and make sure it's teamspeak only, or players with the correct classes. It's an open tag for people who want to play the game WITH the commander. If you aren't going to listen on TS or play the right classes, well, lol. What else to say?

 

Sorry for long post, hope I don't upset anyone.

[MMAI.5892]

> @"Sreoom.3690" said:

> If a commander wants to reimburse me for what I paid to play the game and for my in game investments, then I'll let him tell me what class to play...other than that, he/she can pound sand, I'm going to play what I want, when I want.

 

That works in reverse, you know:

"If a player wants to reimburse me for my time and game investments, then I'll let them tell me how to run my squad...."

[Cerioth.7062]

I feel like it is unclear to some people here how WvW squads and commanders function.

 

There are different commanders for different things. Not everyone will exclude your x class/build, others will.

 

But why exclude? Here are some reasons that can explain it:

 

1. They are a guild squad OR an organized group of friends / experienced WvWers. Even if you dont join the squad and just follow them you might cause potential issues. You could be disturbing their arranged fights with other servers, or potentially be covering their water and light fields with other fields and thus disturbing their regroup and heal. You could be giving them in when they want to move in a tight nit and go unnoticed or utilize a veil. 15 good players can outplay 30 unorganized ones - if all 15 play together as a group.

2. Your class/build might not contribute anything to the group, thus you are dead weight and cannon-fodder at best when potentially you could be another vital part of the team if you switched to a more potent class.

3. Sometimes WvW servers like to orgaize "themes" like have a fun Friday rally where everyone are running specific builds or specific weapons etc.

4. Being a WvW commander is extremely stressful and often a thankless job. They want their group to be effective. They are probably playing a class that is not in THEIR best interest to play but they do it anyway for the sake of the group.,

 

Ultimately it is their group. If you do not like what they are doing and cannot adjust, you have all the power to command your own zerg, roam or have a small havoc group.

[MMAI.5892]

> @"Avelione.6075" said:

> Whoa! I didn't expect such a big response to this topic! But I hope ANet will notice this problem and address it!

> From what I've read by looking through the discussion, some things hit me (I can't refer to all the replies here).

>

> 1. Some commanders like to win (only) and apparently they're not ok with losing at all (??). This brings me a though that they treat WvW too seriously. I still try to keep a distance to GW2. It is a game, there are things out there! (Unless u wanna be a pro-gamer or a pro-streamer, but it doesn't give you any more right to dictate how other random players need to play - for commanders and non commanders) And as a comm, you have much more choice than a pug player that has to take what they have currently on the map.

 

I've yet to see any Commander who's not 'okay' with losing. They know it will happen, but like every player in their squad, they don't want to lose all the time. That's not taking it too seriously, that's just natural. How many times are you, as player, going to want to die in a zerg until you get bored and leave? If you want to be in a specific Commander's squad and they're asking for certain builds, be considerate of that request. Either bring the build, or don't join the squad. You are no more entitled to the efforts of a squad then they are to yours. You are, however, working with other people towards a common goal which means directed efforts and in WvW that translates into classes and builds that work best together.

 

> 2. Commanding and playing as a "normal" player shouldn't be treated like one is superior and has right to dictate what others do/ Are we going to compare how much money/time one put in the game??

 

Commander's aren't 'superior', but they are the people leading the squad in objectives and how best to achieve them. You can either work with that commander, find another who's more suited to your playstyle, roam, or form your own squad. Most Commanders do sink a lot of time into WvW - learn maps, buying siege, and keeping up with current metas and how best to counter them, along with coordinating with other Commanders. You're asking to benefit from their knowledge and skills as well as the group composition without reciprocity.

 

> 3. I think it's very complicated since we have a lot of people involved, with their own ideas how to play. But since EVERYONE are allowed to play WvW, I think it's still not fair to discriminate some players towards others. It creates toxic environment and makes many people discouraged if they are treated like unwanted trash :( And what does it say about a comm that treats others like his/her own toys and wants to mix and match professions as they please? It is NOT their game, it is everyone's' game, you like it or not. Running along a squad that doesn't want you is NO fun and you can get verbally harassed then even more easily ;p

 

Run your own groups. Not all discrimination is terrible. The fact of WvW right now is that a group of condi DHs are going to get hammered by a group of Scourges. There's too much range pressure & conditions to push through. No amount of wishful thinking and wants is going to change that right now. No, it's not their game but it is their squad. Serious question: why do you think you are entitled to join groups and get the benefits of that without returning in kind?

 

> If anyone feels offended by this, maybe you should ;p I try to look at the thing from as wide, social perspective as possible. Thanks!

 

Personally, I'm not offended, but I would recommend that you attempt to look at it from the other side of the line instead of just your own wants. You are literally asking other people to subsume their own playstyles to accommodate yours.

 

 

[Kako.1930]

Some people take group content much more seriously than others. There's no sense in getting upset with them about it.