what do you think about multiple tags in a border?

[aspirine.5839]

Multiple tags means multiple smaller groups instead of the blob, so I am all for it. Where do you these this happen? Not on the servers I play against..

[Threather.9354]

Guild raid time aside because guilds obviously want to fight other similar sized guilds;

 

**If theres enemy blob on map:**

- 2 tags is fine provided they both engage on the fight at the same time. However Bad commanders sometimes portal in or wait for 5-10 seconds to participate in the fight at which point the fight is already pretty much lost because 30 pugs will lose all their cooldowns to pressure of 60 pugs.

- Splitting up for backcapping is a fine PPT strat but at some point you reach a point where you can only get farmed at T3 enemy towers. And we all know that won't work well against blobs. Don't backcap or do it with max 10 people, you don't need 20 players on full map to dodge fights. 10 players can already carry enough supply for 5 catapults.

 

**If theres no massive enemy numbers on map:**

- You're too many? Splitting up for fights is ok.

- Splitting up for PPT obviously. 15 people split at 3 towers will cap them like 2 times faster than capping them one by one with 15 players. Not to forget that most servers are reliant on *that scout* and he can't be everywhere at the same time. We actually did this lot on deso during nightcrew. We were like 8 players and managed to cap every single objective against 15 just by being more efficient.

 

But ye, don't do it at EU outside guild raids. We blob and run smaller 3-6 man roaming groups. I do remember the OPs guild doing some pretty questionable stuff on EU queueing maps while not running WvW builds.

[cobbah.3102]

Yes Multiple tags , a better option ,while some throw themselves at SMC which seems to be the norm these days ,the other can hit other objectives to split the enemy forces 3 would be ideal but then as is the case in ebg does not seem to happen . Playing smarter is always an option. But the drawback for some would be the thought of going to a higher Tier because it may cause more points to be gotten and then the complaints would begin. So realistically not a lot of chance of it happening cordially.

[Sovereign.1093]

> @"Threather.9354" said:

> Guild raid time aside because guilds obviously want to fight other similar sized guilds;

>

> **If theres enemy blob on map:**

> - 2 tags is fine provided they both engage on the fight at the same time. However Bad commanders sometimes portal in or wait for 5-10 seconds to participate in the fight at which point the fight is already pretty much lost because 30 pugs will lose all their cooldowns to pressure of 60 pugs.

> - Splitting up for backcapping is a fine PPT strat but at some point you reach a point where you can only get farmed at T3 enemy towers. And we all know that won't work well against blobs. Don't backcap or do it with max 10 people, you don't need 20 players on full map to dodge fights. 10 players can already carry enough supply for 5 catapults.

>

> **If theres no massive enemy numbers on map:**

> - You're too many? Splitting up for fights is ok.

> - Splitting up for PPT obviously. 15 people split at 3 towers will cap them like 2 times faster than capping them one by one with 15 players. Not to forget that most servers are reliant on *that scout* and he can't be everywhere at the same time. We actually did this lot on deso during nightcrew. We were like 8 players and managed to cap every single objective against 15 just by being more efficient.

>

> But ye, don't do it at EU outside guild raids. We blob and run smaller 3-6 man roaming groups. I do remember the OPs guild doing some pretty questionable stuff on EU queueing maps while not running WvW builds.

 

you remember wrong.

 

how can my guild que a map when we are less than 15.

 

no. 2, we were the ones who always promoted metabattle and ezbuilds.

 

what i do remember though, back when i was in deso, people ignored you and you left since no one followed you.

 

but i do have members who experimented builds. they gave the team an edge. and those eventually were adopted.

 

and i recommend to any wvw player to experiment too. you dont get good by simply copying the popular builds. got to do your own research and understand the class. and adjust.

 

 

 

[Sovereign.1093]

based on experience in this game. the harded blob we encountered considering all eu and na tiers is bg's double tag strategy.

 

that was last year. haven't seen it since though.

[Etheri.5406]

> @"Sovereign.1093" said:

> > @"Threather.9354" said:

> > Guild raid time aside because guilds obviously want to fight other similar sized guilds;

> >

> > **If theres enemy blob on map:**

> > - 2 tags is fine provided they both engage on the fight at the same time. However Bad commanders sometimes portal in or wait for 5-10 seconds to participate in the fight at which point the fight is already pretty much lost because 30 pugs will lose all their cooldowns to pressure of 60 pugs.

> > - Splitting up for backcapping is a fine PPT strat but at some point you reach a point where you can only get farmed at T3 enemy towers. And we all know that won't work well against blobs. Don't backcap or do it with max 10 people, you don't need 20 players on full map to dodge fights. 10 players can already carry enough supply for 5 catapults.

> >

> > **If theres no massive enemy numbers on map:**

> > - You're too many? Splitting up for fights is ok.

> > - Splitting up for PPT obviously. 15 people split at 3 towers will cap them like 2 times faster than capping them one by one with 15 players. Not to forget that most servers are reliant on *that scout* and he can't be everywhere at the same time. We actually did this lot on deso during nightcrew. We were like 8 players and managed to cap every single objective against 15 just by being more efficient.

> >

> > But ye, don't do it at EU outside guild raids. We blob and run smaller 3-6 man roaming groups. I do remember the OPs guild doing some pretty questionable stuff on EU queueing maps while not running WvW builds.

>

> you remember wrong.

>

> how can my guild que a map when we are less than 15.

 

:)

 

>

> no. 2, we were the ones who always promoted metabattle and ezbuilds.

 

:)

 

> but i do have members who experimented builds. they gave the team an edge. and those eventually were adopted.

 

404 : consistency with previous statement not found :)

 

> and i recommend to any wvw player to experiment too. you dont get good by simply copying the popular builds. got to do your own research and understand the class. and adjust.

 

I agree. Most players don't ever get good. Or even half decent.

 

I'll refresh your memory.

 

Here's a video you recorded of you playing the famous meta core worker warrior during HoT. It contains footage of you... blobbing down various guilds in spawn / objectives / ...

You then admit that you also got wiped 4 to 5 times more than this. I get it - this isn't your guildraid. Funny how there's no footage of guildraids for these entire weeks every time you have a good matchup. Funny how I can't seem to find footage of you raiding with 15 players at all.

 

Your memory does seem hazy.

[Sovereign.1093]

> @"Etheri.5406" said:

> > @"Sovereign.1093" said:

> > > @"Threather.9354" said:

> > > Guild raid time aside because guilds obviously want to fight other similar sized guilds;

> > >

> > > **If theres enemy blob on map:**

> > > - 2 tags is fine provided they both engage on the fight at the same time. However Bad commanders sometimes portal in or wait for 5-10 seconds to participate in the fight at which point the fight is already pretty much lost because 30 pugs will lose all their cooldowns to pressure of 60 pugs.

> > > - Splitting up for backcapping is a fine PPT strat but at some point you reach a point where you can only get farmed at T3 enemy towers. And we all know that won't work well against blobs. Don't backcap or do it with max 10 people, you don't need 20 players on full map to dodge fights. 10 players can already carry enough supply for 5 catapults.

> > >

> > > **If theres no massive enemy numbers on map:**

> > > - You're too many? Splitting up for fights is ok.

> > > - Splitting up for PPT obviously. 15 people split at 3 towers will cap them like 2 times faster than capping them one by one with 15 players. Not to forget that most servers are reliant on *that scout* and he can't be everywhere at the same time. We actually did this lot on deso during nightcrew. We were like 8 players and managed to cap every single objective against 15 just by being more efficient.

> > >

> > > But ye, don't do it at EU outside guild raids. We blob and run smaller 3-6 man roaming groups. I do remember the OPs guild doing some pretty questionable stuff on EU queueing maps while not running WvW builds.

> >

> > you remember wrong.

> >

> > how can my guild que a map when we are less than 15.

>

> :)

>

> >

> > no. 2, we were the ones who always promoted metabattle and ezbuilds.

>

> :)

>

> > but i do have members who experimented builds. they gave the team an edge. and those eventually were adopted.

>

> 404 : consistency with previous statement not found :)

>

> > and i recommend to any wvw player to experiment too. you dont get good by simply copying the popular builds. got to do your own research and understand the class. and adjust.

>

> I agree. Most players don't ever get good. Or even half decent.

>

> I'll refresh your memory.

>

> Here's a video you recorded of you playing the famous meta core worker warrior during HoT. It contains footage of you... blobbing down various guilds in spawn / objectives / ...

> You then admit that you also got wiped 4 to 5 times more than this. I get it - this isn't your guildraid. Funny how there's no footage of guildraids for these entire weeks every time you have a good matchup. Funny how I can't seem to find footage of you raiding with 15 players at all.

>

> Your memory does seem hazy.

 

you are derailing the thread. pls limit it to the topic.

 

if you see no video posted, it is simply i did not record a guild raid.

 

also at the start of the vid how many were we? 15 with 2 missing players.

 

thats one reason why players then at deso enjoyed my raids, we allowed anyone who wanted to join join. and so we got lots and lots of bags.

 

also, i dont need to lead all the time, i can follow to. and i prefer not to lead all the time and give chances to new coms. or old

 

in any good match up, we played, players came and joined. things changed only when there was a problem of who gets to fight which group and such politics.

 

now pls get back to the topic.

 

p.s. warriors are awesome. good commander toon then, and good commander toon now.

 

[Etheri.5406]

Yes - you allowed any players who wanted to join join. Which is why you NEVER raided with 15 players and usually fought guilds with "15 of yours" and 30 pugs. That's entirely fine, just stop lying about it.

 

This entire video is you blobbing guilds that actually raid with 15-25 with more numbers, sometimes up to 40. The clip at the start is fighting less than 10 enemy players on EB which are pugs. All other clips are you blobbing guilds with fewer numbers, while often in your own spawn or objectives. The start of the video you have barely 15 and what are you fighting? 10 pugs in EB that are still in your tower AND less numbers while being unorganised EB pugs.

 

Again - I don't mind your style of play. I do mind your lies about your time on EU. You did not run meta. You did not promote meta. You did not raid with 15 or less than 15 all the time - you regularly had a huge army of pugs on you. Or do those only count when checking enemy numbers? And you did not fight even fights against any high-end EU guilds or groups.

 

Half of these claims can be verified by looking at the video where it's clear you're not playing meta; you're playing a significantly bigger group and blobbing down guilds rather than the opposite, and you're obviously more than 15 in almost every EU video. If you're less than 15, most of the enemy groups you fight are 10 pugs...

 

You talk as if you're the 15 man guild fighting a barely organised 30-40 man pug zerg but the reality on EU was that you were the 30-40 man pug zerg. Not the 15 man guild fighting them.

[Sovereign.1093]

=) ok, you can join my guild if you go to na. i will not ignore you anymore.

 

now pls stop derailing the thread.

[shiri.4257]

Proper fight guild etiquette is to block out the minimap and fade out after the first push. It allows the viewer to interpret the battle as your guild vs the world and the viewer's imagination.

[Trajan.4953]

Do multiple tags really affect you that much?

Color code them then! Orange is guild, yellow is scout, green is havoc, blue is K-train, etc etc etc

If Anet would let us have tags within squads this wouldn't be an issue but they feel that every person should be included so here we are.

Again, Devs don't play the game, they don't understand or care.

[Sovereign.1093]

what i like now at nsp is we have multiple tags working together. sometimes awkwardly sometimes good. but in goodtimes. we rip the blob apart. =)

 

i see this sometimes from the old mag and old bg.

 

dont seem to experience it against other servers though.

 

so i am so for it.

 

[Oogabooga.3812]

I personally think every group and roamer should tag up. This helps with map strategy.

 

Large groups (10+): let the newbies/zerglings join whichever group for more help. If you are running a private raid, run tagless.

 

Havoc groups(2-10) and roamers: it helps everybody to know if you're about to take a camp or which wall/gate you are hitting, especially if people are already heading in that direction.

 

Vs. spies: if tag watchers don't know who is running the large groups, seeing 20+ tags everywhere on a map will be a tad harder to report accurately.

 

If you want to see only one tag, the game gives the option to do so.

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Oogabooga.3812" said:

> I personally think every group and roamer should tag up. This helps with map strategy.

>

> Large groups (10+): let the newbies/zerglings join whichever group for more help. If you are running a private raid, run tagless.

>

> Havoc groups(2-10) and roamers: it helps everybody to know if you're about to take a camp or which wall/gate you are hitting, especially if people are already heading in that direction.

 

The problem with this is that it assumes that there are already a clear set set of tags on the map, such as one blue for the zerg and guild tags etc before we even trickle down to other groups, havocs and scouts.

 

If say a 5 man havoc squad tag up out of courtesy and map awareness but they are the only tag... You can be 100% certain everyone will be drawn to it like pigs to a trough and the melee will demand you rejoin on a firebrand so they can run in a melee ball on the tag while the ranged will rush 1v30 ahead of you because they assume you are engaging the enemy zerg and if they die it's your fault. If you are there for havoc you can forget about havocing.

 

And since smallscalers *know* this they never want to get the ball rolling with small tags encouraging larger tags and working together.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"Oogabooga.3812" said:

> > I personally think every group and roamer should tag up. This helps with map strategy.

> >

> > Large groups (10+): let the newbies/zerglings join whichever group for more help. If you are running a private raid, run tagless.

> >

> > Havoc groups(2-10) and roamers: it helps everybody to know if you're about to take a camp or which wall/gate you are hitting, especially if people are already heading in that direction.

>

> The problem with this is that it assumes that there are already a clear set set of tags on the map, such as one blue for the zerg and guild tags etc before we even trickle down to other groups, havocs and scouts.

>

> If say a 5 man havoc squad tag up out of courtesy and map awareness but they are the only tag... You can be 100% certain everyone will be drawn to it like pigs to a trough and the melee will demand you rejoin on a firebrand so they can run in a melee ball on the tag while the ranged will rush 1v30 ahead of you because they assume you are engaging the enemy zerg and if they die it's your fault. If you are there for havoc you can forget about havocing.

>

> And since smallscalers *know* this they never want to get the ball rolling with small tags encouraging larger tags and working together.

 

You are correct which is also dependent on the server. Ooga (and I) play on a server that has populace that realizes he is havocing and can choose to do that or break off on their own.

 

He also has the standing with enough that they will rally to him if the objective is big enough, but also scatter when hitting multiple objectives.

 

But some servers.... Yeah.. it should work... :smirk:

[Tehologist.5841]

Why don’t commanders use lfg more often to clearly announce what kind of group they are running. I know it would require some training for server.

[shiri.4257]

> @"Tehologist.5841" said:

> Why don’t commanders use lfg more often to clearly announce what kind of group they are running. I know it would require some training for server.

 

I put my squad on LFG at least once a week. Of course the ad is somewhere along the lines of, "Donate gold for afk pips, will give shared participation."

[Tehologist.5841]

> @"shiri.4257" said:

> > @"Tehologist.5841" said:

> > Why don’t commanders use lfg more often to clearly announce what kind of group they are running. I know it would require some training for server.

>

> I put my squad on LFG at least once a week. Of course the ad is somewhere along the lines of, "Donate gold for afk pips, will give shared participation."

 

Lol

[Sovereign.1093]

> @"Tehologist.5841" said:

> Why don’t commanders use lfg more often to clearly announce what kind of group they are running. I know it would require some training for server.

 

that works for open tag. also merging existing groups =)

[Dawdler.8521]

> @"Tehologist.5841" said:

> Why don’t commanders use lfg more often to clearly announce what kind of group they are running. I know it would require some training for server.

Or rather training for people. The LFG is not something WvWers ever use. I doubt even the biggest of commanders on any random server knows how to use it.

 

Regardless, I still think a short tag description would solve that better. Would be so easy to join a map, see a pink tag, hover over it and read *"[OINK] just havocing some, bring a roamer"*. No need for an LFG.

 

 

 

[Tehologist.5841]

> @"Dawdler.8521" said:

> > @"Tehologist.5841" said:

> > Why don’t commanders use lfg more often to clearly announce what kind of group they are running. I know it would require some training for server.

> Or rather training for people. The LFG is not something WvWers ever use. I doubt even the biggest of commanders on any random server knows how to use it.

>

> Regardless, I still think a short tag description would solve that better. Would be so easy to join a map, see a pink tag, hover over it and read *"[OINK] just havocing some, bring a roamer"*. No need for an LFG.

>

>

>

 

I was actually thinking the exact same thing for a potential fix. Seems a short description on tag would solve a lot of issues.

[Etheri.5406]

> @"Tehologist.5841" said:

> Why don’t commanders use lfg more often to clearly announce what kind of group they are running. I know it would require some training for server.

 

LFG is great if you wanna play with ANYONE.

 

But if you want some kind of specific requirements, LFG is awful. It only lures in awful pugs. So does teamchat.

 

If you want players that you actually like, invite them through discord or something. Anything else just gets you a queue of leeches.

It's funny how we can get 50+ players in squad making a perfect squad without a queue, while EB will regularly ask "y no commander on eb?!?!" and the moment we get a queue of 5 players, it bumps to 20-30 within 10 minutes because they finally realise where we are.

[Tehologist.5841]

> @"Etheri.5406" said:

> > @"Tehologist.5841" said:

> > Why don’t commanders use lfg more often to clearly announce what kind of group they are running. I know it would require some training for server.

>

> LFG is great if you wanna play with ANYONE.

>

> But if you want some kind of specific requirements, LFG is awful. It only lures in awful pugs. So does teamchat.

>

> If you want players that you actually like, invite them through discord or something. Anything else just gets you a queue of leeches.

> It's funny how we can get 50+ players in squad making a perfect squad without a queue, while EB will regularly ask "y no commander on eb?!?!" and the moment we get a queue of 5 players, it bumps to 20-30 within 10 minutes because they finally realise where we are.

 

This is exactly what LFG is for, you specify what you are wanting for your group and you can invite people you want. If you want a specific composition and not to deal with pugs then you should be running a guild or havoc group and not even bother with tagging. I have played with some really great commanders that can use the map tools pretty effectively for letting group know where to go and can adapt to take advantage of people they have. Versus just constantly complaining about not enough scourges or firebrands. Blobbing up and bumping heads hoping one of you wipe out the other isn't the only way to play this game. Choosing where and when you fight is huge in the outcome of fights, if you can't fight someone head on. Wait for them to cap and come up behind, use terrain to advantage and fight at choke point. If someone is lazy and puts their siege in arrow cart range, punish them for it. If you have them, use your rangers and thieves for what they are good at, this is war not lets blob up and practice wiping.

[Sovereign.1093]

 

Just be yourself. :)

 

quality over quantity. :bleep_bloop:

 

 

now hoping for multiple ten man teams doing stuff in the future. Hehe. long shot though.

 

 

[Tehologist.5841]

I think three10 man coordinated groups would be much better than a 50 man. Our map chat seems to be fairly effective, people call out when things are getting taken and if ask people to go there to defend they generally do.