Introducing Structured Guild vs Guild

[Eleazar.9478]

Instead of doing a lame ass stronghold, that nobody ever wanted to play, why the hell have they not made variations of 4v4s to 8v8s yet? Which people have been asking for ever

[Curunen.8729]

Sounds like a lot of fun - good on you for putting in the time and effort to make this happen. :)

[Miaz.8521]

> @ibkillin.9610 said:

> I don't even understand why they even call it Guild Wars 2 since there isn't anything really good left over from the first 1 (duo spec, 100s of skills, GvG) etc. They should have just called it Chronicles of Tyria.

 

but that woulda lost them 100000s of $ from marketing to the their old playerbase

[R E F L H E X.8413]

> @"Jinks.2057" said:

> > @"R E F L H E X.8413" said:

> > 10v10 sounds really extreme in numbers. Although I havent personally tried it.

> >

> > I liked the 4v4 with the supports I was using (only the guard can halfassly now be used the blind necro was rfg). Even with 4v4 things can be too crowded to rupt properly which needs buffs to begin with dont know why powerblock got its damage lowered other than combo with chronos gravity well.

> >

> > It just seems for a good teamfight with 10v10 using the same ratio as with 4v4 youd want 5 support and 5 roamers/fighters per team. Interrupt builds/skill become way less than they should be which is how this game is designed anyways. 10vs10 is too many people to get good rupts off leaving you to play something power or condi leaving shutdown out of the scenario completely which is its own playstyle and can be offensive or defensive (shutdowns already out of the picture anyways in the entire game so its not exclusive to 10v10).

> >

> > If you havent tried 5 support and are doing 10vs10 you might want to try it in comparison to what youre playing now. You dont want to use gw1 ratios in this game. 5 **Supports per team should give some longer better played fights. For 8v8 I'd say go with 4 supports and 4 offensives. 4 is enough to spike and 4 should be decent at keeping them alive**

> >

> > A team of 8v8 I dont think 4 supports should lose to a random bunch of teams with maybe two supports. 4v4 lowers the spike damage and could be a good number of players from my experience making the two supports not have to work as hard to prevent spike it also keeps aoe within range of hitting all 4 players.

>

> 10v10 is the smallest number where team tactics and combo fields start to matter.

>

> 10s also demands higher individual skill compared to the 20s that most guilds used to run. You can't hide a mediocre player in 10s.

>

> As for 4 support being good....nope. Teams have pushed the limit of as much damage as possible because that is how you win.

>

> Now I would only have these 10v10 days once week with teams being able to practice/scrim in private servers during the week.

>

> This all hinges on Anet opening up servers to allow this & making a map for it

 

Have you tried firebrands? I consider the tome 4 healing skill a nerf it was my main burst healing to get to top 7 id mostly just use skill two and four on that tome. In general it hit more targets than skill one. Skill one needs to be aoe.

[Angeels.3269]

Unless it's 15v15 (minimum) team deathmatch, none of the established (and this applies more to EU admittedly since NA is dead) GvG guilds would participate. GW1 GvG died with that game, the GvG in this game is in the team deathmatch format with a minimum of 15 players and if such a thing were to be implemented it needs to be in that format or its dead on arrival.

[Xillllix.3485]

I feel like 12v12 could be the sweet spot provided that the maps requires the team to both attack and defend.

[R E F L H E X.8413]

After using fb in wvw I think they would shine in these larger matches with a few of them per team.